Hello again, Lennart,
A couple of quick follow-ups before I retire for the night. > Trying to have an understanding I assume you say that gravity is a force much > larger > than for example the centripetal force on a body on this planet. It depends. In an elliptical orbit centripetal force appears to us as greater than the force of gravity during perihelion, the closest approach of the satellite. Gravity, OTOH, appears to us as the greater force as compared to centripetal force at aphelion, the farthest distance from the satellite. I made a rather obscure observation, (or re-discovery) while performing some computer simulations of orbital mechanics a couple of years ago. It had to do with observing elliptical orbits on a traditional x,y Cartesian plane, and not with typical polar coordinates. Using an iterative feed-back algebraic algorithm, (where I’m not using calculus), I discovered I can mimic the exact interplay of these two forces (gravity and centripetal) using the following algebraic expression: r = -+1/r^2 - 1/r^3. The attractive effects of gravity are observed in the formula part of 1/r^2 where the force of gravity is the inverse square of the distance. Meanwhile, the negative or repulsive effects of centripetal forces are shown in the algebraic expression -1/r^3, the inverse cube of the distance. You can see a more technical explanation of this effect by going to the following link titled Orbits in 2D: http://www.physics.csbsju.edu/orbit/orbit.2d.html Scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will see the graphic that looks like the tracing of a bouncing ball. That’s the plot of an elliptical orbital where time is expressed in equal slices (in calculus terms: dy/dt). This is charted in the x axis and y (or radius), is the radius distance of the satellite from the central mass. The author uses different terminology that my own, where he explains the effect as the conservation of energy… which is a perfectly legitimate explanation. However, my observations, while I’m not disputing the author’s claims, seems to come up with different observations and conclusions. I’m still working on the particulars. > There is a Swedish say[ing] that one idiot can ask more questions than ten > wise man can answer.:) Ah, but in my book any idiot that’s willing to ask questions is in a far better place than the idiot who answers them. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 8:00 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the Theoretical Limit OK Vincent I beat you with ten years and I try to avoid being retired. I really think you made a good analogy withe funnel and water. A new one to me.My objective is not to impact the science world. However, I have a clear liking of new ventures. LENR to me is a new venture. I understand that my question about how gravity ought to be different in different areas of the planet is perhaps to simple. Trying to have an understanding I assume you say that gravity is a force much larger than for example the centripetal force on a body on this planet. Understanding that in a funnel with a output of 5cm and a ball of 5mm at the outer edge (1cm from the center for example) the increase in speed is almost the same as it is just close to the ball. Trying to use your analogy to understand why the gravity is the same all over the place even as the reaction force do differ. There is a Swedish say that one idiot can ask more questions than ten wise man can answer.:) Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com <http://www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com> lenn...@thornros.com <mailto:lenn...@thornros.com> +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648
