At previous chapter I claimed, rotating bodies are easier to lift versus gravity than non-rotating ones. I knew this fact anyway and for years discussed similar phenomena and their usages by considerations to rotor-systems, e.g. at chapter Flying Wheels. Reader told me, prominent explorer Bruce DePalma had made corresponding experiments and had published striking results.
One can find comprehensive literature concerning DePalma at web. Besides others he worked at MIT and made explorations to N-Machines, designed and constructed ´Free-Energy-Generator´ of 100 kW - and died unexpectedly by most strange circumstances. At later chapters I will take these subjects, here however only his experiments to trajectories of rotating bodies are discussed.
Throwing Experiments
DePalma and his assistants were experts for photograph recording of high speed motions. In 1974 they studied parabolic curves of bodies thrown upward, using ball bearings and catapults. Ball bearings were put into rotation before start and also not-rotating likely objects were used for comparison. In 1977 these experiments were repeated by most precisely working equipment and Bruce DePalma published paper entitled ´Understanding the Dropping of the Spinning Ball Experiment´. His astonishment clearly is expressed, e.g. by this section:
One can find this pretty picture at web, showing two parabolic trajectories. Upside body is marked to rotate by 27.000 rpm. DePalma reports this rotating ball bear moving faster to higher level and again falling down faster than non-rotating comparable body - and DePalma fears being considered a fool or liar when talking about these results. Immediately he assumes, quite new insights and explanations become necessary concerning terms like inertia, gravity and acceleration in general.
I do not believe this picture is original. For example it´s not to recognize at upward phase, points are part of which track. Coordinates are height and distance, so points should show positions at each likely time intervals. Thus at upward phase distances between points should become shorter - however are irregular. At downward phase distances should become each longer, especially at right track - however that´s not really to see.
At this picture left side (within blue frame) points are shown once more at neutral background. However also here no clear graph results. At comments at web, picture right side (within yellow frame) one can find showing relation height / time. Also here it´s question whether this picture is true, e.g. because right curve ends vertical, i.e. representing infinite fast speed. Nevertheless there is no doubt concerning accuracy of experiments and results - only concerning experiments of explanations of these phenomena.
DePalmas Attempt for Explantions
DePalma at first makes considerations to term of time. Each clock lastly is based on swinging motions, i.e. energy, so DePalma puts time equal to energy (for me inadmissible mixture of pure abstract terms, see Introduction of Ether-Physics). He states:
Time as a manifestation of a much deeper and basic force is what we have a concern for here. The point of connection I want to make is the inertia of objects relates to the time energy flowing through them. The rotational quanta drawn to a rotating body induce in that body a feeling of inertial anisotropy as well as increased inertial mass. ... The first indications of that came when we dropped our spinning ball experiment but we were unwilling to interpret the increase in energy of a spinning to a non-spinning object ... to some kind of energy principle we did not understand.
So at the one hand he assumes inertia to result off time-energy which passed through bodies up to now. At the other hand, rotation gives bodies some ´feeling´ of different inertias like increased mass-inertia ... and he by himself does not trust in his ideas. Based on other experiments concerning rotating and non-rotating bodies however he repeats this conviction:
We can only conceive of the inertia of objects, or inertial mass to be exact, to be representative of the time energy created when the Universe was created. ... All the time in the world is summed up in the inertial mass of an object. How this relates to the spinning ball experiment is that the spinning of an object draws to it the quanta of inertial motion of rotation which are accumulated in the body of the flywheel and account for the altered inertial properties of the rotating object. These inertial quanta, Ro, draw the time energy to themselves in proportion to the number of them present in the flywheel at a given time.
So rotating objects achieve change of inertia by pulling-in time-energy ... and I do not know really whether he could convince himself nor other people. Clearly he pronounces however, there is no interaction between rotation and gravity:
The momentous fact is that there is no special interaction between rotation and gravity. The behavior of rotating objects is explained simply on the addition of free energy to whatever motion the rotating object is making. The spinning object goes higher and falls faster than the identical non-rotating control.
If we dispose of any special connection between rotation and gravity I like the understanding of inertia growing out of the statement of Rendle: "the immaterial medium of space itself is in motion."
Or thus it´s ´Free Energy´, which makes rotating objects flying higher and faster - or there is but still working relation rotation / gravity, because ´not material medium of space´ by itself is moving ... I assume attempts for explanations of that kind - even by scientists of high reputation and success - really fantastic abstract and thus indeed without concern to any reality. Obvious e.g. would be attempt to explain phenomenon by elasticity of bodies, he well know by other experiments.
Effects at Starting Phase
I don´t understand inhibition at first to search for simple explanations for these pure mechanic processes. Rotating body has no ´feeling´ of different inertias but really - in concern to that affecting acceleration force. Picture EV GM 247 schematic shows process of starting phase of these experiments.
At A rotating body is shown turning around its axis (RA), like marked by arrows. From downside-left now accelerating force (BK, German Beschleunigungskraft) affects. I don´t know, whether this force at previous experiments did hit onto circumference of body (resulting asymmetric tensions within material). Effect would be achieved neutral, if force would affect direct onto axis resp. shaft of rotating ball bearings.
In concern to that accelerating force, body really shows different inertia. Acceleration corresponding to acceleration-force occurs only at mass parts momentary positioned direct in line with affecting force or nearby. This stripe of masses alongside affecting direction here is marked by middle-red.
Mass parts right side are already moving upward and thus show relative less resistance versus affecting force. These mass parts (marked light-red) appear relative ´light´ so are easy pushed upward and accelerated to high speed. Mass parts left side (marked dark-red) momentary show inertia downward directed, thus versus affecting force, appearing relative ´heavy´ and thus scarcely to accelerate into new direction upward.
At B situation of body is shown short time after affect of accelerating force (BK). Not all parts did move same distance into direction of acceleration. Only non-rotating body would move at track (BN) corresponding to affecting force-vector. Track of rotating body (BR) is different, because ´heavy half´ of masses did move only short distance from its original place, while ´light half´ of masses achieved large distance and did sling around previous ´centre of weights´ towards left-upside. This light mass parts flying up and away, at the other hand are pulling heavy mass parts at new place below axis of body into direction right side upward.
At this case thus track of rotating body shows some steeper upward in comparison with non-rotating body. If object before start would rotate other direction, track would start more flat. At any case however, affecting force results some mass parts moving faster than other parts of object and thus rotation of all parts around each new place of axis is accelerated.
Higher flight of rotating body demonstrates, these objects are easier to lift than corresponding bodies not rotating. At start phase of flight, total masses are not lifted likely, but ´light half is rolled upward over heavy half´. Same time stronger rotation of all masses around own axis results.
This starting process is essential for previous flight-experiments. However, these effects not only come up by 27.000 rpm and impulse-like accelerating force, but also e.g. at slower turning ´Bessler-Wheels´. There aim is not to lift rotating masses to higher level, but to ´roll-up´ masses with less forces than corresponding not-rotating masses commonly demand.
Effects at Flight Phase
Effects at flight phase are also to explain easy, without usage of terms like ´time-energy´ or ´immaterial space medium´ (even I am sure, inertia like gravity are occurrences of ether, where ether however is real substantial medium). Also common formulas are not useful for explanations as e.g. terms like ´turning momentum´ or ´rot´ are generalizing - while attention is to pay at different mass parts and its different inertia forces. Picture EV GM 248 serves as basis for some general considerations to analyse problems.
At A is drawn a wheel turning around stationary rotor axis (RA, here exceptional clock-wise). At this common case, inertia momentum of all masses (of likely radius) are equal, each showing into tangential directions (see arrows). Common centrifugal forces come up, resulting tension within material, i.e. by ´workload´ of molecular cohesion masses are redirected into circle track on and on.
At B is drawn a ring (red), rolling at supporting surface (blue), from left to right side. Each mass part momentary quite downside is at stationary position for short moment, later on as backside mass is lifted, achieves maximum speed as most upside mass, lastly at frontside is pressed down to support again. Axis of this wheel moves ahead by average speed of upside maximum and downside standing still.
Deceleration of frontside mass results no stop in total, as each supporting point works as fulcrum of seesaw, so backside mass is accelerated correspondingly. Wheel like this runs not really round, but by that support energy of motion-ahead is destroyed at frontside and (fuzzily) re-generated at backside.
As soon now wheel is free of these ´hindrances´ like stationary axis (like at A) or support (like at B) other effects come up. I described these processes in details at previous mentioned chapter Flying Wheels or Wheels at Tracks moved or also at Ringwheel-Motor and I recommended usage of these effects especially by Crosswheel-Motor.
At free flying wheel (resp. flying ring like sketched at C) masses still are connected via cohesion of material and thus movements of all masses are coordinated. Opposite to A however, now axis no longer serves as centre resp. as forcible fulcrum of all motions.
Opposite to rolling wheel (like at B), no longer stationary support exists, which forces mass parts to swing around. Movements of all masses now are directed exclusively by relation of each inertia forces.
Absolutely dominant are inertia forces of parts flying into direction of flight in general, thus at outer border of rotating body. These mass parts (here at C upside) pull behind themselves all other mass parts. Naturally each mass part still has its own vector of inertia, e.g. mass of front side shows vector cross to trajectory. This mass part however is no longer forced (by supporting point like at B) to move further downside or even backwards, but is redirected towards flight direction by previous stronger inertia forces.
Correspondingly masses backside are redirected increasingly into direction ahead. Also each mass part downside now is not forced to stand still in space for short moment, but will wander also ahead. Thus all mass parts show increased motions ahead, i.e. same time are turning slower around their common axis.
This process of transition of rotation to translation (from turning motion into movement ahead) is well known. For example this effect is possible or even probable concerning planets. However again I do not know who was ´explorer´ of this occurrence and also I did not study formula-approvals - because previous simple explanation of pure mechanics for me is convincing sufficiently.
Effects at Falling Phase
DePalma upside stated, no relation between rotation and gravity exists at these experiments of spinning balls. This is not true, gravity well affects flight of rotating bodies, especially at phase of falling downward.
Theoretic - by formula view - acceleration of movement ahead must correspond to likely deceleration of rotation, so increasing kinetic energy of translation comes up only to the debit of turning-momentum or -impulse. So by theory, maximum speed of mass parts running ahead should be reduced, as opposite positioned parts are pulled ahead and thus are accelerated. However these parts show no acceleration in general, but their movements are only redirected into common direction of flight.
At downward phase, momentary upward moving parts are already accelerated downwards by gravity. All masses, which come into movement versus gravity-direction by turning of ring, are pressed down. There come up effects analogue to previous starting phase.
Now here that ´affecting acceleration force´ (BK, at EV GM 260) is inertia of mass parts moving downward most fast. Opposite positioned mass parts show inertia upwards, however these forces are reduced by gravity-weights, i.e. these mass parts ´hang within space relative forceless´. Naturally all mass parts are affected by gravity, so ´potential-difference´ between upward- and downward-moving parts is constant. However, these dominant downward-inertia- plus gravity-forces now affect no longer versus upward-showing forces, but (in ideal case) versus force-free mass-parts (with no resistance versus downward-acceleration). So just at downward phase of flight of rotating bodies, strongly increasing downward movement comes up (which must not exactly correspond to loss of turning momentum).
At this falling-phase, no uniform turning momentum exists. As descirbed at previous chapters, mass of downward turning side tilt around turning-point aside of rotor axis. This fulcrum wanders downward and lastly all masses could well move only downward. However, only if body was already rotating, this tilting becomes possible, thus also that acceleration of mass-parts and correspondingly increased kinetic energy (which now resists stronger versus following upward-turning). So rotation is only trigger for this effect and there is no direct relation of rotation and accelerated falling speed.
Effects at Landing Phase
DePalma mentioned several times, based at these unexpected results of spinning-ball-experiments now ´Free Energy´ should become usable - however he did not describe obvious starting points for technique solutions. My corresponding attempts are based on ´incredible´ stories of truckers who told, their own lost wheel had overcome lorry by large jumps. Result of investigations is shown at previous mentioned ´Crosswheel-Motor´.
Essential effect comes up when previous free flying wheel again touches down at support, like schematic sketched at previous picture at D. While flight, rotation inevitably is transformed into translation, i.e. this wheel flies faster. If now however wheel hits onto solid ground, mass parts downside are braked down and its motion ahead is decelerated. Already based on law of energy-constant, thus rotation of wheel around its own axis must accelerate correspondingly, i.e. previous process is reversed (and not only by formula but in fact).
Solid support affects decelerating force onto parts of wheel resp. opposite, wheel affects corresponding accelerating force (BK) onto support. This impulse disperses at stationary supporting surface (e.g. road). If however this support is organized as movable part, it will be pressed ahead by impact of wheel (at previous picture from left towards right side).
Free Energy is usable as side-effect, if transition of rotation-movement into movement-ahead of free flying body is reversed by ´soft landing´, as necessary counter-force can be pulled off system. It´s absolutely clear, re-installation of inhibition (here that supporting surface for landing) for re-production of original movement pattern (wheel rolling at support) has to affect forces - and if processes are organized well, resulting counter force is free usable energy.
I want to point out once more, all previous mentioned processes do not raise question about new unknown additional energies. There are only simple mechanic affects of forces. Additional profit by coming up of additional forces results only by organisation of processes more or less skillful.
Cycle Processes
DePalma realized (nearly by coincidence) by his experiments, additional forces come up obviously when rotating bodies move through ´gravity-field´. Clearly he stated unusual increase of speed, however he did not pay attention to changes of rotation speed. It´s obvious to take additional kinetic energy off system - however catapults are not useful and forces coming up at landing are hard to earn.
Effects discussed here concerning spinning-ball-experiments however are likely to organize by cycle processes of rotor-systems, as described for example at mentioned Crosswheel-Motor. If in addition previous gravity-effects should be used, ´Bessler-Wheels´ will result - which will run if processes are organized skilful. Previous chapters present correspondingly ´well-organized´ machines. Based at additional insights now next chapter Gravity-Motor with Double-Joint will show once more ´round´ design - i.e. even better organisation of affecting forces by skillful mechanics.
Evert / 27.05.2006
| Energy by Gravity | Menu | Index / Sitemap |