TinMan's inertia drive RFDD Project

[RAMSET]

TinMan has been experimenting with inertia drive and feels he may be onto something that requires further investigation,

below is his contribution

TinMan
Quote


Inertia Drive project. RFDD.

Well here is the start of my Inertia drive project-the RFDD engine.

The plan is to use elliptical orbits of mass(in this project,i call them satellites)to off set the reaction force associated with all actions-Reaction Force Diversion Drive (RFDD).

If successful,this will be the only video posted,until the test video's are presented. If un successful,you will see all the build progress video's along the way. The project is expected to take 3 to 4 day's,so the next video will be posted around that time.

The plan if successfull.
After i have run various test on the device,and found that it works as planed,it will be time to choose one other person to replicate the device,run and report on there test finding's. The chosen person will be given the full build video's and instructions. This person must have access to a metal lathe,and a healthy budget for the project(around $200.00 for parts).

The plan if unsuccessful.
Dont do it this way again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGfDbmn5qaw&list=UUsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w

also being discussed here

Inertia Drive project. RFDD.

--------------------------------------

thanks for looking
Chet

[TheoriaApophasis]

TinMan has been experimenting with inertia drive and feels he may be onto something

below is his contribution

TinMan
Quote


Inertia Drive project. RFDD.

Well here is the start of my Inertia drive project-the RFDD engine.

The plan is to use elliptical orbits of mass(in this project,i call them satellites)to off set the reaction force associated with all actions-Reaction Force Diversion Drive (RFDD).

If successful,this will be the only video posted,until the test video's are presented. If un successful,you will see all the build progress video's along the way. The project is expected to take 3 to 4 day's,so the next video will be posted around that time.

The plan if successfull.
After i have run various test on the device,and found that it works as planed,it will be time to choose one other person to replicate the device,run and report on there test finding's. The chosen person will be given the full build video's and instructions. This person must have access to a metal lathe,and a healthy budget for the project(around $200.00 for parts).

The plan if unsuccessful.
Dont do it this way again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGfDbmn5qaw&list=UUsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w

--------------------------------------

thanks for looking
Chet

So I see, good luck to that lovely Aussie!!


I own him a free meal and what not for replicating magnetic vortex experiments.


Hes a keeper !

[Allcanadian]

The first question I would ask is why, why will it work knowing momentum is conserved due to Inertia?. If we have no clear answer to this question then it is likely to fail before we have even started.
We should also understand the nature of the problem, imagine we are in outer space and we push on a bowling ball and the ball moves in one direction and we move in the opposite direction. The ball is not touching anything, it is not attached to anything it is just floating in free space and yet somehow it resists the force we have applied to it.

According to the laws of science what I have just described is impossible. An object cannot just produce a resisting force from nothing acting on nothing any more than an object can produce a propulsive force from nothing acting on nothing hence all the confusion. The rules have been skewed stating an inertial propulsive force is impossible despise the fact inertia in itself is equally impossible by the same rules. So we do have cause for optimism and as Tesla once stated ... it is a mechanical problem.

On the upside there is an easy solution to know when we are moving in the right direction. Buy a $10 Arduino Uno and a $5 3 axis gyro + accelerometer off Ebay then use the free software and processing on a laptop to graph all of the forces/motions in real time. I would hate to see anyone resort to using a bathroom scale because that is a clear indication they have no idea what their doing in my opinion.

I have the Arduino gyro/accelerometer setup and it works perfectly for a total investment of less than $20. If were going to build better machines then we need better tools to separate the wheat from the chaff.

AC

[RAMSET]

Ken ,
Perhaps you can Buy Brad a Magnum someday [worlds best chocolate ice cream bar]
@AC
I believe Buoyancy/displacement was used in preliminary testing of the concept prototype,
here is an update on the PWM part of the Build.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqmazCLQ9Lk&list=UUsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w

thanks for looking

Chet

[TheoriaApophasis]

Ken ,
Perhaps you can Buy Brad a Magnum someday [worlds best chocolate ice cream bar]
@AC
I believe Buoyancy/displacement was used in preliminary testing of the concept prototype,
here is an update on the PWM part of the Build.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqmazCLQ9Lk&list=UUsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w

thanks for looking

Chet

Just watched it.........

Great stuff, they should call Brad "Capt Open Source"




However I never heard of magnum ice cream But if thats what he wants.

[RAMSET]

A few serious questions

A question to the community From Tinman

Quote

Who here can accurately explain this law
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
\
Give an example for each
1-What is the action?
2-What is the equal reaction?
3-what is the opposite reaction?

I want you to think very carefully about Q3.

From here


Inertia Drive

thx
Chet

[TheoriaApophasis]

A question to the community From Tinman

Give an example for each
1-What is the action?
2-What is the equal reaction?
3-what is the opposite reaction?

1. charge

2. discharge of the charge as NECESSITATED

3. there are no opposite reactions

charge has NO opposite




Equal and opposite actions and reactions, when united, comprise a unit of universal fulcum action-reaction singular entity and its attribute.

An action and its opposite reaction are not two. Their energies, when combined, make one.

Reaction is born of action; and action is born again of reaction.

[dmann]

Free Energy Antigravity Alien Kinetic Lift Drive Thornson's Strange Physics DVD | eBay

Great video on this subject. I bought one and just finished viewing it about an hour ago. I am a believer 100%.

[RAMSET]

TinMan build update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZFusjLL3dg&list=UUsLiBC2cL5GsZGLcj2rm-4w

@dmann

very interesting indeed


thx
Chet

[Allcanadian]

@Ramset

Who here can accurately explain this law
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
\
Give an example for each
1-What is the action?
2-What is the equal reaction?
3-what is the opposite reaction?

I want you to think very carefully about Q3.

1. An Action represents a change in velocity, Δv.
Fundamentally all Energy and Actions are defined by Δv and it can get confusing in regards to the scale at which these actions occur and where they occur.

2. The equal reaction relates to momentum (mass velocity or mv) when the applied Force which is the cause of a Δv divides. For instance I may push on a bowling ball and it resists my pushing force due to it's inertia. This resistance to a change in velocity also acts in the other direction on me and my inertia. So when I push on the ball the force divides between me and the ground I am standing on and the ball.
Earth and Me (mv)>>>0<<<Bowling ball(mv)

3. The opposite reaction is defined solely by the term "reaction" which is by definition opposite to the initial action. That is Action>>0<<Reaction there is no opposite reaction persay which is a misnomer. An Action causes a Reaction which is equal in magnitude an opposite in direction. It does not cause an opposite reaction because that would be like saying there is an opposite opposite.

AC

[TheoriaApophasis]

@Ramset
3. The opposite reaction is defined solely by the term "reaction" which is by definition opposite to the initial action. That is Action>>0<<Reaction there is no opposite reaction persay which is a misnomer. An Action causes a Reaction which is equal in magnitude an opposite in direction. It does not cause an opposite reaction because that would be like saying there is an opposite opposite.

AC

"Since action and reaction are co-existent..........I hold space curvature is impossible (unreal)" - N. TESLA




Heres the brain SKREW......since magnetism is polarized and has a quantitative spatial vectorization, it has a PERCEIVED reactive delay to the dielectric CAUSE.

but the reactive delay is merely the product of the reaction (magnetism) ITSELF

[Allcanadian]

My interest in this area goes a little deeper than my last post when fact becomes stranger than fiction.
It is know that a mass is really an aggregate of masses, that is an object as we see it it is made up of smaller masses having there own properties and there own fields. These masses, particles, never touch as such tangible objects never physically touch and it is said that over 99% of a tangible object is in fact empty space. However we know the particles have fields and these fields couple thus the supposedly empty space must in fact be occupied by these fields.

It is a strange thing that one would suggest a space is empty then in the next breath state two partcles/objects are bound by fields which must obviously occupy this same space. At which point I will give everyone the word of the day...Misnomer.

Misnomer:
A misnomer is a word or term that suggests a meaning that is known to be wrong. Misnomers often arise because the thing named received its name long before its true nature was known

There are many misnomers in science and modern science has literally defined itself through misnomers. This comes about because new understanding proves something from the past wrong however nobody is willing to admit they could be wrong about anything. Thus we have many conflicting views and definitions which contradict one another.

So as we can see it is not simply a matter of one object acting on another as the object is an aggregate of smaller parts having their own qualities. The object may be seen as being similar to a cloud having smaller parts separated by a distance. The actual facts of our reality are quite mind boggling.

AC

[TheoriaApophasis]

space is empty
AC

Neither space nor "empty" have any subjective validity


theyre qualifiers of other Subjects, masses and magnitudes and relative distances between them.


"X is empty of Y". Space is nothing, space acts on nothing, space interacts with nothing, space has only 1 dimension, space.

Space has no independent existence, its only a qualifier between 1 or more principles/ subjects.


Space is literally the shadow cast by a Field(S). It has no validity to do anything, or act on anything , or be a cause of anything.


We idiot humans have only reified it as something because we define our lives by measure and magnitude as measured in space and time.



Again, were all living in the steaming pile of fields in discharge(ing).

[Bob Smith]

It is a strange thing that one would suggest a space is empty then in the next breath state two partcles/objects are bound by fields which must obviously occupy this same space. At which point I will give everyone the word of the day...Misnomer.

AC,
I wonder if the misnomer might be resolved by looking at space between particles as a function of those particles' fields. That is, is it not so much that the fields occupy the space, but rather, that the fields give rise to the space between particles?
Bob

[Allcanadian]

@TA

Neither space nor "empty" have any subjective validity

\]

I think it depends on context and I could replace "space is empty" with "that place is devoid of tangible matter". I use space in the context of describing a place or area in question not as something in itself. In that context I believe the term is correct by definition.

@Bob

I wonder if the misnomer might be resolved by looking at space between particles as a function of those particles' fields. That is, is it not so much that the fields occupy the space, but rather, that the fields give rise to the space between particles?

I think that's kind of like the chicken/egg dilema... is there a field in space or space in the field. It depends on one's perspective I guess, mine is the one below.

Space:
an area that is used or available for a specific purpose

AC