OU from orbital physics, and some spooky stuff

[Radical Ryan]

Check Bruce DePalma's spinning ball experiment.  This can be easily duplicated.

Check the orbital paths of Explorer I and some of the earlier Russian attempts to crash into the moon.  They all experienced an "inexplicable" boost in orbit.

Consider also where the burden lies in who has to show who what.  What assumptions do we have that we think are bolstered by the scientific facts, when experiments haven't actually been done to prove it (just cheap talk)?  That a non-spinning object will behave the same as a spinning one is one such assumption, I think, until you actually look at the data.  Why would one assume that spinning a rocket WOULDN'T affect its orbit?  One might also assume that a gyroscope will not precess until seeing it or learning about it.  I venture to guess that we ALL have to LEARN at some point that a spinning wheel has some "unexpected" behavior (not built into babies).  Likewise, the spinning rockets DID experience some "anomalous" orbits.  Maybe it's time to update our assumptions likewise with the spinning rockets as we did with gyroscopes. 

I thought and thought about the DATA for a long time before I ventured to theorize what was actually happening.   This idea took not so cheap effort. 

[sparks]

  If a thermalized atom is ionized with x number of high frequency photons the free electrons carry both the original momentum of the atom plus the electron orbital momentum.  Upon encountering a magnetic field the free electron momentum is altered.  The photons emitted are in excess of the photons invested to ionize the atom.  An anology:  A truck full of rocks is speeding down the highway,   A tree limb brushes the top of the pile of rocks and 4 rocks fall from the truck.  The rocks roll down the highway until they get to a curve in the road.  They leave the roadway and crash into a car parked along side the highway on the curve.   Damage to car is far in excess then just brushing it with the tree limb.
   We can get a hook on  thermalized atoms by phase changing them to plasma.  Plasma will react to electric and magnetic fields whereas neutral atoms in motion (heat) do not.  This process is in agreement with all thermodynamic laws it is just that the degradation of the heat is not reliant on random process.  A roadway is established through a sector of space allowing for ordered degradation of a chaotic state.

[e2matrix]

Fascinating information!   Thanks for posting Radical Ryan.   I'll say it's somewhat over my head at the moment but I find it very interesting.  I knew someone who I was in personal contact with who had developed an anti-gravity device using gyro's in different axes as well as orbiting about each other IIRC.   Last I heard he was taking the idea to a university and I haven't heard any more since (years ago). 
I do recall reading about Von Brauns overshot and some of the other info but didn't recall why.  I think your ideas are worth expanding here.   I'm not sure I completely understand your idea on getting energy out of spinning disc,  stopping it with a generator and then dropping it etc.  That is I'm having a hard time visualizing such a setup.  Do you believe you would be getting overunity out of such a setup? 

[MileHigh]

You guys should research modern satellites that need to be able to change their orientation while in orbit to take pictures or do Earth scans, etc.  They have spinning gyros in them for orientation.  After a certain amount of time the gyros are spinning too fast and the satellite does a "spin down" where it burns some rocket fuel.  This is to counteract the spinning down of the gyros which would normally cause a spin-up of the satellite so that after the spin-down it is in a non-moving orientation without the gyros turning.  Then as the satellite does its work and changes orientation, the gyros inevitably start to spin up again.   While the satellite is doing all of these gyroscopic gymnastics, the orbital path around the Earth is not affected.

I really don't think that you will uncover anything new with respect to gyroscopic forces and angular momentum but good luck.

[schuler]

  Rayan
Thank you for posting. It's refreshing debating with people based on experimentation and not faith. Agreeing or disagreeing, thank you for sharing links.

I have a simple question unrelated to gravity but related to speed:

Kinetic energy is proportional to V² . Suppose that we have a rocket in space with massless fuel and there is no gravity involved (nor orbits). It spends half of the fuel to achieve velocity V by producing energy E. The next half of the fuel is also spent producing again another energy E. The final speed is 2V. But kinetic energy is now proportional to 4V². The amount of the energy spent by the rocket is linear along the time but the kinetic energy grows faster. Why?

Thank you.