This guy puts his electrodes inside ping pong balls:
http://bmiklos2000.freeweb.hu/unipolar.htm
Terry
On 3/3/07, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unshackle and release the prisoner...
2W * 'kV/mm' * 'grams' = 2W * .9 * 10 = 18 W = 180 kW
Harry
Michel Jullian wrote:
I will
: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
This guy puts his electrodes inside ping pong balls:
http://bmiklos2000.freeweb.hu/unipolar.htm
Terry
On 3/3/07, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unshackle and release the prisoner...
2W * 'kV/mm' * 'grams' = 2W * .9 * 10 = 18 W
Michel Jullian wrote:
Borbas believes like many amateur physicists before him that he has disproved
the ion wind explanation, it's a long story he has been multiposting/spamming
several dozens of mailing lists with his uninformed theory. He doesn't even
realize that the air discharge implies
Michel Jullian wrote:
P.S. Oh yes I had forgotten my promise to Harry below, my comment was that
mv^2/r for the satellite can be thought of as a centrifugal force or as a
centripetal acceleration times mass depending on the frame (it changes sign
while going from the F side to the m*a side),
Message -
From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
This guy puts his electrodes inside ping pong balls:
http://bmiklos2000.freeweb.hu/unipolar.htm
Terry
On 3/3/07, Harry Veeder
of course.
- Original Message -
From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
This guy puts his electrodes inside ping pong balls:
http://bmiklos2000.freeweb.hu
On 3/5/07, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Borbas believes like many amateur physicists before him that he has
disproved the ion wind explanation, it's a long story he has been
multiposting/spamming several dozens of mailing lists with his uninformed
theory. He doesn't even realize
I will only comment when you'll have released the power consumed by the 100kg
lifter ;-)
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
Harry Veeder
Harry Veeder wrote:
mv^2/r is the _derived_ centripetal force on an object rotating relative to
an inertial frame of reference. If the Earth is assumed to be rotating then
v = 0 for the satellite and the satellite's equation of motion is:
GMm/r^2 - ma = 0, and a = GM/r^2
If the
On 3/1/07, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
If any divergence between inertial and gravitational mass is
ever found, however small it may be, it will be a an enormous blow to
the validity of GR, because it will imply that gravity is /not/ a
fictitious force,
thomas malloy wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Michel Jullian wrote:
Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid
;-) But I guess it would be the same force, since it's not a
ficticious one like e.g.
the centrifugal force.
Hum; ficticious force? Isn't the force that
In reply to Robin van Spaandonk's message of Thu, 01 Mar 2007 08:10:46 +1100:
Hi,
[snip]
region below it. The difference in air pressure is multiplied by the entire
area
of the craft (Pi x r^2) to calculate the lifting force. By analogy we are
adding
wings to an aircraft, and pointing the
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
When you are actually _in_ a rotating frame, such as a car going around
a corner, you naturally think about the situation from the POV of that
frame, and in that frame, the centrifugal force -- and the Coriolis
force -- are both quite real, even though they are
the same result for
orbital speed as a function of radius as would be expected.
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 10:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
...
A fictitious
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
When you are actually _in_ a rotating frame, such as a car going around
a corner, you naturally think about the situation from the POV of that
frame, and in that frame, the centrifugal force -- and the Coriolis
force -- are both quite real, even
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
When you are actually _in_ a rotating frame, such as a car going around
a corner, you naturally think about the situation from the POV of that
frame, and in that frame, the centrifugal force -- and the Coriolis
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
When you are actually _in_ a rotating frame, such as a car going around
a corner, you naturally think about the situation from the POV of that
frame, and in that frame, the centrifugal force -- and the Coriolis
Michel Jullian wrote:
My turn to give you some homework Harry, could you try the new multiwire-plane
design guide I posted earlier today and let me know how usable it is? Say
design the mother of all lifters, with the following specs:
100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm
Power
26, 2007 3:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:27:04 +0100:
Hi Michel,
[snip]
Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But
I guess it would be the same force, since it's
Michel Jullian wrote:
Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But
I guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g.
the centrifugal force.
That will do.
I didn't mean to make you sick.
Harry
Harry Veeder wrote:
Michel Jullian wrote:
Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But I
guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g.
the centrifugal force.
Hum; ficticious force? Isn't the force that causes water going down
Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But I
guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g. the
centrifugal force.
My turn to give you some homework Harry, could you try the new multiwire-plane
design guide I posted earlier today
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:27:04 +0100:
Hi Michel,
[snip]
Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But
I guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g.
the centrifugal force.
My turn to give you some
23 matches
Mail list logo
