Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum 2 mass = SYMETRY but Three mass = ASYMETRY

Step 1 we have m*V = Po and energy Eo = m*V*V/2

Step 2 mass m is hiting other mass m

Step 3 mass m + M + rope are making very hard
to describe motion

(we can observe many single torque Impulses T1..T2..T3.... (R2 x Fr) ) Fr it is radial force
Energy Eo will be exchange for many torque impulses . Problem that I notice - before test Torque = ZERO
but after step 2 ?



3 mass test Ytube model

http://youtu.be/SKkYSZsQraU

Pendulum = tool that
was inspiration for above words

http://youtu.be/LZwQC26nrG8


DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT
ARE FUNDAMENTS IN PHYSICS ?
WE LIVE RIGHT NOW IN WORLD
WHERE MATHEMATICA IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN OBSERVATION !

TO SPEAK ABOUT PHYSICS WE MUST USE REAL OBJECTS
LIKE ME ... I SHOWED YOU THREE MASS TEST

I DON'T UNDERSTAND PEOPLE WHO CALLING MY OBSERVATION THEORY !
THEORY IT IS GATE TO SPECULATIONS AND MANIPULATIONS
I WROTE MY 4 PRINCIPLES AND I'M SURE THAT THEY ARE REAL AND TRUE
BECAUSE I CHECKED AND CONFIRMED ...

I'm sorry I can not accept symetry , I making test and observations

click > MAROSZ's RADIAL TURBINE / TURBINA ROTACYJNA MAROSZA

At no point did I use mathematics to disprove each of your last great engines I simply showed you the obvious fault and I could either improve them using standard Newtonian physics or show they don't work.

Using mathematics with you would be pointless.

Your rubbish theory makes predictions even your example above makes a prediction that is clearly and obviously wrong you just don't apply logic to see the problem. Your problem Marosz is you don't use or even like logic so you don't look at the logical extension of your interpretation so you fail at basic science.

The extensions are obvious if your theory was right gyroscopes would tilt over at around 10-12 degree and if you spun anything on the international space station it will immediately tilt over like a gyrocompass. If your theory was right your last engine would hover or at least weigh less because it predicts antigravity effect (you at least sort of worked that out and then created the most ridiculous test of it).

In all your posts on heaven knows many forums and places you have managed to get one friend a nutcase "Prof Andy" (I wonder what he a prof of ) and even he doesn't actually believe you .. here is what he says.

http://www.forallkind.com/#!task-force-4/cor


In other words your theory is garbage but you are a good bloke and he sees promise

You have been laughed, ridiculed and banned off so many sites and places most normal people would have got the message by now. At some point Marosz the truth has to sink in ... so how many years will it take?

Step 1 we have m*V = Po and energy Eo = m*V*V/2

Step 2 mass m is hiting other mass m

Step 3 mass m + M + rope are making very hard
to describe motion

(we can observe many single torque Impulses T1..T2..T3.... (R2 x Fr) ) Fr it is radial force
Energy Eo will be exchange for many torque impulses . Problem that I notice - before test Torque = ZERO
but after step 2 ?




ORAC DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT m + M + rope
will make rotation
( rope is giving radial force !!! to big mass M )


3 mass test Ytube model
http://youtu.be/SKkYSZsQraU

ORAC YOU NOT SEE PROBLEM or YOU not want to see problem

There is a huge problem with that idea think about it carefully ... like it's really really obviously wrong ... lets see if Marosz can think his way thru it without me giving the answer for a change.

All I will tell you there is a device that uses that principle and it fully complies to Newtonian physics like it must because of how we use it ... so I know you are wrong

I will give you a hint there has to be torque on that centre shaft its only a question of if it is positive or negative and that forms part of the answer

I will give you 3 hints:

1.) If there really was zero torque on the shaft on earth here the mass m would simply fall down ... TRY IT Marosz

2.) Now extend the thought I want you to think what would happen in space and why?

3.) For the final hint if this was actually done in space would rotation be the only motion to occur.

Now lets see if Marosz is actually clever and can work it out .. show me you can think Marosz.

ORAC CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT EXIST MORE INTELIGENT PEOPLE THAN YOU
AND YOUR POST LEVEL ! BELOW SMALL HELP (TRUE /FALSE) QUESTION + PERCEPTION PROBLEM

Q I : Mass m will hit mass m and stop ? ( TRUE / FALSE )
Q II : Exist radial force F1=mV*V/R ( R1 rope long ) ( TRUE / FALSE )
Q III : Angular momentum before we start is ZERO. ( TRUE / FALSE )
Q IV : Agular momentum ? short time after mass m give radial force to rope exist Torque T1 impulse . ( R2 arm ) ( TRUE / FALSE )



ZERO angular momentum at start must give always Zero Angular momentum ( this You have in book right now )


can You imagine M---m motion in space far far away from the Earth
when M---m will stop ? ( Me Marosz M---m will never stop )


QI , QII , QIII ,QIV - ( classical mechanic is very old I'm sure that You can solve problem )


PERIODICAL PERCEPTION !!! I marked green alpha angle.

Period's time and R1 rope's long is important !
amplitude will go down .. down .. WHY ???!!!

to speak about universe we must use
obserwations not theory

sport for example 100 meters run ( sprint )

Why very Important is START ? You can ask sportsman ... person who first started run need use lower energy for better "time".

sport = real live not theory
( First half circle in above picture is very important for m---M motion. Next half mass m will have lower energy ! )


to write above word I joust made animation in my imagination. You need my words ( explanation )
You see picture and example from real live and ....


Aikido - better is push mass m perpendicular to motion never opposite to motion

m ---->

Why Marosz speak here about AIKIDO
Marosz it is very inteligent sport
HOW TO REDIRECT ENERGY and not use many energy ?

at start mass m want to propel big mass M
next half rope will try slown down mass M


TRUE it is not theory but many facts that cooperate

... physics and books ... sometimes important is author

***three stars problem ( homework for ORAC )

Pendulum must step by step slown down even if we eliminate friction ( rope and air )
each step Earth recive new torque impulse and radial force Impulse ( pendulum is making work )

http://youtu.be/LZwQC26nrG8

Maciej Marosz
Engineer & Very Good Inventor
http://tesla4.blogspot.com

Still haven't worked it out hey .. come on you think you are smart but sorry you really aren't

Hint:


Tell me what happens if there is no radial force .. two case it's easy think Marosz

1.) On earth (a gravity frame of reference)
2.) In space

As I have repeated I am not wasting my time on this garbage because the answers are all obvious you don't even need mathematics, did you see me use any mathematics in my answer? Perhaps ask you new admirer Prof Andy to explain it to you

Anyhow I am busy I have some more hover products to design .. now lets see a hover boat

But seriously I have given you enough hints and since you won't even bother to try and until you do I am exiting this discussion ...... bye bye bye see in you a couple of years

ORAC
Tell me what happens if there is no radial force .. two case it's easy think Marosz

1.) On earth (a gravity frame of reference)
2.) In space

MAROSZ




My oryginal question To Orac

Q II : Exist radial force F1=mV*V/R1 ( R1 rope long ) ( true / false )

ORAC TRUE /FALSE ?

please not write what will be if ... I not ask how to mix information in my Post.

MAROSZ's LOGICA
Exist Radial Force ====> Exist torque ( R2 arm ) and peridical percetion ( in space M---m will never stop )

Exist torque ===> ...Orac and his Quantum theories = ....

ORAC's LOGICA
I will mix information ===> Marosz = Idiot

Orac below definition books :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_momentum

Above post ? at start ( before colision ) angular momentum = zero ( we have only one mass m and constant velocity V ) After colision we mave m---M body that is making rotation ( we can observe perception - there where is mass m and rope Mass M will have some angle to vertical position )

ORAC ? what if my model works ?
rope = gravitation
small m = water
big M = Earth

OK last hint from me here is the result of your experiment ... try and work out why because I can't justify wasting more time on this.

I think you are expecting R2 to rotate but it will only get a very small rotation ending in a weird horizontal position .... this it what it will end up looking like.



The end weird new format will rotate like this along the direction of the original path at a distance of the rope length + R2 length



R2 will get a very minor rotation probably swivelling it and the rope and mass m. It's not hard to test this sort of thing on the ISS and they have done hundreds of them.


That is definitely the final result of your experiment ... now you challenge is to work where your theory went wrong ..... I will leave you to it.

YOUR ANIMATION IS ABOUT BEAM

.........................^
.........................^
M-------BEAM ---------m ----> Fr = m*V*V / R1



rope is elastic it is not BEAM !!!

rope can't push
rope can only pull




Eo - kinetic energy at start

E1- kinetic energy T1 torque
E2 - kinetic Energy mass M own axis
E3 - kinetic energy M---m ---> V1 line motion


Before colission

M-----rope R1-------m


........................^
........................^
.......................m


Mass m hit mass m and stop
after collision

........................^
........................^
M----- rope R1 ------m ----> Fr = m*V*V / R1
.......................m

WHY FIRST HALF ( m around M is more important than next )



please study 100 meters spriter physis
person who first started can use lower energy and have better time

>>> link to above dokument

I don't think gravity is an elastic force. And 20 pages of how sprinters train has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Please keep to the topic or start a new thread. I do not have infinite patience.

I cant make out exactly what your talking about here but
I have noticed a few things that you might need to consider.



from what I can tell so far is

1) you have a large mass (M)
2) a rod that extends from the bottom of mass (M)
3) a rope that extends from the bottom of the rod to mass (m2)
and
4) another mass (m1) that will collide with mass (m2)

I can go ahead and tell you what will happen when
mass (m1) collides with mass (m2)

1) mass (m1) will give energy to (m2)

2) mass (m2) will try to move in the same direction of the
energy or force that (m1) gave to it.

3) mass (m2) is bound to the rod by the rope so it cannot
travel in that direction so it begins to rotate around
the rod and wraps the rope around the rod as it spirals
inward toward the rod.

the torque placed on the rope by (m2) will slightly
twist the rod causing (M) to wobble as (m2) spirals inwards
toward the rod.

you can think of the bottom of the rod moving like the
small mass in the below image and the mass (M) moving
in the same fashion as below also , except there will
most likely also be a rotation of the entire system
that changes with the ever changing direction of forces.


that is what will actually happen if you ever experiment
with it , because that is what physics predicts will happen.

the good part about physics is that the above can be calculated
using a computer program and actual math.

Physics of running
To understand the basic physics of running, you can think of your limbs as pendulums.



If You and me RUN 100 m distance

If I will start first to win with me (or have the same time what I ) You have to use more ENERGY !!!

start is very importnat it give domination ( I can win and use lower energy than You )

sorry my link about Run was not the best.

Paul

Lets back to my picture



My question

below we have ZERO angular momentum ?

V1<---Mx
......i
......i
......i
......o
......i
......i
......i
......Mx---->V1

No - please use right hand rule

below we have ZERO angular momentum ?

V1<---Mx
......i
......i
......i
......o
......i
......3*Mx ---->V1

No - please use right hand rule


below we have ZERO angular momentum ?

Mx ---> V

YES






please imagine below two situations



A)

m ..........<----m
i
i
i rope
i
i
i
i
Earth


B)
m...........<----m



in situation B 100 % energy will be exchange

in situation A XX% wil take mass m
and YY% will take Earth ( radial force )

we have ideal torque F1,-F1
and two pipes with water
if we are pushing pistons ( red ) water is moving and give radial forces and opposite to F1 forces ( F2 )

test we can repeat on table ( Ideal symetry situation because
radial forces can not make job ) and in space ( spring will feel radial forces at the end )


conclusion 1
If we are using spring we can reduce torque F1 >>> F2

conclusion 2
if we will use other pipe's diameter we can give line motion ( momentum ) to spring and pipes

Fradial = mV*V/R

in situation III Radius R is the same
big pipe diameter = D
small pipe diameter = d


D=2d ===> water's mass inside big pipe = 4m

D=2d ===> water speed inside big pipe is 1/4V

V - water's speed inside small pipe

VERY EASY WE CAN PROVE THAT


radial force in small pipe is 4x biger if we compare to big pipe ( V*V) is more stronger in equation.

Im sorry I cant understand or follow what your asking.

and repetition only works when someone understands what is being repeated.

Im sure its important to you but I just cant understand what it
is that your trying to tell us.



the radial force of what?

if there are pistons in the pipe and the pistons are pushing water then of course the velocity of the water will be greater
in the small pipe.

but the same amount of mass will be passing any point on
the big pipe side and the small pipe side.

m X v = P

theres no difference in the total energy of either side of the
system.

even the pistons will have the same energy because the small
pistons will move faster than the large pistons.

again

m x v = p

I cant see any gain or loss in this.

the same mass of the oil ( green ) is going left and right

Radial forces
H2o VS Hg

the same speed
the same pipe
not the same mass inide pipe more big mass is going to front and Boat is going to front !!!!

VERY IMPORTANT ARE SPRINGS 1 and 2 ( we can use pneumatic actuator extra precission - air preasure will be simulate different inertia Hg and H2o
or we can use TAP ( Hg open MAX, H2o closed near minimum )
Perpendicular diection is neutral




EN http://youtu.be/iTQweoVZspc
PL http://youtu.be/YI2Vqf9TFi4

WATER vs WATER two different pipe d, 2D





PAUL ??? please evaluate the same problem for electric energy

mv = mv
F1 > F2

EN > http://youtu.be/Aazwjy3n-fg
PL > http://youtu.be/uk9R7EylmQU

RADIAL FORCE = REACTION


http://youtu.be/yI5xD5d0mmw

PAUL we speak about discovery !!! it is NOBEL ( new physics )
but very old equations ( Kirchoff , Bernouli - good confirmed facts about water or electrons)

ok , in the above picture you posted.

the pump is providing the same force to the green fluid.

so the resultant force will be the same applied to the pistons that push the mercury and the pistons that push the water.

all the pistons are the same size so the mercury will move slower and will have a lower velocity than the water because
the mercury is heavier than the water.

what will happen is the pistons that move the water will stroke
further out than the pistons that move the mercury.

and there will not be any difference in the radial forces
you have depicted in the image.

always remember m X v = p

even when you are using hydraulics and a closed system you
must remember the moment of inertia of the fluids used.

the springs will need to be of different strengths in order
to compensate or to balance the fluid velocities of the
mercury and water.

you may even need to pressurize the area where the spring on
the water side is located.

if you can get it balanced out then you also have found
yet another method of reactionless propulsion.

theres no extra energy involved so its not free energy
and nobody who has previously found a method of reactionless
propulsion has a nobel prize for it or for pointing out
the inaccuracies of current scientific thought patterns
and beliefs because it would be those who hold onto the
inaccuracies and beliefs who would nominate you for the prize.

how many times have you ever experienced a scientist
voluntarily admit that he was in error and give praise
to those who found his error?

youtu.be ?

it has no certificate.

try youtube.com instead.

http://listofscams.blogspot.com/2011/07/youtube-links-hackvirus-alert.html

Paul
all the pistons are the same size so the mercury will move slower and will have a lower velocity than the water because
the mercury is heavier than the water.


Paul Please not forget about spring 1 VS spring 2

green (oil ) go to left and to right the same ===>
water and mercury velocity is the same !!!

for liquid capacity / time and pipe diameter = velocity

for example
spring 1 = TANK 1
spring 2 = TANK 2



we can very precission change preasure in tank 1 and tank 2
during person inside boat is pushing.

we can steering the process to keep the same speed
inside pipe full of water and full of mercury

Preasure inside tank 1 and tank 2
it is different resistance for (green) oil .
Green oil joust pushing in one and the same time water and mercury

the same energy will go to left and to right side
( Force x distance x time = the same )
and velocity inside pipes must be the same


only radial force will be different !!!


we can use nozzle ( spring 1 big diameter , spring 2 small diameter )



we can use two taps ( spring 1 mercury = full open )
( spring 2 - water minimal open )

no , the water and mercury velocity will not be the same.

unless you use something that will have different resistance
to the pistons that push the mercury and water.

if you use tanks with different sized orifices to allow the pistons
to move at the same velocity then you will have achieved the same thing
that springs with different strengths would have achieved.

theres really nothing special or new about this , reactionless propulsion
has been around for a long time its just that
theres more money to be made by using a propulsion system
that throws mass ( expanding gasses )in a direction
or causes mass to be thrown in a direction via an
explosion ( expanding gasses ) that pushes against a pistons surface.

if fuel were free we would no longer need fuel.

because fuel is only used because it cost money.

another way to think of the cost of fuel is that
it is a convenient way for the rich to have some of the money
that they have passed out for labor wages passed back
to them so they can pass it back out again the next week.

fuel prices have become a throttle or a valve used to
control the amount of money
that workers can put into a savings account , because
people having money in a savings account cost the rich money.

a = F/the mass of water being forced to move (01 g/cm^3)

a = F/the mass of mercury being forced to move (13.534 g/cm^3)

theres a big difference in mass so the water will accelerate faster than the mercury.

this means that the water side piston will move further
because it starts moving first and it moves faster than the mercury side piston.

unless you compensate for the difference in mass.

Preasure P1 and P2 is variable
During person is pushing "central piston" special taps system is able steering and control process - green liquid will go left and right symetry !

I think around 10 people have told you aren't even eligible for the Nobel prize this will be about the 3rd time I have and Paul pointed it out above, but you aren't a stupid at all are you .... now go take you meds like the men in white coats tell you

You can't even convince the crazies like Prof Andy and Paul what chance do you think you have with actually intelligent people ... few more years to go lets see how you hang in there.

ORAC, PAUL below three mass experiment

http://youtu.be/FgsJrimgPiQ




In above Ytube You can see two experiments

exp.1
4 : 24 ( four minutes and 24 sec. )
three the same mass M

..............EARTH
MV---> {pipe - three way } ---> MV
...............M

exp.2
7:55 -- small mass m

..............EARTH
MV---> {pipe - three way } ---> MV1 !!!
...............m

m<<<M
******************************************


exp. no 2

DID YOU SAW --- V1 !? V1 <<< V

WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT ??? MV or ENERGY !

NEWTON = SIR - people like Me or Lagiewka = not reach person who step by step working ...





INVERSE SQUARE LAW = SECRET RULES FOR ABOVE PIPE
and MY BOAT and GENERAL IN ALL SECRETS NEW PHYSICS
in 2012 I made in home MICHELSON MORLEY but Inverse Square Law
wersion !!!


I wrote 4 principels it is future for physics
http://marosz-physics.blogspot.com/

YOU CAN USE MY MODEL AND START REBUILD YOUR KNOLEDGE ABOUT ATOMS and BINDING !!!

WE DON't KNOW NOTHING RIGHT NOW

I WROTE mail to Dr ILUK ( in 2010 --2011 ) I described very similar experiment to MR Lagiewka

ILUK told me that I'm Idiot


three way pipe it is special example small radius and pipe

( Newton = past , Einstein supported his theory by fiction )
physics right now = zero true ! only fiction

ORAC CALL TO MIT or LIGO OR ANY UNIVERSITET AND SHOW THEM TRUE

YOU WILL SEE HOW PEOPLE ARE OPEN FOR GOOD EXPERIMENT

THREE MASS few DESK VS 400 years HISTORY in physics

WHAT IS FOR YOU QUANTUM ? - for me speculation
HIGS ??? HIGS ??? no ... physics is more simple !!!
CERN ??? LIGO ??? many people who are not awarness what they are doing !!!


very cheap test ( camera --- Balb ---> 30 km/s )

KOPERNIK stoped SUN
MAROSZ space and TIME





My first pictures
( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )

> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg


( I WROTE 4 principels .. it is not the end but first very important step for next step ... ORAC ALL WHAT YOU SEE IN BOOKS = FALSE !!! not EXIST SYMETRY !!!

MACH was great Engineer - Einstein = great manipulation and false

I IMPROVED GALILEO NATURAL FALL DOWN LAW

http://tesla4.blogspot.com/

there will be no difference in the air pressures in tank1 and tank 2 and the system will equalize.

you need 4 air tanks , two in front and two in back.

you also need to isolate the front from the back or the
tanks will equalize pressures.

you will need two sets of center pushing pistons that apply the
force to the green fluid.

also your pictures are so tiny that I have to zoom to 400% in order to understand them.

I will not click on your video links because they are stored
on a known / documented / advertised virus prone or infested
web site.

you need to get a you tube account for your videos if you want me to look at them.

STOP PAUL YOU ARE WRECKING MY BUSINESS IT IS A GREAT THEORY

Here is my latest school bus design all you need is to pump water around



It's such a good theory I really love it.

I also fully support the idea that energy and fuel is just a way to keep the poor under control

Those dastardly clever rich people .. weird part I come from a poorer country than poor Marosz.

Below Oryginal MR Lucjan Lagiewka Experiment

http://youtu.be/FgsJrimgPiQ

exp.1

4 : 24 ( four minutes and 24 sec. )
three the same mass M

..............EARTH
MV---> {pipe - three way } ---> MV
...............M

exp.2
7:55 -- small mass m

..............EARTH
MV---> {pipe - three way } ---> MV1 !!!
...............m

m<<<M
******************************************

Paul You have right
4 tanks and 4 different and full variable preasure ( during person is pushing piston e .
( single tank is big ===> level of liquid is close to constant during person is pushing )



01 of May 2014
first test in Home

My turbine move up green bucket.
I'm using 12V pomp from automotive
( glass cleaner pomp in your car 10 USD and two different diameters pipe ( 6 mm and 8 mm ) )



EN http://youtu.be/yI5xD5d0mmw
PL http://youtu.be/5FVBddDUAiM

How big radial forces we have inside small and big pipe ? please tak pencil in Your hand and write equations from secoundary school !!!







I'm very open for Cooperation with CAMBRIDGE
DEAR CAMBRIDGE TEAM befor "next SMITH" will statr copy my idea
please contact with me ---> author is always person who can improve own tool - MR SMITH we speak about new physics You even don't know what You did - Mr Lagiewka made first test in 1980 or more early

INVERSE SQUARE LAW it is very good old physics

pipe d and 2d and we have 4x biger radial forces
pipe d and 3d and we have 9x biger radial forces


In 2012 in Poland I made Michelson Morley but Inverse Square Law version Please ask about below picture any Astronomer that You respect !!!




Doppler it is very natural problem Bulb in the universe
look like below picture is showing ( there is no C+ Vearth )



INVERSE SQUARE LAW


More far from place where signal started = lower intensity of signal
( "lower brightness" )
1R = X , 2R = X/4 , 3R = X/9
X- brightness, R- radius
the same energy portion but different area

there is no any Einstein False exist only different intensity
and absolute constant motion



Above test must be repeat in LIGO :
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=51368#Post51368

ORAC ORAC

Light for distance Y+ need time t
during this time camera is moving and Earth is moving



How works camera ? (VERY OLD GREECE )

ok , you almost have it.

you need 2 of the (e) items.

so that you will have 4 pistons in the center.

ie...

ea,eb,ec,ed

ea and eb cannot be allowed to apply pressure on each other.

likewise

ec and ed cannot be allowed to apply pressure on each other.

because the pressure in tanks (B) and (D) will be higher than the pressure in tanks (C) and (A) and this higher pressure
will equalize with the tanks (A) and (C) and when these tanks equalize then you will no longer have the ability to have exact fluid velocity of water and mercury.

there must be a partition between ea and eb in the picture.

there must be a partition between ec and ed in the picture.

like this

tank A <------eb | ea------> tank B
tank C <------ed | ec------> tank D

you will have 4 hydraulic systems that are independent
of each other yet are controlled by a central pressure
apparatus ( the 4 pistons in the center ).

draw another picture with the changes above and post it.

Can I offer a name for the boat HMS Titanic.

You guys have to build it ... please do it.

I have to ask do you mind if I condense all this material to show how brilliant this is to other scientists, I feel such brilliance should be given a forum?

Now please don't let me interrupt I want to see the final design and can we get numbers on sort of weights and sizes to speed of HMS titanic?

I think your out of your league here orac , this type of
thing requires actual math and reality.

and those two things are not the type of things that you understand.

and why would we have to build anything?

To show your true genius, and you are right I don't understand your version of maths or reality

I mean do you believe it will work or not?

As they say put up or shut up ... the result will be funny I assure you

I think the mercury is a bit dangerous probably go for a mud slurry you just need a specific gravity weight differential right?

thats why I said your out of your league.

as soon as newton draws the new picture we can then
put the math up.

not that math means anything to you unless it incorporates
the speed of light

in which case the math would be fake math which you by
association must understand because it too is fake.

and unlike you I think that mercury was a good choice for this
due to its low viscosity and if he uses glass as the hydraulic pipes the surface tension between the mercury and glass will be negligible.

Ah so this is like GOD I just have to believe you he exists. The fact you are a complete religious whackjob who thinks science ate baby Jesus and is out to extract some revenge on science we should discount and ignore as not relevant.

Perhaps you should go and pray I mean the all powerful GOD should be able to knock over pathetic weak science or is that why you don't want to put it to the test its an epic blockbuster ... SCIENCE versus PAUL'S GOD ... NEWS AT 7.

Sorry I am going to bait the hell out of you because you really need to do the experiment there is a lesson in it for you.

Not sure you are going to convince to many with your argument, but hey don't let me distract you two geniuses this is pure gold you do all the maths you like with Marosz I will watch the result of your great claims

well since were the only ones in the discussion that knows how to do math I suppose you would have a need to sit it out.

Im certain that when you find an opportunity to provide
lip service then you will step back in , since that is
really all you know how to do when science , and possibly
k12 math is involved.

you really are a piss poor example , even of someone that
holds a tiny amount of worthwhile knowledge

Cool so you have put your maths and your reality on the line. Do you want to up the stakes and put your GOD on the result?

So how about it do you really believe or not?

Tell you what to sweeten the deal I will put it on the line. If you are right I will convert to the religion of your choice and give up science and spend the rest of my life promoting the religion.

Now all I need is Marosz to put his theory on the line and this could be worth doing

LAGIEWKA's EXPEIMENT
( POLAND 02/04/2013)

Part 1
4 : 24 three the same mass M


Part2
7: 55 small mass m asymetry ( m <<< M )



NOTICE !!!

AFTER COLLISION
( small mass will take close to 100 % energy Eo )

M*V -----> { three way pipe } M*Vx -->

Perpendicular direction is neutral for momentum



ORYGINAL SOURCE
http://youtu.be/FgsJrimgPiQ



WHERE IS CAMBRIDGE and MR SMITH

Who is MR SMITH ?

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/f1/understanding-the-j-damper/


He copied Lagiewka's Solution 100 %
and even don't know how it work !!!

YOU WANT TO COPY NEXT TOOL FROM POLAND
AND USE MY WORK !

( befor "NEXT MR SMITH" WILL USE MY TALENT PLEASE CALL ME I WILL PREPARE BETTER TOOL on web I not showed all

EINSTEIN = IDIOT


MAROSZ's INERTIA FRAME



MICHELSON MORLEY BRIGHTNESS VERSION
Poland 2012 first test





Discovery : brightness of pictures West and East are not the same
Reason ? Eart's Velocity 30 km/s = 30 000 000 mm/s
(NIKON 5000d remote start, zero outsite light ,stative, manual set ,
time 10s , F 8 , Iso 200 - /10 cm to bulb / filtre is important !!!)

first test
> http://youtu.be/XF_npmQ8kGY

first pictures ( brightness - photoshop 10 histogram) west ( -30km/s ) and East (+30 km/s )
> http://youtu.be/O9k-zidfJZg


author
MY PATENTS AND DESIGN VISION
http://tesla4.blogspot.com


MAROSZ 4 Principles ( NEW MECHANIC )
http://marosz-physics.blogspot.com/

So do you want in on the bet then Marosz.

If you are right and the boat actually propels itself along like a normal boat I will immediately give up science and you can send everyone here I and will explain that physics is wrong along with having to convert to a new religion because of my bet with Paul.

However if the boat doesn't move forward and just sits there and rocks and rolls as the mass changes around with each piston pump you have to give up the theory and science and never come up with any more great ideas

GOOD TIP PHYSICS =ENERGY and energy exchange process "

ZERO THEORY only OBSERVATIONS !!!

use dynamica not eyes ( sometimes eyes = mistake it is not important what You see because see = illusion and speculations ( relativistica + Quntum = I never SAW THIS WHAT I DESCRIBING IN MY IMAGINATION !!! )



( Forces and momentu = NEWTON's idea - sometimes people making mistake. The problem is that people not like study problems. People joust are using books without brain ( not exist absolute true we all have to study !!! )



MArosz' Four Principles
1 ( not exist line motion in universe )
2 radial forces can redirect energy without reaction



3 INVERSE SQUARE LAW and GRAVITATION


4
Gravitation mass it is not the same what INertia mass

one mass

M ----> V



two mass 1/2 M

1/2 M ----> V ..........distance L .........1/2M ----> V


Inertia is the same for one mass M or two mass 1/2 M
but gravitation ???

There is no middle point of mass
in 1/2 distance L center

why ?

because exist Inverse Square Law and milions STARS around US


MAROSZ DISCOVERY

Galilleo's Natural Fall Down Law +
+ one paragraph more ( absolute motion & Inverse Square Law)


m----Earth----m ===> 30 km/s

Mass m left and right will never fall down on planet in one and the same time ( exist other Intensity of gravitation ) and
absolute kinetic energy !!!

WHY WE HAVE WINTER AND SUMMER



ENERGY IS GOING ISOTROPY RESPECT TO POINT WHERE LIGHT STARTED

orac

first off , I think your as dumb as a brick .

and you never have exhibited any evidence to counter my
evaluation of your intelligence.

in fact if I had to guess I would say that a brick is
probably smarter than you are

I suppose you could counter my claims by pointing out that
bricks cant think , right?

let me ask you a question mr brick brain , if you don't think
that his idea has value , then why do you think that race tracks have banked turns.

are race tracks banked to keep the asphalt from slipping off the track in the turns.

and about your bet , I only use bricks to prop things up
with.

which is currently what science uses them for
and you are a living testament of that fact.

So put your GOD on the line, I have put my science beliefs on the line but you are being gutless.

Come on do it or stop talking, you are all mouth.

What the religious don't have backbones ... you are so sure you are right what can go wrong

We don't need to argue and make a scene in the forum we have a straight test your god and his science versus my science. Let the HMS titanic sort out if your GOD or my science is stronger can't get fairer than that and save a lot of unseemly arguing because our maths and physics don't agree even according to you.

So come on put your belief on the line ... are you a real believer or not, I am and I have gone all in.

well orac since you don't understand physics the below
will seem like a miracle to you , and you will be scratching
your brick trying to figure it out.

believe me its only applied knowledge , theres nothing
miraculous about it.

the guy in the video seems to know you orac , I keep hearing
one of my favorite carefully chosen descriptions of you in the video.



orac, I see you have applied your knowledge of the physical world
and made a video also.

Again I have no intention to argue this with your and Marosz because there is no need.

WE HAVE A TEST PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

I am willing to walk away from science if I am wrong what are you worried about you are sure I am wrong.

Oh I am terrified by your video evidence and yet still I won't back down .... crazy hey I really want to get converted ... I am going to be the best goat god worshiper ever.

For a religious man you don't have very much faith.

What the good ship HMS Titanic not going to save us all from the flood?

I have to say you are not a patch on Rev K who for a start would not be stupid enough to get in the position you have put yourself and if he ended there he would have the faith to follow his conviction. I walked you right into this and you didn't even see it coming.

So how does it feel to be out faithed by a lowly janitor who believes in science ... feeling a little trapped perhaps

No amount of abuse will save you Paul you either have faith or you don't and you have answered the question as a have I.

I wonder if your pollack mate has more guts and faith than you, is he a true believer

wow , what a prize. (( not really )LOL)
that is very tempting orac. (( not really )LMFAO)
hopefully the people at the disney studios quantum studios wont get wind of your offer to improve science
and join in with their immense vastness of BS nothingness
and place the same wager.

can I sell you some bear stearns stock? its obvious that
you value worthlessness because you seem to think that
your offer to walk away from science would have some value
that could be used in a wager , from what I have observed
you either never approached science or you walked away from
science years ago.

That the best you got Mr Faithless.

You were tested and failed.

Pretty sure that ends this thread because neither of you really believes as has been demonstrated.

so when you apply your brick brain to a problem
it tells you that all you have to do is write a
bunch of BS in order to achieve a solution to the
problem?

then it tells you that you are the victor because of
the BS you have written.

and that all of the involved parties interested in solving
the problem should just take your BS as a solution to the
problem and walk away from it.

I would laugh with you orac , if I were I not laughing at you.

Mr Lagiewka live 70 km from my home

I spoke with him about my own Idea

He told me that he want to measure absolute Earth motion
and he want to use classical mechanic

His words was inspiration to my test

Michelson Morley Brightness ( Inverse Square Law Version )

later I started think about gravitation

for gravitation and for light ( inverse square law = the same problem - we have wery similar equations in books )


ENERGY RISE UP ISOTROPY but ISOTROPY ONLY RESPECT TO POINT WHERE
WAVE STARTED AND ONLY IN IDEAL SYMETRY VACUUM


FOR EXAMPLE IN AIR WE HAVE INERTIA PROBLEM


sensor ---->30 km/s AIR ----> 30 km/s <<< Light


Light >>> AIR ----> 30 km/s sensor ---->30 km/s


AIR = conveyer ( machine that is transporting light )

Air not give ISOTROPY resistance for ligth


EACH ANIMAL FEEL THAT RIVER IS MOVING !!!!

transport inside air = different energy lost for Each direction


AIR = MEDIUM

the same medium = electric wire for electrons


+.........electric wire .........- ---> 30 km/s

-.........electric wire..........+ ----> 30 km/s


To wake up electrons ( +/- or -/+ ) we will use not the same energy ( direction and medium motion is important )

electron = mass m

electron is inside wire

wire and Earth are moving around SUN we have radial forces and
speed problem (Energy respect to stationary space )