Sjack Abeling Gravity Wheel and the Worlds first Weight Power Plant

[fletcher]

Einstein made a quip about you should be able to explain physics to a bar maid - I guess he never had a pint poured by omnibus.

Keep going mondrasek until he realizes why getting there any quicker without a higher final velocity is of no practical use in a wheel.

[Omnibus]

Einstein made a quip about you should be able to explain physics to a bar made - I guess he never had a pint poured by omnibus.

Keep going mondrasek until he realizes why getting there any quicker without a higher final velocity is of no practical use in a wheel.

Before giving irrelevant quotes and talking about practical use which is not the subject of discussion here you should understand first what kinetic energy really means. All your problems stem from misunderstanding of that simple concept.

[mondrasek]

@mondrasek,

That's not the obvious fact that I ask you to agree with. You talk about part of the distance traveled while what is to be considered is the entire distance traveled. Therefore, you have to agree first with the obvious fact that the entire distance has been traversed by the first ball for a shorter time than the time which the second ball needs to traverse its entire, shorter distance.

In other words, you have to agree first that, considering the entire distance traveled, the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball, despite the fact that both ball have the same PE to begin with.

Do you see, you can't escape acknowledging the above obvious fact, no matter how you try to finagle?

Omnibus, what you are stating is a partial truth, that results in a false conclusion.

1)  It can be true that, "the entire distance has been traversed by the first ball for a shorter time than the time which the second ball needs to traverse its entire, shorter distance."

2)  It is partially true that, "the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball".  But this is only the case at a point along the horizontal travel where the ball on the first track is now LOWER than the ball on the second track.  Without adding this additional information, I cannot agree to your statement, because it does not completely describe all the necessary conditions for the case you are trying to make.

3)  It is absolutely not true that, "In other words, you have to agree first that, considering the entire distance traveled, the first ball has higher velocity, that is, has greater KE than the second ball, despite the fact that both ball have the same PE to begin with."  That is a conclusion drawn only from cherry picked facts. 

The only point that can be compared using the PE at the beginning, is the KE at the end.  Any point along the track where one ball is allowed to drop LOWER than the other allows for an increase in KE ONLY at that point.  It is also an obvious case where the ball on the lower track has converted more PE into KE sooner.  Your failure to agree that this information is relevant to any conclusion drawn is unfortunate, because it neglects the obvious case where the ball on the lower track must rise up a hill and thus slow down, or the case where the ball on the upper track continues to accelerate until reaching the same speed as that of the lower ball which does not continue to accelerate.  And those two cases are exactly what DOES occur in every possible configuration for the lower track.

The independence of KE gained due to a change in height of a mass relative to the path it travels between the start and end is well understood and supported by simple experiments.  Why don't you try one?  Your attempts at logically disproving these facts are pointless.  The nature of a "Conservative Field of Force" is not disproved by these experiments.  Maybe you can find one that does instead.

[fletcher]

Kinetic Energy is energy of motion omnibus - Potential Energy is energy of position.

I think you're short of a chromosome if you can't grasp this & its implications.

[Omnibus]

Kinetic Energy is energy of motion omnibus - Potential Energy is energy of position.

I think you're short of a chromosome if you can't grasp this & its implications.

I wish you really understand what you've written. Read your own definition of kinetic energy once again. Do you see in it anything about collision, transfer, turning into work etc. etc., that is, all the crap you were foisting in your previous postings as part of the definition of energy? Learn physics foundations before engaging in discussions such as this one.