Vertical Motor

[Dr]

Strange name I know, but I was going through my very old notes about O.U. and came across some info maybe some one here can help me with. I remember reading an article about a man from England who said we were building our electric motors all wrong. He claimed we should be building them more like flywheels. If I am not misstaken I think this took place during the 1920s or 30s, Anyone remember this???

[Paul-R]

Flywheels remind me of the Jim Watson variant of the John Bedini device:
http://www.icehouse.net/john1/foreward.html
But this emerged much later, in the 80s.

[gravityblock]

                Object                                    K    Mass   Diameter   Velocity   Energy, J
A) bicycle wheel @ 20 km/h                       1    1 kg     700 mm       150 rpm     15 J
B) bicycle wheel, double speed (40 km/h)    1    1 kg     700 mm       300 rpm     60 J
C) bicycle wheel, double mass (20 km/h)     1    2 kg     700 mm       150 rpm     30 J

Compare A) and B), then you will notice doubling the speed will quadruple the energy stored in joules.   Compare A) and C), then you will notice doubling the mass only doubles the energy stored in joules.

If we transferred 30 J in C),  to a bicycle wheel @ 20 km/h with half the mass, so the bicycle wheel is similar to A), then the bicycle wheel should have 30 J), because we can't destroy energy.   This will give us D).

D) bicycle wheel @ 20 km/h                    1    1 kg     700 mm       150 rpm     30 J

Now compare A) and D).  is this correct?  D) has twice the Joules as A), so D) should have twice the RPM), but according to the mathematics, A) and D) should match.  If we make them match, then we will destroy half of our energy stored.  How can this be possible if we can't destroy energy?  So, we'll double the RPM and the correct answer should be E).

E) bicycle wheel @ 20 km/h                    1    1 kg     700 mm       300 rpm     30 J

E) and B) should match, but B) has twice as much Joules as E) and the wheel we transferred the energy to, should also have 60 J if it is running at 300 RPM.  How can this be possible, since we can't create energy.

This is what the above suggests.  If we can't destroy energy, then energy must be created.  If we can't create energy, then energy must be destroyed.  The correct answer in our example is F).  We created energy in our example.  If we transferred F to a bicycle wheel @ 20 km/h with double the mass, then we will destroy energy and will have G), which is what we originally started with in our example.

F) bicycle wheel @ 20 km/h                    1    1 kg     700 mm       300 rpm     60 J
G) bicycle wheel, double mass @ 20 km/h    1    2 kg     700 mm       150 rpm     30 J

So, we transferred the energy stored from a larger mass into a smaller mass and created energy.  Then we transferred the energy from the smaller mass with the additional energy that was created from the previous transfer to a larger mass and destroy the energy we previously created. 

The end result is energy can either be created or destroyed in an open-loop, but when the loop is closed and we go in both directions, then energy is both created and destroyed and it appears to have only changed from one form of energy into another form of energy.  So, the law that states "energy can't be created nor destroyed" is flawed, inaccurate, incomplete and just wrong.

A), B), and C) were taken from wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel#Examples_of_energy_stored

GB

[Dr]

Gravity Block: Very interesting post! I have seen first hand the awesome power of flywheels, In my youth I worked in a metal fabricating shop that had a punch press, that could punch a hole of 1.5 inches in a 1" steel plate. Your theory about energy transfer sounds just like what Pequaide is saying at Bessler Wheel Forum.com, under a thread called energy producing experiments, very interesting stuff!!!