RedBarron's gravity generator solved

[t686]

The picture (my drawing with blue lines) shows a tube that houses a spinning "wheel" driven by an electric motor.  On the wheel's surface are shallow mountains, as the close-up shows.  RedBarron's experiment a year ago was to show that driving a wheel to high speed draws a normal flat sheet of paper to the tube's entrance.

RedBarron's device is similar but not identical to a tesla turbine: 

 

A tesla turbine's set of washers with air between each washer, air flowing into the chamber drags the washers, and centrifugal force forces air away from the disc, which gets balanced by a spiralling vortex inward at high speed, and exactly when the outward centrifugal force balances the spiralling vortex, is there a drop in sound and the turbine sounds a tuned sound.

The mountains on the surface of RedBarron's device, splits air, creating the spiralling vortex, but it's missing the air being forced out or lost from the core as in the tesla turbine, since RedBarron's core is smooth, air will not be lost out of the core.  However, he did train a camera on the experiment, and all digital cameras contain a lossy form of image compression.  It was the lossy image compression in real time that provided the air being forced out or lost from the core.  The experiment shows that something not expected can affect an experiment, even something that doesn't normally touch part of the experiment, the camera.  The paper would not have been blown towards RedBarron's device and stay stuck unless it became tuned like the tesla turbine.

[Strange]

So, you are confirming the rather obvious conclusions that the piece of paper that "RedBarron" waved around in front of his mechanism was affected by air movement from a spinning disk. (After all, he claimed that he had invented some form of gravity generator. And refused to do any sensible experimentation to prove his idiotic claims wrong.)

This is hardly shocking news. 

And, can I suggest you draw the picture yourself next time, instead of getting a drunk chimpanzee to do it for you.

[t686]

It didn't just wave in front, but had a definite blow towards, and stayed sucked on the tube's entrance.  I think the picture shows the outward tube, with a much smaller solid spinning cylinder or wheel (with shallow mountains on the surface.  The wheel of RedBaron's device is connected by a fixed rod to the electric motor that's a box closest to the viewer in blue lines.

[Strange]

4 minutes ago, t686 said:

It didn't just wave in front, but had a definite blow towards, and stayed sucked on the tube's entrance.  I think the picture shows the outward tube, with a much smaller solid spinning cylinder or wheel (with shallow mountains on the surface.  The wheel of RedBaron's device is connected by a fixed rod to the electric motor that's a box closest to the viewer in blue lines.

We know all that. His machine was obviously just moving air about. Obviously. The problem was that he denied that and insisted that it was a gravity generator (or some equally ludicrous nonsense).

I don't really know why you are wasting time on this. (Although I can see you didn't spend any time on your drawing.)

[t686]

Well my current idea is that it may be possible to use a telescope to make, say, 100 stars, move like a wave.  At the smallest level, light can act like a wave, so at larger scales, 100 stars should be capable of moving in a wave.  If it can, that means that superluminal motion is possible.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, t686 said:

Well my current idea is that it may be possible to use a telescope to make, say, 100 stars, move like a wave.  At the smallest level, light can act like a wave, so at larger scales, 100 stars should be capable of moving in a wave.  If it can, that means that superluminal motion is possible.

OK. And back to complete gibberish.