ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Captain's Log 21/12/12:

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 05 2013, 11:43 am

 


Ensign:


And, finally, here's another youtube video to demonstrate gyroscopic motion and precession of the copper conductor when one end is free.


LL&P.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fRC7V3KMA4


 

alfamav

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 54

Report this Aug. 06 2013, 4:15 am

 


Thanks Mr Spock.


Always steered clear of gyroscopes and gyroscopic motion before, as didn't understand it, but this makes more sense than those Right-Hand and Left-Hand rules.


Not sure about the "minimum-energy configuration" bit.


Can you explain further please?


LL&P

Palomar1932

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46

Report this Aug. 06 2013, 10:05 am

 


Yes Mr Spock, I like this explaination of gyroscopes and motor theory.


"Live Long & Prosper".

EDisConstant

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 43

Report this Aug. 07 2013, 11:11 am

 


That's an excellent step-by-step analysis of orbital & gyroscopic motion Mr Spock. Commendations.


I wonder if Earth scientists will ever review the way they see things???


They are still searching for a monopole in their magnetic theory, which is a pointless exercise if the "magnetic" phenomenon is really a Potential Energy Gradient - when a gradient must have two ends!


LL&P

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 10 2013, 3:16 am

 


And commendations to the readers of this StarTrek forum.


Thanks for some good questions:


Alfamav asked "what is a photon?"


Palomar asked about travelling faster than the speed of light.


And Lang-hao Leeyoh pointed out, with some intricate mathematics, the risks of using old science theories as the foundations for new theories.


Will get back with some information on "minimum energy configuration".


LL&P

alfamav

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 54

Report this Aug. 11 2013, 4:53 am

 


Wow! Well done Mr Spock.


Just took another look at the chinese space video.


Does that gyroscope in space look just like a flying saucer or not???


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMTdHtunmHI

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 11 2013, 10:39 am

 


 


Alfamav:


Sorry, have only seen flying saucers in your early Sci-Fi comics and "Lost in Space".


Some earlier ideas were good, as featured in "Tom Swift and His Outpost in Space" (James Duncan Lawrence 1955) - a true classic.


 


Here's some further information you requested:


In nature, everything stabilises into a minimum energy configuration - like these soap bubbles - one of the easiest examples to observe.


It's the same across the universes.


Don't know why - it just does - but it is logical - why would nature waste energy?


LL&P.


 



 Picture by Paul Rapson.


So let me get this right: Your Earth physics is based upon the idea that an electron has one unit of electrical charge, which is exactly equal and opposite to the charge on a proton, which is almost 2000 times bigger! Furthermore, these charges normally repel like charges, but not when electrons are close together in an atom, nor when protons are close together in an atomic nucleus! You must be crazy!

alfamav

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 54

Report this Aug. 17 2013, 3:44 am

 


Took a look at the Tom Swift books.  Apparently it was very good Sci-Fi at the time.  Will read some more.


 


Have also looked up "minimum energy" on gloogle search etc.  It seems to be a common theme in nature.


You say "there is only energy" but can you explain this like the gyroscope stuff - that can be understood by us Earthlings?


Thanks Spock.


LL&P.

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 19 2013, 3:52 pm

 


Ensign:


 


Here's the first stage to understanding Energy:


 


Principle No 1:   Conservation of Energy:


 


Example No 1:


For a car accelerating along the Earth's surface: The wheels apply a force to the ground, the car accelerates and its velocity increases.


But the equal-and-opposite force on the Earth changes the Earth's speed of rotation - by a small amount.


The net result is that the total Rotational Energy (Earth plus car) remains constant (Conservation of Rotational Energy).


 


Furthermore, the total energy (Kinetic Energy plus Potential Energy plus Rotational Energy) of the car and the Earth (including the Potential Energy in the burnt fuel) remains constant.


Note: When fuel is burnt, its Potential Energy is converted from chemical Potential Energy to other forms of energy - Kinetic, Heat, Sound etc.


 


Energy cannot be created or destroyed:


Energy can only be converted from one form to another.


LL&P.


 


 


 


So let me get this right: Your Earth physics is based upon the idea that an electron has one unit of electrical charge, which is exactly equal and opposite to the charge on a proton, which is almost 2000 times bigger! Furthermore, these charges normally repel like charges, but not when electrons are close together in an atom, nor when protons are close together in an atomic nucleus! You must be crazy!

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 22 2013, 1:50 pm

 


Example No 2:


When Tom Swift's Rocket Ship (written in 1954) fires its engines, the exhaust particles move in one direction and the Rocket Ship moves in the opposite direction.


However, the total Energy of the Rocket Ship plus exhaust gases remains constant:


The fuel's Potential Energy has been converted from chemical Potential Energy into other energy forms - Kinetic, Heat, etc.


Energy cannot be created or destroyed:  Energy can only be converted from one form to another.


LL&P.


 


So let me get this right: Your Earth physics is based upon the idea that an electron has one unit of electrical charge, which is exactly equal and opposite to the charge on a proton, which is almost 2000 times bigger! Furthermore, these charges normally repel like charges, but not when electrons are close together in an atom, nor when protons are close together in an atomic nucleus! You must be crazy!

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 23 2013, 5:31 am

 


Example No 3:


For a ball rolling down a slope, the ball's Potential Energy is converted into Kinetic Energy and Rotational Energy.


The total Energy of the ball plus the Earth (Potential Energy + Kinetic Energy + Rotational Energy) will remain constant.


 


Note: The Earth's rate of rotation will alter slightly to maintain constant total Rotational Energy (Conservation of Rotational Energy).


 


Remember: Energy cannot be created or destroyed: Energy can only be converted from one form to another.


LL&P.


 


 



So let me get this right: Your Earth physics is based upon the idea that an electron has one unit of electrical charge, which is exactly equal and opposite to the charge on a proton, which is almost 2000 times bigger! Furthermore, these charges normally repel like charges, but not when electrons are close together in an atom, nor when protons are close together in an atomic nucleus! You must be crazy!

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 26 2013, 3:08 am

 


Example No 4:


For the Starship to turn in space, small thrusters are often used.


The total Linear and Rotational Energies of the exhaust gases plus the Starship will remain constant.


Remember: Energy cannot be created or destroyed:


Energy can only be converted from one form to another.


The Principles of Conservation of Rotational Energy and Conservation of Linear Energy will always apply.


LL&P.



 Diagram Credit: National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution


 


So let me get this right: Your Earth physics is based upon the idea that an electron has one unit of electrical charge, which is exactly equal and opposite to the charge on a proton, which is almost 2000 times bigger! Furthermore, these charges normally repel like charges, but not when electrons are close together in an atom, nor when protons are close together in an atomic nucleus! You must be crazy!

brianstrom999

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 85

Report this Aug. 28 2013, 12:03 pm

 


Ensign:  Are you still with me?


 


Principle No 2. Linear Energy is proportional to "Velocity Squared" (V^2):


For a powered vehicle, as fuel is burnt and an increment of chemical energy is converted to kinetic energy, the vehicle's velocity increases by an increment.


But this also increases the total intrinsic energy of the vehicle - you would say its "mass" increases.


For the next incremental increase in velocity, the increment of energy needs to be larger, because now the vehicle is "heavier" (has higher intrinsic energy).


Mathematically, this means that "Linear Energy is proportional to Velocity Squared (V^2)".


 


 (Note:  Earth scientists also know that Energy of linear motion is proportional to "Velocity Squared". Their knowledge is based on experimental observations, from almost 300 years ago, of an object falling into clay:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Émilie_du_Châtelet


However, they appear to have no explanation of why this should be so, and their Energy equation erroneously includes "mass" as a constant: 1/2mV^2.)


 


Graph:  "Vehicle Energy proportional to Velocity Squared"



 


 

alfamav

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 54

Report this Aug. 29 2013, 1:13 pm

 


Still with you, Mr Spock. 


It's OK with this step-by-step approach.


LL&P.

Palomar1932

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 46

Report this Aug. 30 2013, 1:41 pm

 


Me too Mr Spock.


 


This looks pretty fundamental, but seems logical


the way you explain it:   "There is only Energy!"


 


Never knew about Emilie du Chatelet before.


What a gal!


LL&P.


Spockism: "Your Earth scientists are confused. Logically, matter plus anti-matter would equal zero - it would not produce a finite amount of energy in the form of photons."

Post Reply

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: darmokattanagra, FleetAdmiral_BamBam

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum