Re: Newton's laws

From: Eric Gisse (jowr.pi_at_gmail.com)
Date: 02/02/05 

Date: 1 Feb 2005 23:54:14 -0800

PAUL JACOBY wrote:
> I would like to get some opinions about interpreting Newton's laws of

> motion.

"NEWTON'S LAWS EXPLAINED:
THE FEASIBILITY OF A CLOSED LIFT PRODUCING MACHINE

The argument against such a machine includes Newton's laws. The
first law is that a body at rest remains at rest until a force acts
upon it. The common belief is that the force must come from outside the
mass and that works well for solid masses. There is a flaw in the
assumption based on our definition of outside. The problem being that a
hollow mass has a peculiar situation of occupying a volume of space but
not filling it. The hollow volume is confused with the mass. It should
be thought of as external to the mass not internal. The simple
condition of surrounding the hollow volume does not make it a part of
the mass. Therefore the "inner" surfaces should be thought of as
external to the mass. The mass of an object never extends beyond it's
surface.

An accurate description of a container could be like this:
A mass of brass measuring 12 inches long by 6 inches diameter excluding
a volume measuring 10 inches long by 4 inches diameter and centered in
all directions within the brass. When a container is described in this
fashion it becomes clear that the volume and any thing in that volume
is not a part of the container and should be thought of as external to
the mass (brass). Unless it is secured (glued, bolted etc.) to the
"inner" wall which makes it a part of the container and requires
adapting the description to fit.

Given this condition it can be seen that a force originating from the
hollow volume could cause movement of the mass (brass) although the
simple geometry of closure causes a limitation of movement. None the
less the container can be moved by an action against the "inner"
surface which is really an external surface and it is not necessary for
the force to come from "outside" the container since the volume is
actually outside (not a part of) the container.

A container can be of any configuration as long as it restricts the
free movement of a substance. It can be open in one place or more. A
cylinder open on both ends is a container. It might be containing air
or water but it is still a container. It might contain a blower and
combustion machines as in the the case of some jet engines. It also
might contain only a blower and be open on both ends.

The nature of a closed container is the same as an open container
except that it is not open to the rest of the world. It can be composed
of several sub compartments which might be open or closed separately.
In fact it can be made with two open containers connected front to back
and back to front. In this fashion the two would still act as open
containers. A fluid would still go in and out of each by the same flow
pattern.

The nature of closure is a real problem of how to construct a machine
to produce lift continuously. Any fluid in it will have two opposing
adjacent surfaces which will neutralize each other. However this
contains an assumption that the adjacent surfaces are stationary in
relation to each other. Which need not be true. It is quite possible to
build an arrangement which will have the two adjacent surfaces moving.

Newton's third law is also part of the problem. For ever force there
is an equal and opposite force. This law is a bit subtle. It has to do
with contact of objects and the force exchanged between them. It
applies to a fluid on a surface. Each molecule is hitting the surface
with a velocity. It is that force exchanged which we measure as
atmospheric pressure or fluid pressure. The fluid pressure on a surface
is also affected by a velocity (wind) of the fluid viewed as a single
mass unit. Bernoulli Principle is about the flow velocity affecting the
pressure on the surface. The flow velocity could be thought of as
giving the fluid molecules a bias all in the same direction thereby
changing the angle of contact and the force exchanged on contact. Thus
the pressure is reduced by increasing the flow velocity.

Taking the larger view of the situation causes some people to say
that Newton requires a force to be pushing down equal to the lift since
the container is closed. The force is there and is redirected by the
velocity of the fluid. It becomes part of the drag on the surface.

Normally in a closed container a gas will exert an approximately
equal force in all directions. This condition is even used as part of
the definition of "gas" but it is not an absolute requirement. The
pressure in a closed container can be different at different locations.
One rather obvious example is a container starting at sea level and
going up a mile high. The pressure inside will clearly be the same as
outside at the same altitude.

Considering that the pressure on the inner surface is a function of
the fluid molecules hitting the surface all that is necessary to create
an uneven (unbalanced) condition is to simply cause the fluid to hit
the surfaces differently. This could be done easily by making two
opposing surfaces move. When a surface and a fluid are moving together
the relative velocity between them is less. Furthermore if the two are
moving in opposing directions the relative velocity between them is
greater. When both conditions are used the lift generated could be
considerable.

In a closed container with both adjacent surfaces stationary the
result is equal pressure in both directions but if both surfaces are
moving in opposing directions then one surface is moving with the flow
and the other surface is moving against the flow which makes different
flow velocities on the opposing surfaces and different pressures.
Therefor it seems possible to construct a machine to produce lift
continuously in the same direction. "

> I feel that all he meant was that if you want to move an object then
you
> must have a second object involved (to hit it or attract it).
> Outside or external means "other than"
>
> --
> ------------------- SOME THOUGHTS --------------------------
> "The art of invention is to do what others think impossible"
> How do you know if an invention is revolutionary?
> Count the experts that say it is impossible.
> THINK CAREFULLY -- IT'S DANGEROUS
> EXCELLENCE IS ALWAYS HIDDEN IN THE DETAILS pj
> pjacoby@charter.net
> http://newlifter.tripod.com/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question about immersed fluid filled vessel
    ... |>submerged in a container of hydraulic oil. ... For a new job involving a depths with pressure as ... In our case the wall thickness is significantly more than 1mm as it ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Question about immersed fluid filled vessel
    ... | model used for calculations and real materials. ... submerged in a container of hydraulic oil. ... For a new job involving a depths with pressure as ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Question about immersed fluid filled vessel
    ... |>submerged in a container of hydraulic oil. ... For a new job involving a depths with pressure as ... In our case the wall thickness is significantly more than 1mm as it ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: definition of a clock in relativity theory
    ... >>The idea is that if you have a sealed container holding trapped light, ... >>energy of the escaped light, ... >>contributes to the thermos' apaprent gravitaitonal mass, ... >>floor of the suspended flask, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: a new Yahoo Group for "Dance of the Planets"
    ... Then the container would be placed upon the ... > containing the mass of the Sun. ... > its volume, and hence its radius. ... The idea would be similar to a balloon filled with air, ...
    (sci.astro)
Quantcast