re: energy producing experiments

[Delburt Phend]

Correct momentum is conserved. Linear Newtonian momentum is conserved.

I posted several experiments because each tells us something; but lets use the 1320 g cylinder and spheres throwing 132 g spheres.

You can do a frame by frame evaluation the any of these experiments.

By counting the frames that it takes to move from one side of the black square to the other; we can determine that the cylinder is rotating about 1.2 m/sec. The cylinder throws the spheres out and at one point all of the motion is held by the spheres. At the point where the cylinder has stopped rotating the spheres start returning the rotational motion back to the cylinder. At the end of the experiment the cylinder is again moving about 1.2 m/sec.

1.2 m/sec * 1320 g = 1.584 kg m/sec of momentum

When the spheres have all the motion they too must have 1.584 kg m/sec of Newtonian momentum.

For the .132 kg sphere to have 1.584 units of momentum then they must be moving 12 m/sec. At 12 m/sec the spheres have ½ .132 kg * (12 m/sec)² = 9.5 joules of energy.

And the system started with .9504 joules.

So, these videos are the first machines that show energy being produced in the lab; and the concept is worth several trillion dollars.

By using this event and an Atwood's you can make free energy from gravity. 

[sm0ky2]

except that you lifted the mass of the cylinder, the strings; and both spheres to height h before you began.
Subtract that

[sm0ky2]

Now consider that when you view the frame when the cylinder stops:
It is at an angle, the lower sphere is accelerating; the upper sphere is decelerating.
Your assumptions about the velocity of the two spheres is simply incorrect.


The only time during the experiment, when the spheres have the same velocity,
Is when the cylinder is perfectly vertical in the gravitational field.
at all other moments their acceleration is different, as is their velocity.


Which is why the microgravity tests were very important

[sm0ky2]

Another fallacy about the velocity of the spheres comes from the changing length of the string.
Here is an example of the correct mathematics:


https://youtu.be/G0RikmNonoU

[Delburt Phend]

Anybody can do a mathy video but experiments tell the truth.

Increasing the length of your string does not change the momentum in the tiniest bit. Law of Levers proves angular momentum is false. Repeat the following experiment and you will see.

A pulley could have two radii: one radius at 2 cm and another at 20 cm. 1 kg suspended from the 20 cm radius balances 10 kg suspended from the 2 cm radius; this means that the sides have equal angular accelerated. An extra mass of 10 kg can accelerate 2 kg (one kg on each side) at the 20 cm radius just as easily as it would accelerate 20 kg (ten kg on each side) at the 2 cm radius.

This pulley can be used in an Atwood's machine and you could place 10 kg on both sides of the 2 cm radius or you could place 1 kg on both sides at the 20 cm radius. These two arrangements would have the same angular acceleration.

An extra 10 kg accelerating another 20 kg all at the 2 cm position would be the same angular acceleration as an extra 10 kg at the 2 cm accelerating 2 kg at the 20 cm position.  I have done this type of experimentally many times.

Ten kilograms accelerating another 20 kg, all at the 2 cm position, would have a linear arc acceleration of 3.27 m/sec². After the suspended 10 kg has dropped 1 m all three 10 kg masses would be moving; d = ½ v²/a; 1 m = ½ v²/9.81 m/sec² = 2.557 m/sec. The angular acceleration would be the same for the 2 kg at the 20 cm position. So the two 1 kg masses at 20 cm radius would be moving 25.57 m/sec.

The energy input here is 10 kg dropped one meter: 9.81 N/ kg * 10 kg * 1 m = 98.1 joules.  A joule is a Nm

The energy of 2 kg moving 25.57 m/sec is ½ mv² = 654 joules. The 10 kg moving down at 2.557 m/sec is 32.7 joules. This is a total energy of 686.7 joules; 700% of the original energy used to make the motion.

700% of the original input energy.

There is a means of transferring the motion from the falling 10 kg and the spinning mass of the pulley for 1500%