(1) Extraction of Electrical Energy Directly
from Space: The N-Machine
(2) Gravity & The Spinning Ball Experiment
(3) Understanding the Dropping of the Spinning
Ball Experiment
Extraction of Electrical Energy Directly from Space: The N-Machine
by
Bruce E. DePalma
(9 March 1979)
Introduction ~
The extraction of energy directly from space has been suggested as
a viable process for the solution of the energy problems of society.
The accessibility of this energy has been limited by the necessity for
the formulation of new energy paradigms. In the past, energy in space
has been suggested by thoughts such as Orgone, Od, Prana, Bio-cosmic,
Neutrino energy sea and so on, but the useful extraction of such energies
has always awaited more explicit formulations of these ideas which could
suggest the construction of simple practical energy extraction machinery.
Variable Inertial Mass ~
Experiments performed by this author have suggested a picture of
space which is perfused with a "fine substance". This concept is one
which lies between the ineffability of a space-time construct such as
Einstein and the tangibility of gross matter. The important part about
this "fine substance" is that it is shown that this substance confers
inertia on physical objects. The substance of inertia can also be shown
to have the property of polarization.
Normally the inertial mass of an object is anisotropic --- that is
to say, an inertial measurement performed by applying a force vector
to the object and measuring the resulting acceleration; the inertial
mass obtained in this measurement would be a constant independent of
the direction of the applied force vector. The important discovery is
that the inertial mass of a rotating object becomes polarized and anisotropic
--- in terms of the real behavior of a rotating object the inertial
mass is found to increase for measurements performed in the direction
of the axis of rotation, and perforce the inertial mass is found to
decrease for measurements made in the direction of the plane of rotation.
Complete inertial polarization of the rotating object takes place when
the inertial mass taken in the direction of the plane of rotation of
the test object decreases to zero with increasing rotational speed.
The "N" Effect ~
The interesting combination would be to combine the effects of inertial
and magnetic polarization for the extraction of electrical energy directly
from space.
With reference to the two diagrams, Figure A and Figure B, the "N"
effect is demonstrated quite simply. A cylindrical bar magnet of alnico
or other magnetized electrical conductor as shown is rotated around
an axis passing through the two magnetic poles and perpendicular to
the polished pole faces as shown. What is found is a cylindrically symmetrical
electric field is established within the magnet through rotation. Electrical
current is simply extracted by placing the probes or sliding contacts
of the appropriate ammeters and voltmeters, one on the axis of rotation
and the other on the outer surface of the rotating magnetized conductor.
Figure A: N- Effect
Figure B: N-Machine
The "N" Machine ~
In order to make full use of the current capabilities of an N generator
and to accommodate the use of non-conducting "ferrite" permanent magnets
or electromagnets, an N-machine is constructed as in Figure B. The N-machine
utilizes a copper or bronze conducting shaft and disc and ferrite ring
magnets cemented together as shown. A typical machine constructed with
ordinary loudspeaker ring magnets of dimensions o.d. 2-7/8", i.d. 1-1/3"
and ½" thickness, two of each epoxy-cemented on either side of a conducting
disc 1/8" thick, delivers 30 millivolts at 3450 rpm. The field strength
of the magnets as supplied is about 1000 gauss. The current obtainable
from the machine is limited only by the resistance of the leads and
sliding contacts. Since the aforementioned 30 mv can be developed across
a heavy copper wire shunt of resistance less than .001 ohm, a current
in excess of 30 amperes is developed by this simple toy.
Electrical energy developed out of centrifugal extraction of the
electrical positive and negative poles from the free energy field of
space is supplied in useful and controllable form from N generators
which are scaled in order to supply requirements. Experiments show the
voltage polarity depends on the sense of rotation. Output voltage goes
directly as speed and magnetic field strength. Geometrically the output
voltage increases as the square of the machine radius, r2.
Discussion ~
It was in the 1830s that Michael Faraday working in the basement
of what is now the Royal technical College in London, discovered that
a conducting disc held between the poles of a magnet with the lines
of force perpendicular to the surface, would generate current if rotated
and the current extracted between the center and the edge of the rotating
conducting disc.
Conversely, if a voltage were applied between the center and the
edge of such a disc it would rotate as a motor. These effects are presently
known as the Faraday unipolar dynamo and Faraday motor respectively.
If Faraday had rotated the whole combination, magnets and disc together,
he would have discovered as this author did in 1977 that the voltage
output remained constant regardless of whether the disc was rotating
independently of the magnets or not. Of course, if Maxwell or Faraday
had known of the "N" effect, things would have been different. But it
is probably true that such a discovery had to wait until the availability
of strong, lightweight permanent magnets, a development that didn't
take place until the 1930s.
What is important about the N machine is that unlike a conventional
generator which exhibits a rotational drag when current is drawn, an
N generator exhibits no such drag.
All of the currently used electrical generation rotating machinery
has the property of being both motors and generators simultaneously.
That is to say, an electrical machine which is used as a generator will
operate as a motor when excited with the appropriate voltages and currents.
With the foregoing in mind, we interpret the situation as follows.
In the conventional electrical power generation system we have an
electrical generator coupled to an engine of some kind which supplies
mechanical power which is interpreted in accord with present understanding
to be converted from mechanical to electrical energy with a conversion
efficiency not to exceed 100%. If we were to suppose however that that
the energy obtained was extracted from some heretofore unsuspected property
of magnetism; then it is simply apparent that the slowing down of the
drive engine is due to the "generator" having the aspect of a motor
also, and that is the slowing of the drive engine with electrical load
is simply the effect of the motor aspect of the generator energized
by the load current. The generator being a motor also elicits a torque
output in opposition to the drive engine torque. This is why an engine-generator
combination slows down when an electrical load is thrown on the generator.
An N generator is only a generator and does not possess the dual
aspects of presently used machines. Electrical loading of an N generator
produces an internal torque between the conducting electrical disc and
the attached ring magnets. However, since they are firmly cemented together,
this torque cannot escape from the machine and load the drive motor
or engine. Thus the N machine is a non-reciprocal machine, which, if
a voltage were applied to it in the fashion of motor excitation between
the center and the edge of the conducting disc, no motor action could
result since the generated torque is constrained within the body of
the machine.
Directions for Future Work ~
The discovery of a new physical phenomenon, the N effect, which relates
phenomena of magnetism, inertia, and rotation together in a new machine
for the liberation of electrical energy directly from space is a pregnant
development of a new age in science which will energize the civilization
of the 21st century. Although many ideas may have suggested themselves
in the minds of the readers of this information, I would like to suggest
a few possibilities which have occurred to this author in the time that
he has been working and experimenting with N generators of various kinds.
1. Control of Very High Currents at Low Voltage: Simple
calculations will show the N generator to be characterized as a very
high current, low voltage electrical generation machine. For the sizes
and rotational speeds normally associated with conventional automotive
or electrical traction purposes it is easy to show that voltages of
up to 100 or so vdc can be generated at currents limited only by the
brush technology and the machine internal resistance. Standard texts
detail methods whereby high currents have been conducted through liquid
conducting metal electrodes. In this fashion, currents of 50,000 amperes
have been conducted from Faraday unipolar generators for the excitation
of ultra-high field strength magnets for physical experiments (Francis
Bitter Magnet Laboratory Publication, MIT, Cambridge, MA).
The important fact about the N generator is that once the appropriate
brush technology has been adopted for the ultra-high currents, the control
of the voltage becomes very simple. The N generator is constructed as
an N machine with the permanent magnets replaced by a pair of electromagnets
on either side of the conducting disc. Excitation of the electromagnets
can vary the N generator output from zero to full in either polarity.
Thus a current of thousands of amperes can be controlled in voltage
and polarity by a few amperes or less of excitation current necessary
to saturate the electromagnets in the chosen direction of magnetization.
It is easy to see that ac operation is possible if the electromagnets
age built o laminations stacked in a cylindrical build with the direction
of easy magnetization parallel to the axis of rotation of the machine.
2. Self-Contained Power Generation Systems: Since the N
generator can generate many times the power needed to overcome bearing
friction, windage losses and frictional losses in sliding contacts,
the N generator can be combined with an electrical drive motor forming
a self-sustaining combination. Reflection will show the appropriate
motor for such a purpose is a Faraday motor; a simple copper disc rotor
between the poles of strong field magnets. The ultra-low voltage, high
current characteristics of this machine combine perfectly with the low
voltage, high current output of the N generator. Such a combination,
an N generator on a common shaft with a Faraday motor, with the motor
excited with a fraction of the generator output regulated through an
appropriate series resistor (to prevent machine speed runaway) forms
a power generation system. The basic power generation system then consists
of a self-sustaining combination of N generator and Faraday motor which
provides a mechanical and an electrical output.
Figure C: The N-I Power Generation System ~
An interesting line of development begins here since once the basic
power generation system is constructed the mechanical output can be
used to drive conventional generators - which may be to some advantage
since these machines are presently articles of commerce and can deliver
higher output voltages than the basic dc generator. The point of all
this is that once the free energy is liberated from space and converted
into rotational form by a combination N generator-Faraday motor, the
resultant energy is directly applicable economically, and with known
conventional technology and machines.
3. Inertial Guidance: The N generator concept of the direct
centrifugal extraction of the electrical poles from the spatial energy
field has direct application to the field of inertial guidance. It is
not necessary to have sliding contacts if the N generator is to be used
to sense do/dt. Wires can be soldered to the ends of a diameter of an
N generator disc and a voltage obtained between the two diametrical
ends connected together and at the center. The polarity of this voltage
will reflect the sense of rotation and its magnitude will be proportional
to do/dt. Appropriate integrators on the output of a 3-axis combination
will provide all the information necessary for an inertial guidance
system replacing cumbersome mechanical gyroscopes spinning at fantastic
speeds together with excessively sophisticated and expensive ancillary
mechanical and electrical instrumentation.
Conclusion ~
The powerful physical principle resulting from the interaction of
rotation, inertia, and magnetism, for the liberation of unlimited controlled
energy directly from the energy medium of space, the N effect, opens
the door to the continued social development of a society freed from
the limitation of the present energy conservation paradigm.
Freedom from the limitations imposed by the present formulations,
the so-called Laws of Physics, is important since it allows the upward
spiraling of free thought which eventually expresses itself in new forms
of machinery. In terms of 1979 science, it is an unexpected pleasure
to be reminded that the present closed system of equations of electricity,
Maxwells' equations, do not represent all there is to know about electricity
and magnetism.
The Laws of Thermodynamics and the so-called conservation of energy
relationships are 150 years old. Of course, the discovery of the inertial
anisotropy of rotating objects taken together with new information this
author has elicited regarding the elastic collisions of rotating objects
impacting on identical non-rotating controls - free energy is liberated
in the collision of a rotating object with a non-rotating one [sic].
New information such as this imposes new degrees of freedom in the thermodynamic
interactions of colliding atoms and will help explain much of the anomalous
new information which is being accumulated in the present search for
more "efficient" ways of liberating or extracting energy from Nature.
A thorough intelligent analysis of the N generator will show that
to produce any voltage whatsoever, such a combination of magnets and
a conducting disc in rotation as shown, invalidates the physical interpretations
of Newton and Einstein, special relativity and general relativity. The
loss of these ideas I do not regard as a terribly great tragedy since
in their overcoming we shall eventually perfect the anti-gravity spacedrive
and will send humans to the stars. In this short paper I can only suggest
some of these ideas.
Closer to what is at hand, I would like to suggest that the presently
conceived ideas regarding the operation of the magnetron radio frequency
transmitting tube can be re-examined in the light of the N effect. In
such a tube a rotating disc electronic cloud excites a series of resonant
chambers around its periphery at microwave frequencies. The very high
power microwave impulses obtained in this way form the basis of radar
transmitters in current use.
Interpreting the magnetron operation as a higher order property of
the Faraday unipolar dynamo, we can suspect that we might be able to
obtain ac excitation of a series resonant LC circuit connected between
any two separate points on the periphery of a rotating N generator conducting
disc. For most of us who have spent our lives in the conventional applications
of electricity and electrical rotating machinery, it may be enlightening
to obtain alternating current in this way. What is important is, anyone
can say that a certain formulation or set of ideas in invalid, i.e.,
the Einstein geometrical interpretation of space. The important thing
is what we have to offer in terms of new machinery, i.e., free energy
or anti-gravity to substantiate new ideas.
Experiments performed by this author have obtained 2-3 millivolts
ac (p-p) generated in this way employing a 1 microfarad capacitor in
series with the appropriate inductance to obtain a resonance between
100 and 600 cps. In consideration of the utilization of this effect
for the generation of megawatt power levels at powerline frequencies
(60 cps) the size of the components becomes important since a resonant
circuit must be employed in conjunction with the N generator. The L
and C elements would have to be fabricated to reach the megawatt power
levels with suitably low internal impedance. Such limitations do not
appear to assert themselves at the magnetron operating frequencies,
so the possibility of the liberation of megawatt power levels of microwave
power radiation from an N machine in a UHF cavity suggests itself.
Without becoming prolix it is interesting to consider all the ramifications
of the electricity which originally was known in the Galvanic wet cell
or the lightning arrestor. Now pictures are sent through the "air" (television),
and sound is recorded (magnetism). Many other things are done. We live
in an age where the conceptualization of such a development has taken
place in many fields. Thus there is some basis for understanding of
the possiblilities which can result from the evolution of a new basis
of understanding. With this in main, I have tried to indicate what some
of the thoughts I have had have led me to in consideration of the newly
discovered inertial anisotropy of rotating objects and the interaction
of magnetism and rotation, the N effect.
Bruce E. DePalma
(Died 1998)
Gravity & The Spinning Ball Experiment
by
Bruce E. DePalma
(17 March 1977)
Introduction:
The spinning ball experiment consists of the observation of the interaction
of gravitational and inertia forces on a rotating material object.
In the interaction of material force on a rotating physical object,
four experiments are possible:
1) Inertial forces acting on non-rotating material objects in field-free
space;
2) Inertial forces acting on rotating material objects in field-free
space;
3) Inertial forces acting on non-rotating material objects in a gravitational
field;
4) Inertial forces acting on rotating material objects in a gravitational
field.
Discussion of the Experiments:
In experiments (1) and (2), we would expect the normal inertial forces
summarized by Newton's Laws of mechanical motion. In experiment (3),
there is reason to believe there will be (supported by experimental
evidence), a slight enhancement of inertia by the gravitational field.
The cases of experiments (2) and (4) have not been adequately treated
in the literature.
Behavior of Rotating Material Objects:
Certain theoretical considerations justified the belief by the author
that the mechanical properties of objects would be altered by rotation
and that this would be the basis of the gravitational interaction. A
series of experiments has been carried out supporting this basis of
action. The report of some of these experiments has been appended to
this theoretical dissertation. The results will be presented here.
1) Experimental evidence supports the fact that a rapidly rotating
material object will gain in inertia.
2) The form of the gravitational interaction is that the additional
inertia property, od, of rapidly rotating real material objects, represents
an additional repository for the extraction and supplying of work from
or to a gravitational field. This means a rotating mass will fall more
rapidly (with greater acceleration) than a corresponding no-rotating
object under the influence of a gravitational field.
Form of the Gravitational Interaction:
The complete description of physical phenomena depends on the result
of many experiments. Together with the behavior of the spinning ball
experiments, there is another series -- force machine pendulum experiments
- which have been reported elsewhere. Basically the phenomena reported
here are summarized by these results:
1) A force machine pendulum, i.e., a pendulum composed of two identical
flywheels contra-rotating, for the cancellation of gyroscopic forces,
swings with a period slightly increased over that of the non-energized
force machine. This indicates a net increase in the inertia of the rotating
system.
2) The swinging of the energized pendulum is non-sinusoidal, with
a foreshortening (flattening) of the peaks of the swings.
3) Mechanical energy of motion, stored in the created inertial property,
od, appears as an inertial field. This inertial field has the property
of conferring inertia on surrounding material objects - and a reduction
in the frequency of oscillating electrical circuits placed in the vicinity
of the energized machine.
When we examine the behavior of the spinning ball in relation to
the above phenomena we can extract the following behavior.
When the spinning ball is thrown upwards it leaves the cup wit some
vertical velocity v, In order to attain this velocity the spinning ball
had been accelerated vertically prior to the time of leaving the cup.
Acceleration of a rotating material object requires greater energy than
a corresponding non-rotating one since some energy is supplied to the
od field. When the spinning object leaves the cup, the kinetic energy
of motion is divided between the 1/2mv2 of the "real" mass of the object,
and the energy stored in the created inertial property, od. The sum
of these two energies allows to attainment of a greater height reached,
in the doing of work against the gravitational field, in comparison
to a non-spinning object moving with the same initial vertical velocity.
When we examine the behavior of the falling non-spinning object versus
the spinning object, we notice the spinning object falling faster (with
greater acceleration).
We infer that the behavior of the falling non-spinning object, falling
in accord with Newton's Laws, is a special case of the motion of objects
in general. The more general case, involving rotation, is obscured by
the gravitational interaction.
We would expect, if we could increase the inertia of an object (through
rotation of by some other means), that the object would fall more slowly
in a gravitational field. Let us consider however that while a conferred
inertial property, od, would reduce the acceleration of a given body
acted on by a given force in outer space, in the presence of a gravitational
field, the conferred inertial property would be an additional mechanical
"dimension" for the extraction of energy from the gravitational field
in falling. Conversely, enough energy could be delivered from this "dimension"
to cancel, or overcome, the mechanical energy extracted from an object
raised in a gravitational field.
On this basis we may write:
For the spinning ball: mgh = ½ mov2 + Kodv
For the spinning ball falling: ½ mov2 = ½ mov2 + Kodv
In a strict sense, the precise application of Newton's Laws would
have to be restricted to non-rotating mechanical objects in field-free
space. In a gravitational field, the possibility of extraction of greater
energy by a new mechanical dimension opens the possibility of an anti-gravitational
interaction. In a rotating force machine, od energy can be supplied:
Driven force machine: mgh = ½ mov2 + Kodw2
Where, w is the angular velocity of the force machine drive axis.
Here is the possibility of the conversion of rotational energy to
work done against the gravitational field. What is not determined at
this point is the necessary increment of energy required to neutralize
the weight of a given object, viz., it might take 1.1 foot pounds of
work to lift a one pound object one foot. The incremental field necessary
to establish neutral weight, or the hovering condition, represents the
inefficiency or lack of perfection of a real force machine. The important
fact is the establishment of the od field as the mechanism for a mechanical
interaction with the gravitational field, in addition to the mechanical
interaction expressed as Newton's Laws of the falling non-spinning mechanical
body.
Interpretation of Physical Laws:
The fact that Newton's Laws do not distinguish between the spinning
and the non-rotating object represents the state of mechanical knowledge
at the time. But because Newton did not distinguish between rotation
and non-rotation, Einstein did not distinguish between the so-called
inert and "gravitational mass". The fact that rotation affects the mechanical
properties of objects paces Newton's Laws as a special case and invalidates
a geometrical interpretation of space.
Many questions have been asked about the nature of the gravitational-rotational
interaction and its theoretical prediction. Basically the theory can
be looked at in the following way. If we consider a force, such as that
engendered by the action of the gravitational field on a non-rotating
real object, we find we can make a measurement of that force on what
we know as a scale. If we examine the reading on that scale, say one
pound, we can conduct our examinations to that degree of accuracy where
we can reach uncertainty, i.e., 1.000000000??? It is not clear at that
point whether the uncertainties in the measurement are due to properties
of the experiment, or that which is being experimented upon. The level
of causes and effects, uncertainty.
If we consider the results of any experiment we find this phenomenon.
If a real material object is rotated, it is found that within the
body of the object are manifested the centripetal forces of rotation.
If we consider a measurement of these forces we could find the same
defect, that is, the measurement could be made precise enough to reach
the noise level, i.e., causes and effects, and it would not be discernable
whether the fluctuations were being caused by the experimenter or that
which is being experimented upon. This level is the level of defect
of forces and represents the connection between rotation and gravitation.
Once there is established a connection, the transfer of energy follows
a controllable orientation, viz: the spinning balls falls more rapidly
because such an object can extract more energy from a gravitational
interaction than can a normal one, and as well, the storage of energy
in a force machine as an od field results in direct application of this
energy to do work against the gravitational field and provide lifting
force.
The concept of defect (of a field or force) was originally elicited
epistemologically, forming the basis of the author's theory of Simularity,
a theory of Reality based on the properties of measurement.
What is considered is the real properties of the level of causes
and effects. What this represents physically as a form of inertia and
a connection between rotation and gravitation. The "connectivity" of
defect and the other real properties of inertia fields is better left
to discussions to begin with the data presented herein. The theory s
more properly left to the serious students of these ideas. As apprehension
of the theory of Simularity necessarily entails the dropping of certain
restrictions on the mind of the experimenter.
What can be said is this:
In the further refinement of the art of physical conceptions, there
are certain points reached, wherein it is in the proper ordering of
things to drop certain concepts when they have reached the end of the
usefulness. In the search for the gravitational interaction, we have
long been hampered by the erroneous equation of inert and gravitational
masses. We could better say: force is an element in the performance
of two separate experiments - the force of gravitational attraction
of a test mass, and, the force necessary to cause a test mass to accelerate
at the same rate at which it falls.
Now that we have distinguished between the inert and gravitational
mass by means of rotation, there are two principles involved:
1) The connection between all experiments through the mechanism of
defect.
2) The resolution or distinction of experiments, one from another,
on the basis of differing procedures. There is no basis to believe that
two experiments involving a common element (ingredient) have any basis
to be comparable in their results, viz., the particle and wave hypothesis
of light. It is also reasonable to suggest that we not apply mundane
concepts of "size", "weight", "mass", "spin", "sign", etc., without
precise explicit reference to the experiment being performed. Since
many of the ideas we have about "matter" are conditioned by the models
we construct, we may have reached a point of development where the "model"
as a concept may have to be discarded.
It is not inconceivable to this author, to regard physics as a collection
of experiments, some of which may involve one or more common elements.
No one experiment ever gives the results of another separate and distinct
experiment. Thusly stated:
A different experiment gives a different result.
We can see that to take the common element of two distinct experiments,
that is to take force, and then take the results of the experiments
and then equate - having found them "equivalent" - such a dilemma can
only resolve itself in a curvature of geometrical representation of
space. In final analysis, the invariance of physical laws is replaced
as a concept by defect, a real property elicited by the spinning ball
experiments, and which now replaces the invariance of physical laws
as the unifying concept of all experiments.
Bruce E. DePalma
Understanding the Dropping of
the Spinning Ball Experiment
by
Bruce E. DePalma
(3 May 1977)
The beginning of this author's work with rotating objects began with
moment of inertia measurements of constrained gyroscopes undergoing
forced precession. The increased moments of inertia discovered for precessional
motion were translated into a series of measurements on pendulums with
rotating bobs. Although the discovery of the inertial effects associated
with precession and pendulum oscillations were highly suggestive, this
author greatly resisted attempts to force him to drop a rotating object
for two reasons.
Firstly, he had no reason to be able to predict the motion of a freely
falling object on the basis of the inertial alterations he had measured
which had concerned themselves with constrained situations of rotating
objects. Second, there was no reason to expect inertial alteration to
affect the rate of fall of a released object, and there was no available
theory which could in any way be applied to the situation of a falling
object in a gravitational field. This is a situation known in religious
terms as a "leap into the dark".
Since the author and his assistants are experts ion the application
of stroboscopic lighting techniques to the study of high speed motions,
the first experimental cut at the situation was to photograph the trajectories
of a steel ball bearing rotating at high speed together with an identical
control object moving at similar initial velocity. The result of the
experiment was so startling and anomalous as to have taken me 5 years
to understand.
The original results of our experiments were circulated as a report
in 1974 (Ref. 1). Two years later, the experiment was published in an
appendix to a book of Christian exegesis (Ref. 2). In 1977, one of my
former students performed a high precision verification of the dropping
of a rotating object: "The Gyro Drop Experiment" (Ref. 3). Actually,
the experiment has two parts, the spinning ball going up, and the spinning
ball falling. Since I would rather be thought a fool than misrepresent
results of experiments, I only attempted to analyze the portion of the
experiment I thought I understood. Basically, the spinning object going
higher than the identical non-rotating control with the same initial
velocity, and then falling faster than the identical non-rotating control,
presents a dilemma which can only be resolved or understood on the basis
of radically new concepts in physics - concepts so radical that only
the heretofore un-understood results of other experiments (the elastic
collision of a rotating and an identical non-rotating object, et al.)
and new conceptions of physics growing out of the many discussions and
correspondence pertaining to rotation, inertia, gravity, and motion
in general. We should remember the pioneers in this field: Wolfe, Cox,
Dean, Laithwaite, Rendle, Searl, Kummel, DePalma and Delvers, to name
but a few.
In the beginning, I developed the concept of variable inertia to
explain the behavior of rotating material objects, but variable inertia
in itself contravenes the laws of physics in the sense of contravention
of the laws of conservation of mass and energy. Of course, the destruction
of one thing is interesting, but of course this is in itself not a creative
act and does not take us any closer to the truth.
Because man is so interested in the universe, and the motions of
the universe depend so much on gravity, the study of gravity takes us
to the deepest foundations of human thought. I think it is a mind-bending
experience to see every stone fall at the exact same rate as any other
stone. And when you spin an object, why does it fall faster? And most
mind-boggling of all, why does it go higher than the identical non-rotating
control released to go upward at the same initial velocity? Of course,
the experiment could be wrong, but also perhaps we could develop a hypothesis
which would fit all experiments.
We know that when we can alter the properties of mechanical objects,
i.e., change their inertia, we have contravened the conservation of
energy because we have associated the properties of an object with the
space which contains the object. The space which contains the object
also contains energy and we can go at the project in two ways: we can
attempt to extract the energy without worrying where it came from, or
we can attempt to understand physics, ourselves, and the universe by
a new formulation of reality.
Par of the difficulty of accepting free energy is the feeling that
we're getting something for free, and that automatically makes it suspect.
On the other hand, however, we can accept what we know as "energy" as
something which is a natural part of our environment and can be reached
if we have the key.
Most of the difficulties in the location of this energy lie in the
comprehension of where it's coming from. If this can be comprehended,
then the understanding of the free energy experiment can be believed.
When reality came into existence, the time energy of the Universe
was concentrated into a single form, the exactitude with which a single
atom gave off a beat of frequency when excited as a spectral line. We
have come to regard this as the only way of measuring time. The true
way of measuring time is in the inertia of objects. Thus, a tuning fork
watch or oscillator is a more natural way of measuring which can only
exist and not be measured. In the case of Time, we can know the existence
of it, but for whatever measurement we take to be indicating it, we
make our own determinations as to whether this measurement is more suitable
or "accurate" for our purposes (we might prefer a crystal clock to a
tuning fork, but for what purposes or measuring is this "time" being
used?). If, for instance, we were interested in inertial processes,
i.e., the motion and the orbits of the planets, and we knew these were
sensitive to inertial influences, we might consider a "time" which was
also sensitive to these inertial influences to be more "accurate" than
a time derived from another experiment which might have no relationship
to the phenomena of importance.
Time is a manifestation of a much deeper and basic force that 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.
Could this "mass" be thus somehow translated into energy for mass consumption?
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 dropped to fall over a controlled
distance to some kind of energy principle we did not understand.
We also had a second series of experiments, elastic collisions of
rotating and non-rotating identical controls which we could not interpret.
It took a paper, "The Cause of Gravitation", by Bernard Rendle (Ref.
4) to jar my mind into comprehension of the facts as I saw them. 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. Naturally the question of how old is the Universe becomes
invalid then because a possible interpretation is that the Universe
existed forever because inertial mass exists at all. Measurements of
the age of the Universe are also invalid. 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. If a rotating object is collided
with an identical non-rotating one, the non-rotating object is rebounded
a greater distance than it would have traveled if it had been struck
with the same identical object non-rotating. A rotating object struck
by an identical non-rotating object rebounds less than it would had
it not been rotating (Ref. 5).
This explains why the spinning ball went higher than the identical
non-rotating control (moving at the same initial velocity), and also
explains why the spinning object falls faster than the non-rotating
control. The momentous fact is that there is no special interaction
between rotation and gravity. The behavior of rotating objects is explained
simply by 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.
I like the understanding of inertia growing out of the statement
of Rendle: "The immaterial medium of space itself is in motion." If
we dispose of any special connection between rotation and gravity, the
constancy of "G" then becomes the inertia of objects. The fact that
all objects fall at the same rate (earth normal acceleration) means
that the substrate space is moving all objects along at the same rate.
This we can define as Earth normal standard inertia, a unity factor
to which all other conditions are compared. Thus rotating an object
does not change its inertia (under the new standard) since the mechanical
alterations in behavior of rotating object do not affect their inertia
but are the result of the additional (free) time energy flowing through
the rotating object by virtue of its accumulation of rotational quanta,
Ro.
The question to be answered: is there any gravitational effect from
rotation, or is gravitation a special interaction of mass with its environment?
I would tend to believe gravitation is a special interaction of real
mass with its environment. This is not to say that artificial gravitation
fields cannot be created, but they would always be distinguishable from
the real thing through some physical test. An artificial gravitational
field would be non-isotropic and anisotropic.
In terms of the dropping of the spinning ball, the understanding
of the experiment involves the results of many other experiments as
well as the resolution of a mind picture of the Universe which is our
best approximation to understanding at the present time. What makes
it difficult for other experimenters to understand the experiment is
that it is not simply the results which are important. Without a theoretical
foundation of understanding to make the experiment comprehensible -
to fit the results into a context of rational understanding and harmony
with the facts of other experiments - the data become trivial and worthless
and, worst of all, subject to misinterpretation.
The availability of free energy from as simple an experiment as colliding
in a rotating object with a no-rotating one opens up the development
of other machines for energy extraction and propulsion which may be
more convenient to handle than the extraction of energy from the collision
of a rotating object with a non-rotating one.
Bruce E. DePalma