Sure, no problem. Though, what I have to offer, may seem meager
when compared to the other suggestions. But fist I want to say, that
from my perspective, I am doing 'anything BUT' trying to be
"disparaging" in Spirit. I am merely on a quest for 'truth' in these
matters, so that, we do not get bogged down in a swamp of 'half truths',
or totally lost on a sea of outright errors. I have said this here many
times before; that I will change my tune in a heartbeat, if I can just
see the proof. That is 'ALL' I'm asking.
I do believe, that there is certainly room for as much conjecture as one
can muster, when inventing, and brainstorming; but please; lets not
present conjecture as FACT, until ALL the 'PROOF' is in. I certainly do
'discourage' that practice, wherever I see it; but, please don't assign
anything, quite so dower to my motives, as being disparaging. I really
am, on the same side as everyone else, on this list; when it come down
to the ultimate 'goal' of this list.
I can say without a doubt, that some of the most fun I have ever
had, while inventing / experimenting, in the search for O/U, was when I
built a Hammel spinner. As, I kept redesigning, and adding (Radio Shack)
magnets onto the device, in different strengths, and configurations; I
eventually got the thing to to rotate on a ridged axis, on a bearing
race, with hardly any perceptible movement of the ring. I can't help but
think, that with a coil placed near the spinning magnets, and with the
proper electronics, a solenoid, or small electric motor connected to a
levered cam could automate that movement. And I think, that it would be
enough to keep it going, by applying very short, intermittent timed,
'nudges' on the lever; which would 'rock' the top ring. And, all powered
by electricity derived from its own spinning magnets. I am still working
on perfecting the latter portion of that device; but, I have amazed more
than one person, with that device, in the configuration, that just
spins, with the least amount of effort.
More power to you Steve, if you can get there before I do.
-------------------
Oh! Since I am leaving it in it's original form, I noticed, that my post
below needs a correction.
If you remove the 'NON', from the word NON-FERROUS; then, that
particular sentence will make a whole lot more sense.
SWB
__________________________
Jerry, I am sending this to you; because it is a bit long. If you say it
is fit to post, then I will; or, you may post what you think is
pertinent.
________________________________________________________________________
Jerrys first responce: ...
Hi SWB!
Go for it...I have big shoulders...<g>..
SWB wrote:
________________________________________________________________________
I really DO NOT wish, to sound belligerent here - at all. But, I do have
some grave reservations, about what is being passed along here, to a
'yoot', with such a limited foundation, for grasping, and applying the
full 'power of reason , to discern 'fact, from conjecture. I myself, am
interested the 'proof' for the 'facts', which I question below.
"Jerry W. Decker" wrote:
>
> Hi Steve et al!
>
snip
>
> 3) Build a gravity wave detector using the Hodowanec circuit. Check
> out Bill Ramsays work with a chart recorder showing the amplitude and
> frequency shifts. Bill also connected the output of his detector to a
> VCO (voltage controlled oscillator) so you could hear the sound of the
> changing gravity waves...sounds like whales mating. You could build two
> or more, place them several miles apart, use PICS (tiny computers about
> $30 each)) to sample the data over a period of a week to a month,
> depending on how much memory you have and compare that data to show
> variations in the gravity over a specified region, then correlate that
> data with local events, weather, animal populations, number of crimes in
> the area, etc. and look for anomalies that might be influenced by
> gravity variations.
snip
I have reviewed all, that is available in the 'Keely Archives', plus
some other sites; and, I would still challenge ANYONE, to prove to me,
that ANY device, built for this purpose was actually measuring 'gravity
waves'. Gravity is not a 'force field', or a wave. It is a 'field of
influence', between two (or more) masses; which, ONLY comes into play
(actively), when the 'effects' of one mass, can be felt (significantly),
by the other. There is NO 'wave' involved in this process; at least, not
in the since, that there is 'one specific frequency' or even a 'set of
frequencies', which could be called 'gravity'.
HOWEVER, if you can envision a constantly dynamic, interactive,
multidimensional, harmonic, REACTION, between the combined atomic
signatures, of EVERY atom in EACH of the masses involved; then and ONLY
then, will you have a handle, on the tip-of-the-iceberg, of 'this
ENIGMA', that we call 'GRAVITY'. And, science has yet to come up with a
device, which can monitor all aspects of the the gravitational
interactions, of subatomic particles, in all dimensions, in real-time;
and, to positively identify, what exactly is happening, to make it
'happen', the way it does. At least, if 'they' HAVE; it hasn't been
released to the public, so their children can take it to school, for
'show and tell'.
> 6) Another physics test might be to duplicate Don Kelly's gravity drop
> experiments where he used mobius/caduceus coils inside identical boxes.
> He dropped these boxes mechanically over a fixed distance to get the
> average fall time. Then he connected a battery to the coil and noted
> that THE BOXES FELL SLOWER when the circuit was powered. You could use
> a pulse generator and compare many different arrangements. That would
> blow them away if you take all precautions and use statistical averages
> with as much reliable mechanical drop components and photo detectors to
> be triggered to calculate fall times under different circumstances.
If anyone out there thinks, that they are witnessing evidence of
gravitational waves; then, I would relish the opportunity, to see what
'exactly' you are measuring, and HOW you are measuring it. I know, that
everything I have seen on the WEB so-far, is woefully lacking, in ANY
sort, of substantive proof. And, that goes for the few, that are from
those in the 'conventional camp', as well.
I have no doubt that this experiment does indeed work. I do however,
think that any measurable reaction here, was due to the configuration,
of the electromagnetic field produced by the coil, acting against the
earth's electromagnetic field; and NOT gravity. Gravity only paid the
price, of a little more 'free fall' time; because the energized coil,
was counteracting the 'effects' of gravity; by, 'hanging onto' the the
Earth's electromagnetic field (which, it can now 'feel', with its own
electromagnetic appendages, when the coil is energized). If the coil's
field were strong enough, and manipulated right, it could hover, fly,
accelerate up, and even go into orbit; but, AT NO TIME, would it be
'nullifying gravity', as THAT is not possible, in the sense, that I
have heard most people describe, this 'erroneous' assumption.
> 7) Tying in with this gravity drop experiment is the one by Japanese
> experimenters where a gyro was dropped and found to fall SLOWER when it
> was spinning CCW with respect to the earth, that is looking down on the
> falling gyro, you would see it spinning to the left.
That one, is THE most provocative demonstration, I have seen to date;
which lends credence to my theory, that what we 'observe' as 'gravity',
is merely a 'reaction' between masses; and, it DOES NOT EXIST as a FORCE
FIELD, (or, as waves), in the absence of any other mass. (It's just too
bad, that the only way I will ever have, to prove this theory, is to
invent a gravimeter detector; which, itself has NO mass !!!) BUT, here
too, a gyro will only 'counter' the gravitational, and magnetic forces
acting upon it; and, NEVER in ANY way, alters the attractive forces of
another mass.
The ONLY thing, that changes in a spinning mass, is the 'available'
mass, being subjected to the 'accelerate attractive force', of the the
other mass. When it is spinning, at least half of the mass is always
moving away from, or at a 'neutral angles', to the accelerative force;
as the 'ENTIRE MASS' is made up of 'spinning subatomic particles.
Therefore, in a spinning mass, a randomized section of that mass, will
have a FULL half of it's combined subatomic spin to be away from, or at
'nullifying angles' to the accelerative force. But, that in no way is
'Anti-gravity', nor is it, setting up a 'field' which, makes the
attractive forces "go away'. One set of masses, just temporarily
'looses' a portion of the 'full effect, of their encounter, when 'spin'
is involved.
This phenomenon is indeed gravity related, as the 'spinning body' is
constantly 'redistributing' it's mass; and (in essence), is causing the
'attractive forces', associated with the gyro's mass, to react, in the
manner witnessed above. But, there is also evidence, that the Earth's
MAGNETIC FIELD, is playing a major role in this, as well. The direction
of spin, in a given magnetic hemisphere; makes the 'repellent' magnetic
properties help in 'OVERRIDING', or 'ADDING TO', the acceleration
associated with the attractive gravitational forces. Both of these
factors combined, are what make a difference, in the gyro's 'free fall'
time. (I would also venture to say; that, a NON-FERROUS gyro, will act
differently, than one of wood, or plastic, when performing this
experiment.)
The only way to alter gravity is to alter the MASS, of the individual
interacting 'bodies'. If you cannot get rid of 'physical mass', then you
cannot lessen the gravitational 'reaction', between those bodies. At
best we will only be able to get enough centrifugal force going, that
the lesser mass involved is easily moved, by some means of propulsion.
> 9) You could do acoustic levitation showing how mass can be trapped in
> a standing wave to 'levitate'.
>
That sounds very interesting. Have you actually seen this done Jerry?
How heavy was the object being levitated? What frequencies were used, at
what Amplitude? What was the SPL? And, with what manner of device was
this done, that would really be safe, for a high school kid to be using,
in an 'acoustically unshielded' environment?
SWB
-------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this list, email <listserver@keelynet.com>
with the body text: leave Interact
list archives and on line subscription forms are at
http://keelynet.com/interact/
-------------------------------------------------------------