Mike Smith Cosmos

This was at the end of the trip pulling back into EXMOUTH. Think this is Red Permian Sandstone Rock , With Bird Droppings. We were about 10 feet away . Docking Back on Terra Firma There appear to be many different geological layers down here in the South West of England ALL coloured with this RED look. It is a Major World Heritage Site I suppose this is All IRON staining. Some large Blocks were Red in the Cliff but white as they had fallen to the foot of the cliff and exposed to sea water. The Iron Content seems to be very present. As Picture below . Note .Where sea gets at RED blocks . They are White. At the foot of the cliff. .

U3A University of the Third [OLD] age GEOLOGY GROUP EXETER Jurassic Coast Trip World Heritage Site 20th July 2013 . Landing on the Beach SEATON . Cretaceous . Triassic . Glacial Valley opening into the sea at SIDMOUTH ... . looking back along Jurrasic Coast . .

Arc John Joly a french professor of the turn of the century 1890-1920 proposed, with the then recent understanding of radio activity,that the inside of the earth was heating up in certain places under the supercontinent of Pangea to such an extent that massive rents in the earths crust occurred. To cause Pangea to split . To move apart by the later understood Plate techtonics. Does Joly,s theory work with your new mechanism for Plate movement ? I think this was late Permian . And I believe the Deccan traps and the older Siberian traps with lava 5 km thick figured in the break up of Pangea. Is this about Right? Mike

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ EEk ! It looks precious , But I don't understand it though . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mike

Well maybe you are right. When I discussed this with the now dead Prof Laithwaite , he said he is often approached with claims. He said he felt there was something there, but the first one to bring a working model to the table will silence critics. He at one time believed he had done it at one stage. Now he has gone. Its up to someone else to bring a working model to the table. I am not so sure about that. He wrote a very interesting Science fiction story called CONTACT. A film was made of it. Jodie Foster starred as the SETI expert. The device proposed ( accepted it is Science Fiction) non the less written as you say by a giant. The device was four counter rotating swirling magnetic rings. SF giants stories have a habit of becoming Science fact as years roll by. [As with Arthur C Clark. Isaac Asimov, Etc ] . Swirling , counter rotating Magnetic rings . . Jodie Foster .Contact by Carl Sagan .

. The Feeling that might be felt . If you have ever had hold of a heavy gyroscope that has been cranked up in speed, even a small one to some extent, there are some directions it goes easily and other directions it fights back. I am sure the oscillating masses will have some interesting directions of ease and others of fight back. Especially when the mass goes more , the peek amplitude and the frequency increases. Interesting experiments I did with vibrating strings , showed that when the amplitude had nowhere to increase to, it set up another dimension in which to compound oscillate using the surplus energy . Waves, vibrations, oscillations , rotations even electrons have interesting shaped orbitals. The quantum world ~ May~ have , (only may have ) macro applications in the mechanical world about us. The future is exciting , the opportunities countless, . Lets research ourselves into the Future. . . .

OK . Let's hear it then ! mike

A Man of great Vision was Carl Sagan . .This shot was taken from the first episode of his series COSMOS. The shores of the Cosmic Ocean. In this episode he, by speculation traveled from the depths of the universe 10 billion light years from earth , back across space , to arrive back and see the earth from above . As a NASA consultant he was well poised to get a perspective on our aspirations, ambitions as well as realities. . . So beautiful to behold. Lets make it work The Project I mean, although we could make the Earth work at the same time.

Well I have just looked up Free Fall on Google. Sort of what I expected. It refers to issues where only gravity is a force. It speaks of projectile, parabolic flights and people in aircraft etc. Before I looked it up I thought it refered to, and may still refer to a model that either Galileo or Isaac Newton came up with about shooting a Canon off a very high mountain sideways. With enough velocity the said person said it would go outwards and fall, but as it fell it got no closer to the earth , but kept on falling . All the way round the Earth . Describing an orbit. Not sure if I have found the correct link ( perhaps you could give me your link. If you do mean this (off a high mountain and keep falling all the way round the Earth.) Well I do not think it is applicable to the device I am talking about. a) I am not imagining firing it off the top of a mountain. b) It is not only force as there are others c) it is not going in a single forward flight but rather back and forward in oscillation. When I read about this version a few years back , I sort of , saw what being described , and could see how it worked out. I don't have a problem with it in the right circumstances, I just do not particularly like it as an easy one to use on these Oscillations or on Centripetal/centrifugal discussions. I am not dismissing it , [ as in I dont believe it ] . I just do not like it in this application as I want something to stand still in Gyosynchronos Orbit at 100 m and 10,000 meters and higher say 500 miles. I do understand the idea of fall caused by gravity. I am trying to make the fall of the device from one end of the device to the other as being the same fall you would propose by your " free fall" ( this very shallow part arc, however it is made up of all these bits ( this way very fast , slowing, speeding up to a peek, slowing again , different direction) all this is not easy to picture in a canon ball being fired off a mountain model. I have tried to view it as an electrical analogue. Where AC electric + and - mean 0 into full wave rectification + and + mainly. There may be a little -ve leakage but overall good + ve net This + to balance against gravity. You could be right , BUT if there is a chance that you are wrong and a net balance at least will give a floating Chamber in Gyosync Wherever . At this stage I am not discussing an action without reaction. I am saying inertia/momentum pushing out via attempted straight line . Gravity push in in radially in equal balance. This could be within our long reach :- . .

Its only a one off. As once oscillation is set up, it is self perpetuating by the resonant oscillation. Alternatively, the oscillation can be cranked up over a period of time. A long time . This to some extent is what I was illustrating with the Charging vehicles . . .

Ed , I can understand your principle of speed change due to oscillation over 4 times 4 inches every cycle creating large acceleration , that was one of the reasons I looked into the gyroscope or circular rotating disc ( not requiring a change in direction ). Except of course circular motion is itself causing acceleration toward the center , and if I had my way large centrifugal forces outward ,away from the center . These forces are what tore my models to pieces. When I was a boy Centrifugal forces existed, they were in the text books. Atoms were explained with electrostatic forces (electron - to protons + ) pulling in with Centrifugal forces due to very large angular momentum causing a pushing out. They are still spoken about. But they (centrifugal forces) are being written out of text books. Now it is all about centripetal forces pushing inward , to steer straight line trajectories into a circle. I have tried to work with this on this thread showing Gravitational Force pushing the devise parts against their straight line inertia and momentum into a part of an orbital shaped arc. But now "free fall" is being pushed as model . Even by the current model of gravity pushing into a circle there is no "free" in it . Things want to go straight , especially fast things. It needs forces like gravity pulling mass away from their straight line trajectory. The faster they go,the more the momentum in a straight line, soon gravity is not strong enough, or structures are not strong enough and things move or blow apart. I am sure that with a bit of serious R & D in this area , many of these orders of magnitude can be overcome. Here we are at the threshold of needing to get out into space , cheaply and efficiently. All effort should be made to address any possibility of a 'Sky Hook'. What takes all the energy in conventional rockets is carrying all the Fuel. If you have a 'Sky Hook ' you can do it with a Washing Machine Motor . It might take the energy of 3 USA NAVY HARP Project Explosive devices ,to get a Sky Hook up there. But once in place its easy to raise things upwards using a Sky Hook ! I have and am still working with your exhortation to do force diagrams, and appreciate your urging . The one that I am trying to reconcile now is :- The instant a moving mass travelling in a small section of space and time at right angles to the force of gravity ( indicated by a plumb line and weight ,) as pointing towards the center of the earth and indeed measurable by a simple Newton meter. Immediately after this instant moment, the force of gravity attempts to pull this mass away from its straight line trajectory.. Not a long time, but a very reduced yet finite time later. Because the tangent of the new position is not the same as the starting instant tangent , the effect of the force of gravity can be resolved into a vertical and horizantal components . I am trying to isolate the effect of being in a balanced orbit to being in a faster than balanced orbit.

Arnaud What point are you making , I am not sure if you are supporting my proposal or against it ? Mike

This bit is surely what its all about. ! When the device is placed say 500 miles up , the influence is similar to what it is here at ground level ( short of a change in radius from 4000 miles to 4500 miles. ) quite a strong force. Here the effect of this gravitational force will be enough to bend the path of each part of the device into a part arc identical to the orbit radius at 4500 miles. ( all this within its sealed container which must allow for this bending .) I fail to see why this " by equivalence " is not in orbit. The only difference its jiggling back and forward at 17,700 mph rather than in one direction. However I may be hopelessly WRONG by something I am completely overlooking DH. If that is the case please excuse me.

. I Like it Give me More ! But we attain these speeds by space flight , why not by oscillation (resonant oscillation ) .Even if it does have to be in a vacuum ? You notice in my early illustrations, I did put an explosion , I thought it might require a bit of initial Boost ( Hummf ? 3 times your US Naval Firing ! I like it a lot ! ) The passengers might have to go up later ! . . Mike PS I Knew I should have done the Maths I had the feeling it was a biggish project. ! PPS [ I am off to Barbados , looking for that discarded Gun }

TAR2 Of Interest is :- This idea that there is a lot of "stuff" out there at the moment , emanating from somewhere. Materials, forces , fields , goodness knows what ! All moving about, taking up relationships with each other. This I ,for want of another name have called 'The Mold (mould english ) , stable but changing to some extent from moment to moment. I get the feeling this sounds similar to your 'THE CASE ' , but i am not sure if that's what you mean by 'the case' . I think this mold has a lot to do with what ' allows' things to happen ( no reason not to happen) easily, Also ' paths of least resistance ' ,when things don't necessarily happen easily ( reasons for them not to happen ) yet tend to take the less energetic route none the less. Also should there be something to happen which is difficult, large amounts of energy and directive are required to reach that part/parts of the 'Mold ' less easily reached. How does this compare with your " THE CASE " or does it not ? mike

I think TAR2 has the same connotations as my talk of a mold. Everything as is constitutes the mold or "the Case " . We need this as a stepping stone to the future. Whether we are an electron in orbital/ energy band, energy state or a person about our business.

. 1. I imagine that nothing will happen ,other than the masses will oscillate back and forth in a straight line. Bring it back from outerspace where there is not much gravity to influence anything., into the neighborhood of earth, then I think this. 2. At an orbit radius , not moving around the earth, but oscillating back and forward each mass ( in anti phase ) by 4 " inches at 40khz at 22,000 mph peek velocity 17,700 mph RMS velocity THE DEVICE SHOULD HANG IN ORBIT HEIGHT , Not rotating around the Earth. 3. What I am not sure about is what happens at less that 17,700 RMS miles per hour , or greater that 17,700 mph. I would like to think it goes either Up or down away from 17,700 mph orbital. I think the mechanism is Mike Smith said . Getting up and down May have to be by other means. I am not quite clear what you are proposing and why you are proposing it. ? There is something here in these rotating and oscillating Masses.

Although the drawing puts integral parts far apart in reality all integral adjacent parts are tangential to the orbit which itself is at 90 degrees to the force of gravity , so should be neutral to gravity. Then the question is IF the parts of the device are trying to move in a straight line to a higher orbit does this ammount to a LIFT ? Why can I get a sweet smell of Tomatoes ?

Don't think I am Ignoring you, I am following very closely your reasoning .I need to do a very careful balancing of Forces. I remember trying to pick myself up when I was a young boy ! Yes ,I do get your point and it has 'bugged ' me a bit , I must admit. But if the elasticity is bound up in the whole mechanism. EG like the giant slinky ( not real but illustrative ) then the "inertial out fling " which is some gastly non scientific term I know , but it's how I see it . Its the accumulation of all this mass on average moving faster or at 17,700 mph must mean that the inertia , momentum is overcoming the inward force of gravity, thus going toward the sky. The argument I would use would be. If it is true for a rocket put up by Nasa to 17,700 mph for it to be in orbit, it is true for a small part of that rocket that fell off. Similarly for an identical rocket traveling in the other direction. with its bit that fell off . If these two bits collided in a perfectly elastic collision , They would both bounce back each in the opposite direction. Both these bits would both still be in orbit , but in the opposite direction. If they now just miraculously got coupled together in an elastic coupling , then they would rattle back and forward in orbit. Now there are times during reversal that velocity would reduce momentarily. That is why there needs to be a peek velocity of 22,000 mph such that the RMS ( root mean squared ) is 17,700 mph. What I have just described is What the Device I am describing should be and do . Except that rather than all the rockets , bits falling off etc One sets up an oscillation device doing precisely the same .

I thought of " paths of least resistance " applying to much of electrical/electronic conduction. I noticed a young person with their i player in pocket and ear pieces plugged walking the street. Soon I thought they will want them ' wireless' NO WIRES hanging about their person . Then I thought we have built a whole modern world (1700-2013) on wires. We found it was an easy way to point electrons where we wanted them . Because they follow " the path of least resistance " There is a main probability that the electrons flow down the wire , in fact mainly the probability is on the surface of the wire by the 'skin effect' There is a low probability that some electrons can escape the surface and skim through the air . In fact there is a possibility being low in normal circumstances that a major discharge of electric current could travel some distance through the air . However given the path is least resistant though the wire. In today's mobile phones the frequencies worked at are nearly microwave so some of the electronic conduction , even within the mobile hand set moves about on the RF ( radio frequency ) part of the mobile phone above the copper track as a wave . A large part of our universe ...Things /not all are seeking the path of lease energy or resistance. (perhaps like filling a cup with water, as soon as the water is at the lip it flows over the edge. It does not wait until the water has piled up another centimeter before it flows over the edge. I found such a path of least resistance in my day to day living two days ago. I left a bag of shopping at a bus terminal by mistake on a step. We got home a half hour later and discovered I had left it behind. My wife said " do not bother to go back , it will have gone, it will have been stolen!".... I returned an hour after leaving it. It was there on the step among a bus station full of people . And retrieved it. It was the path of least resistance to have found it, rather than it being stolen. It takes a bit of thinking through ! Interesting though . Bit of a People thing , rather than machines.

. . .I thoroughly agree with you, and have done precisely both of these in small measure. I went to University a second time in my late 50's and made what you say a Thesis Project . Partial arc swings measurement. with Mathcad simulation. Both were positive, but subject to interpretation . Yes you can see the content, The manuscript in Italy . Original in Plymouth University year 2000 . . I have mentioned , there is no actual Spring . The Oscillating masses 2 . are fed by a transducer mechanism which can be viewed as elastic ( molecular bonding elastic ) , as it needs to drive the masses in some form of resonant vibration. In view of what is being commented by m656366 it is either necessary for the transducer to be moving along with everything else,narrow( or as you say negligible ) or following the arc.(or all). As the purpose of this device is effectively a 'Sky Hook' It is natural that something appears to be pulling things upwards. Arthur C Clark once proposed a space elevator with a counter weight circling way out in space . He was right on many other things he predicted like communication Satellites

Your Comment .I am reasoning that when a mass has more velocity, than orbital velocity, The moment it crosses that orbital velocity the mass will attempt its INERTIAL straight line. Gravity will be pulling towards the center (centripetal ) , But its Value of Force will be unable to hold it in that particular orbit so the mass separates, or raises above the would be orbit. The value of Momentum (mv ) being increased by the increased v ( ie a value bigger than the orbital velocity necessary for the magnitude of gravity to push it into that particular orbit. {Incidentally it is this pull against gravity that I see as centrifugal force , that nobody seems to like any more.} I have tried to use the Idea which everybody seems to quote now, That you only have gravity as centripetal force pushing the mass to undertake a circular orbit. Personally I see it ( in my head ) as this excess of inertia in a strait line Mass m or Momentum mv bringing in the v. With the level of inward force by gravity , it can only work at a specific orbit . More v will make larger momentum, gravity can not push it into orbit. . . .I must admit that some of the tests I did , ( Gyroscope type tests ) smashed to bits when I turned the revs up. but I think at the moment we are discussing the oscillation of two masses in a variety of orbits. I know a transducer and masses moving 4 inches peek at 40 khz would take some doing. I just thought ,that down in the audio range ( 25 hz -20 khz ) might be a little loud. ( like a rock concert to beat all others ). I have done some experiments ! At low frequencies 20 -70 Hz . I have tried to meet this value of velocity 17,700 mph which when combined with whatever value of m , obtains orbital velocity . [ as formula is mvsquared/r = mg ] m's cancel

I agree with all three points. I should never have used them . " Free Fall " has crept into the conversation. I presume from the model of orbit, that I personally do not like . Namely : - that one could fire a canon at orbital speed and it would continue to fall all the way round the globe. Although its true, I don't like it as a model, it excludes models of other important happenings to the issues I am discussing. Similarly I do understand that Orbital velocity is pre escape velocity ., , namely remaining at one constant radius from the center of the earth. As I understand it Escape velocity is an increase such that one can make orbital radius increase, if necessary to totally escape the earth or settle by velocity change at a higher orbit.. I have used these terms too loosely and will try to be more specific in future. Oscillating masses are two very large masses ( proportionately large compared to the load -[say between 100-50 to 1 ] . Joined by an energy transducer of an elastic nature say electrical oscillation to mechanical vibration. [ NOT a SPRING , purely a symbol of elasticity.] In reality the transducer material would need to use molecular bonding as the elastic medium such that at peek amplitude an end displacement of the transducer could attain 4 inches of elastic displacement. Partial ARC. The two opposing masses and the joining transducer would make or rather take up a shape of a very small section of the desired orbit This shape is caused by the pull of gravity towards the center of the Earth, away from the instantaneous straight line which would be taken were not gravity present. This change for each integral part of the assembly IS the change in Mass Inertia and/or straight line momentum m x v into a direction towards the center of the earth , along the line of pull by gravity. (Centripetal Force) . As each integral part of the arc is on average moving at 17,700 mph , the shape taken up by the oscillating masses should be following a very small PARTIAL ARC of a complete orbit. Rotating Ring This was the ring introduced at post 16 which relates to prof Laithewait , which I believe may follow a similar set of partial arcs in the location of the ring, yet from a different approach . The one being more like the two ens of an oscillating tuning fork, the other more like a gyroscope . There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems. One may prove functional the other not. Oscillating Masses in Partial Arc Rotating ring http://www.scienceforums.net/uploads/monthly_07_2013/post-33514-0-63185500-1373095418.jpg The comments about radio waves , were in no way connected with this Device, only in so much as to say AS AN EXAMPLE how energy put into a system like a radio antenna can produce radio waves heading out across space at high speed . Just an example not used as any explanation of the operation of these devices. See Above Diagram Of partial Arc. Does this not show how the forces would act both around the ARC and Radially ALSO BELOW ( Press mouse on picture to enlarge .....THEN.........Esc to return . DIAGRAM SHOWS TWO opposing MASSES AT EITHER END - TRANSDUCER IN BETWEEN MASSES. . Red and Green slices Represent instantaneous INTEGRAL slices ( illustrating Direction of Forces. For Mental Modeling purposes ONLY this whole thing is like a GIANT SLINKY bent into a partial arc by the force of gravity ,acting on mass moving at RMS (Root Mean Squared ) average speed of 17,700mph. See further Purely Model ONLY below (NOT A REAL SPRING )

See diagram . Is this 4 " not in free fall escape velocity orbit ?