re: energy producing experiments

[Delburt Phend]

The suspended masses on the sides of a pulley are not under gravitational acceleration because their masses are equal. Two equal masses fixed at 180° on the edge of the pulley are not under gravitational acceleration either. A certain quantity of force applied to the pulley or wheel will accelerate the suspended masses or fixed masses in the same F = ma manner. Therefore, two suspended masses can be treated as two point masses fixed at 180°.

Just keep making the strings of the suspended masses shorter and shorter until they touch the wheel and then fix them to the wheel; the math remains the same throughout.

There is sufficient data collected from Atwood's machines and those masses are treated as point masses at a particular radius; and of course, fixed masses are treated in the same manner.

Now here is why this is important. When the wheel pulls the mass (on the end of a string) toward the wheel's surface the acceleration does not change because the mass touches the wheel. A thin-walled cylinder will accelerate in the same F = ma manner as an Atwood's.     

[Delburt Phend]

Compare NASA despin quote: "The relatively small weights have a large effect since they are far from the spin axis, and their effect increases as the square of the length of the cables". And Prof Quote: "Why should string lengths matter---? How foolish".

This is a quote from NASA concerning the Dawn Mission despin. The Satellite mass was 1420 kg and the released masses were less that 3 kg. I simplify this to a 400 kg rim 1 m in diameter spinning with and arc speed of 1 m/sec. This rim has two ½ kg mass unwinding from both sides. This unwinding stops and reverses the satellite's spin.

The cylinder and spheres machines are the same experiment, and they show that the original spin of the center mass will be restored if the masses are allowed to rewrap around the center mass.

If the original arc speed of the 400 kg rim was 1 m/sec then "squaring the radius as NASA predict allows for the sphere (two ½ kg masses) masses to have a speed of only 16 m/sec (1kg * v * 12.5 m cable extended / .5 m cable wrapped).     

If the original arc speed of the rim was 1 m/sec then energy conservation would allow a sphere velocity of 20 m/sec.  ½ * 400 kg * 1 m/sec * 1 m/sec = 200 J and ½ * 1 kg * 20 m/sec * 20 m/sec = 200 J   

But we know that there is no such law as the law of conservation of kinetic energy and in fact we know that 1 kg moving only 20 m/sec can not give 400 kg a velocity of 1 m /sec. So kinetic energy conservation is not a logical option.

So: "Why should string lengths matter---? How foolish". Why should 1 kg moving 16 m/sec have more momentum when attached to a 12.5 m cable as opposed to being attached to a .5 m cable? How foolish!!!

Let's ask it another way. What takes 1.6 N applied for 10 seconds to stop: a 1 kg mass moving 16 m/sec on a 12.5 m string or 1 kg moving 16 m/sec on a .5 m string?

A 1 kg mass moving 16 or 20 m/sec can not give a 400 kg mass an arc speed of 1 m/sec. It can not return the motion. This 400 kg at 1 m/sec is 400 units of Newtonian momentum and it will take 400 kg*m/sec of momentum to return the original motion.

When the 1 kg is moving 400 m/sec it has 400 times as much energy as the 400 kg moving 1 m/sec.    ½ * 1 kg * 400 m/sec * 400 m/sec = 80,000 J and ½ * 400 kg * 1 m/sec * 1 m/sec = 200 J

This makes the 'cylinder and spheres' experiments worth several trillion dollars.