Author Topic: Inertia Control through E/M means. Real Theory and Experiments.  (Read 11559 times)

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Good Evening everyone!

I would like to share with you some important discoveries in regards to Inertia Control and much more. Please visit my web site:

http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/

There you will find a brief introduction of the theory (.ppt format) as also there are two experiments that may verify the existence of the Variable Inertia (Variable Rest Mass) which leads actually to the control of the Dynamic properties of matter (Reduced Inertia/Null Mass (Invisibility)/Antigravity):

Exp#1: It is a natural phenomenon that takes places in the outer Van Allen belt (Vanishing act of the Electrons). See Theory Presentation or corresponding chapter of the paper SEPPv6.pdf (Download it through the link found on the web site). Complete explanation and calculations.

Exp#2: A ferrite ring coil turns to a Half-Wave (Standing Wave). There is a link in the web site (scroll down) that leads to my Youtube Channel (real video). It shows a real propulsion concept without moving parts using E/M means. The simplest propellant less and without moving parts propulsion system, ever (See Star Trek small movie which is included on the experiment). Complete Engineering Equations and calculations.

When a particle acquires additionally the wave property (trapped within a Standing Wave), Einstein's relativistic mass is not any more valid, due to the variance of the Rest Mass.


Comment: Einstein's relativistic mass is valid when the particle possesses only the particle quality (free motion in space and not trapped within a Standing Wave).

The Inertia Control Equation (Ferrite Ring Coil)


I will look forward for your comments and feedback!

Kind Regards

Ioannis Xydous

Electronic Engineer

Switzerland


Offline Tass

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
  • Liked: 89
  • Likes Given: 208
Sorry, pseudoscience is not allowed on this forum. It is a pretty impressive specimen though. You must have worked hard to achieve that crackpot look of the website.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
While I agree that this is certainly not real, I don't think we need to start attacking for the heck of it (the dig at the website was unnecessary).

And actually, looking at all the Mach Effect posts and some of the stuff going on at NIAC, it DOES look like pseudoscience is allowed on this forum. Don't be so harsh.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Tass

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
  • Liked: 89
  • Likes Given: 208
Yeah, I suppose you are right. Sorry.

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Hi Tass and Robotbeat!

I just would like to share my discoveries and to receive some feedback. As I mentioned on my post, there is a theory and experiments. If it is pseudoscience, then I would like someone to prove it with real arguments.

I am just looking for some real feedback. What would you do if you were in my position? ( I am just a simple Electronic Engineer from a technological Institution, not even a University). There is no chance for someone to go further if he does not belong to the official Science (You understand how official Science worked the last 100 years and works today) by sharing those you find on my web site. With other words, I AM NOBODY.

The theory is very straight and needs only a high school education (not a University degree) to be understood.

I will be very happy  to discuss my work and especially on the concept of the variable inertial mass (based on the variable speed of light with distance) which leads to the concept of propelant less propulsion and real Antigravity.

Kind Regards

Ioannis
 

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Welcome to the forum.

The world has enough "theories" on how to do propellant propulsion. Experimenters, on the other hand, are sorely lacking.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline Cinder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 779
  • Liked: 229
  • Likes Given: 1077
Hi Tass and Robotbeat!

I just would like to share my discoveries and to receive some feedback. As I mentioned on my post, there is a theory and experiments. If it is pseudoscience, then I would like someone to prove it with real arguments.

I am just looking for some real feedback. What would you do if you were in my position? ( I am just a simple Electronic Engineer from a technological Institution, not even a University). There is no chance for someone to go further if he does not belong to the official Science (You understand how official Science worked the last 100 years and works today) by sharing those you find on my web site. With other words, I AM NOBODY.

The theory is very straight and needs only a high school education (not a University degree) to be understood.

I will be very happy  to discuss my work and especially on the concept of the variable inertial mass (based on the variable speed of light with distance) which leads to the concept of propelant less propulsion and real Antigravity.

Kind Regards

Ioannis
 
Empirical support?
NEC ULTIMA SI PRIOR

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Welcome to the forum.

The world has enough "theories" on how to do propellant propulsion. Experimenters, on the other hand, are sorely lacking.


Thank you QuantumG! You are perfectly right about it. The last 13 years where I am also involved on the search for Scientific papers, patents in regards to alternative propulsion methods, you see mostly complicated theories and doubtful experiments.

The experiment I have on the Youtube Channel although it looks like a "hoax" (for those who do not have the patience to understand), but it is not.

A 206 grams Ferrite Ring gives thrust to a small LEGO car or moves on the surface of table using only a +/-25Vrms Power Supply (no HV, no ionization of air.). The paradox is that the input Energy is around 0.2mJoule and the Output (Kinetic Effects) is around 10 times the input, without to violate the Conservation of Energy. This simple table-top experiment is unique on the Internet.

Hi Cinder, I was meaning a feedback from amateurs and professionals on this topic. The opinion of an open minded Physicist would be greatly appreciated.

Stay tuned!

Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/

Ioannis Xydous

Electronic Engineer

Switzerland


Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Hi everyone!

About the Exp#1, it is a natural phenomenon where you may find info on the following link: http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/ucla-researchers-solve-mystery-221811.aspx

"During the onset of a geomagnetic storm, nearly all the electrons trapped within the radiation belt vanish, only to come back with a vengeance a few hours later," said Vassilis Angelopoulos, a UCLA professor of Earth and space sciences and IGPP researcher.
 
"It's a puzzling effect," he said. "Oceans on Earth do not suddenly lose most of their water, yet radiation belts filled with electrons can be rapidly depopulated."
 
"Even stranger, the electrons go missing during the peak of a geomagnetic storm, a time when one might expect the radiation belt to be filled with energetic particles because of the extreme bombardment by the solar wind."

The above article does not claim that Einstein's relativity is violated, due to rest mass variance. I would like to be clear on this: It is me who claims (after reading the above quotes) that, where after some calculations, I could verify (here it is required the feedback of an expert) the vanishing kinetic Energies of the relativistic Electrons, in the outer Van Allen belt (Very interesting phenomenon). I already sent my research to UCLA Team and others worldwide but until now, no answer.

I used the following paper as a reference for the calculations: http://rspa.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/466/2123/3329.full.pdf

Well, if this prove to be true (the reason I need the feedback), then the Invisibility (null Inertia) and Anti-gravity effects, already occur in Earth's outer Atmosphere (Van Allen belt) since thousands of years (or even million of years) as a natural phenomenon.

Just think about it for a moment!

The Exp#1, does not require a setup but just calculations to compare the measurements with the theoretical results. Of course this natural phenomenon is more complex and to simplify the approach, I used only the following assumption: The relativistic Electrons are suddenly trapped within a Standing Wave. It means the relativistic Electrons traveling near to the speed of light (0.90c to 0.99c), they are suddenly trapped within a Standing Wave. More explanations for those who will show interest.

Stay tuned!

Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/

Ioannis Xydous

Electronic Engineer

Switzerland



Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Below is the direct Link to my Youtube Channel for the Exp#2 with the ferrite ring coil:

http://www.youtube.com/user/AetherControl

The above link can be also found on the web site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/ , when you scroll down. The materials and setup used for this experiment are found on the Theory Presentation in case you would like to attempt it by yourself.

Just for the record: I claim that I discovered the conditions and the Engineering Equations to turn a mass to a Half-Wave (Standing Wave) as also the conditions to control the Dynamic effects of matter (turn to Null Inertia/Invisibility, Anti-gravity).

The kinetic effects although can be also described from my theory, are not my discovery. The kinetic effects is nothing else than the kinetic part of the Warp-Drive concept (mass turns to a wave). The Warp-Drive concept as it was developed by Alcubierre in theory is practically impossible and conceptually wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warp_drive).

Warp Drive=Matter trapped within a Standing Wave. It is simpler than you probably think. Proof of Concept: Exp#2: http://www.youtube.com/user/AetherControl. Exp#2 is actually a very primitive version of the Warp-Drive.

What is missing from the Warp-Drive (Kinetic Effects) is that at the speed 0.94c the Space-Ship will acquire a near zero Inertial Mass and it will vanish from our material world.

Actually when the speed of the Space-Ship (using the real Warp-Drive concept) is between 0.92c to 0.95c will be practically Invisible and undetectable.
(As predicted from my theory)

Proof of Concept is the Exp#1 Natural Phenomenon: Electrons vanishing act.

Conclusively, due to the discovery of the variable Inertia, it is  required a Space-Ship design with two Layers. The outer will control the Inertial Mass (by increasing the Amplitude of the Standing Wave) and the second Layer (internal) will be used for the Kinetic Effects, which may enable faster than Light transportation.

When you ever study my paper and experiments then it will come a moment and you will say "This cannot be true. None ever notice this simple proposed solution the last 100 years? It is definitely pseudoscience."

I reply with this quote: "Power may hold 20 or 30 or 40 years, but influence may hold more than 100 years". Keyword: Einstein, at least.
 
Without to offend anyone, take all the above as a challenge! (speaking always seriously)

Kind Regards

Ioannis Xydous

Electronic Engineer

Switzerland






Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
The motion is caused by vibrating against the table.

Proof: hang it from a string and run the experiment again, the sideways motion will disappear.

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
The motion is caused by vibrating against the table.

Proof: hang it from a string and run the experiment again, the sideways motion will disappear.

Hi antiquark!

Unfortunately I cannot repeat the experiment for some technical reasons that I can explain, if you are able to understand. This is a very good argument of yours if someone wants very quickly to disprove this without to think or to study it further. But you forgot the first and second part of the experiment.

On the first part the ring rotates clockwise and counterclockwise due to a frequency shift that I apply on the signal generator (absolute controllable part).

On the second part where the ring is loaded on the LEGO car, you see by your own eyes that is pushed forward (there is no direct contact of the ring with the table). I use Amplitude modulation which results as a small impulse.

On the third part where the ring contacts table's surface what really occurs (without frequency shift, it is a locked mode) is that the ring attempts to rotate and due to unbalanced friction (from the one side the ring is wired and the other side of the ring is bear) it stops and restarts resulting to a linear motion caused by the internal forces and the friction with the table. (Watch again that video to observe the behavior. The force that comes from inside the ring mass is horizontal or better tangential to the ring topology. It follows the direction of the Magnetic Field created inside the ring.)

The third part I may explain but you need to read my theory, otherwise it will be useless and a waste of time.

In the Theory Presentation, I mention that the experiment is extremely sensitive to current variances since an increase in current it destroys the wave condition (Permeability varies with increasing magnetic field).

If you cannot be convinced from the above then keep in mind the first two parts of the video where disprove directly your claims.

Kind Regards

Ioannis Xydous

Electronic Engineer

Switzerland


 

Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
So you tried it hanging from a string, and it didn't work? Case closed!

Offline LegendCJS

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 2
Your posts are inconsistent.  You say "the force" follows the direction of the magnetic field, but you are putting an AC waveform into the coil, so the magnetic field is switching directions at the same frequency as the AC waveform.  How do you explain any preferential direction of motion?

Other than the fact that your setup is randomly rattling around on a wooden surface with a possibly un-level table top plus the tension of your thick wires pulling on the ring/coil?
« Last Edit: 02/01/2013 04:09 pm by LegendCJS »
Remember: if we want this whole space thing to work out we have to optimize for cost!

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Your posts are inconsistent.  You say "the force" follows the direction of the magnetic field, but you are putting an AC waveform into the coil, so the magnetic field is switching directions at the same frequency as the AC waveform.  How do you explain any preferential direction of motion?

Other than the fact that your setup is randomly rattling around on a wooden surface with a possibly un-level table top plus the tension of your thick wires pulling on the ring/coil?

Hi LegendCJS!

Until someone read my paper or the Theory Presentation at least, I will be continuously misunderstood. Yes, you are right about the AC Waveform, but did you notice the closed loop topology? The traveling AC Wave will ultimately create a Standing Wave (I hope that you understand what is Standing Wave. The same is created on an open half-wave dipole).

From the moment the Standing Wave is created, then the entire mass of the ring is trapped within it. Then if you vary slightly the frequency, it will create the kinetic effects (The kinetic effects for once more, it is not my discovery but all the rest) you see on that video. The Moving Standing Wave (which is not my discovery) which entraps the ring mass is the cause for the kinetic effects. A slight frequency shift will move the Standing Wave to another position by taking the mass with it. This is the real Warp-Drive concept!

Note: The artificial Space-Time bubble as it is mentioned in Alcubierre Warp-Drive is absurd having only mathematical validity and will never work. On the other hand what I mention above is real (Theory and Experiment).

Please do not underestimate my intelligence with such kind of claims. I would be crazy or careless to have develop and publish such a theory and to explain this experiment without to have thought all of these possibilities.

You and antiquark insist on pointless claims without to have read or understand what is behind all these, meaning a theory. If we were speaking for a conventional theory, then this thread is useless.

My answer to your claims are: Part I & II of the video as also at least my theory.

Probably (there is no warranty), if there is a physicist on this forum, could help on the topic.

Ioannis Xydous

Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/

Electronic Engineer

Switzerland




Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
You and antiquark insist on pointless claims

On the contrary, if this is intended to be a space drive, you should know that there are very few tabletops in outer space. As such, it's an extremely important experiment to ensure that the device can operate in the absence of a tabletop.
 
Anyways, all quibbling aside, running the thing with a string attached would take, what, five minutes?   

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
You and antiquark insist on pointless claims

On the contrary, if this is intended to be a space drive, you should know that there are very few tabletops in outer space. As such, it's an extremely important experiment to ensure that the device can operate in the absence of a tabletop.
 
Anyways, all quibbling aside, running the thing with a string attached would take, what, five minutes?   

antiquark, the problem is that I cannot repeat the experiment since the material is defect due to the extreme Electric Field that was created inside the ferromagnetic material. I can explain it but you must be able to understand technical details in regards to Radiation Resistance, Insulating internal Layers of the MnZn Ferrite, e.t.c.

The force is very small and the experiment is very sensitive. Let us assume it fails to rotate with the string attached, then how you explain the thrust on the LEGO Car or the first part where the ring rotates clockwise and counterclockwise by demand (absolute controllable)?

When you repeat it by yourself, then you will understand what I mean about complexity and sensitivity of the experiment. It is not so easy as it looks like.

Regards and I remain!

Ioannis Xydous

Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
antiquark, the problem is that I cannot repeat the experiment since the material is defect due to the extreme Electric Field that was created inside the ferromagnetic material. I can explain it but you must be able to understand technical details in regards to Radiation Resistance, Insulating internal Layers of the MnZn Ferrite, e.t.c.

What happens if you run it on the tabletop now, does it no longer move?

You could also buy a new ferrite, in fact, you should buy a dozen of them so you can continue with your experiments without interruptions.

  then how you explain the thrust on the LEGO Car or the first part where the ring rotates clockwise and counterclockwise by demand (absolute controllable)?

It's vibrating against the table, that's how it moves.
« Last Edit: 02/01/2013 05:23 pm by antiquark »

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Quote
What happens if you run it on the tabletop now, does it no longer move?

You could also buy a new ferrite, in fact, you should buy a dozen of them so you can continue with your experiments without interruptions.

I have stopped experimenting with this material and I am not going to use this kind of ferrite anymore (It is difficult to control it. Permeability varies very quickly and destroys the condition). At the time when I bought this material it was sold in 1000 of pieces, you could not buy just one sample for private use. I was just lucky that time! This material is only for this kind of demonstration. You cannot make it fly or to use it for propulsion (I warranty this 100%!)

I am working on something else now (Invisibility and Anti-gravity) but if it works, I am not sure that I will share it so easy.

Again, I urge you to watch the part I & II of that video and then come again to discuss it. For the sake of discussion, let us assume that you are right (which is not the case according to me) about the part III. You must find a way to disprove the other two parts.

Regards

Ioannis


Offline grondilu

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • France
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 14
You and antiquark insist on pointless claims

On the contrary, if this is intended to be a space drive, you should know that there are very few tabletops in outer space. As such, it's an extremely important experiment to ensure that the device can operate in the absence of a tabletop.
 
Anyways, all quibbling aside, running the thing with a string attached would take, what, five minutes?   

Also, if the effect is real, it will be more spectacular when the device is suspended on a string, since there will not be the friction from the wheel.

Apart from this, I confess I did not understand anything to the paper, and I have no idea why the thing moves on the video.

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Quote
Also, if the effect is real, it will be more spectacular when the device is suspended on a string, since there will not be the friction from the wheel.

Apart from this, I confess I did not understand anything to the paper, and I have no idea why the thing moves on the video.

Why it moves, as I mentioned it is not my discovery. You will find the link which explains the kinetic effects at the end of the video. My discovery is the Engineering Equations and the Inertia Control which leads to Anti-gravity.

The owner of the other web site has catch the real mechanism of the Warp Drive although he does not name it like this (he names it "Moving Standing Wave"). His concept does not predict actually Superluminal Velocities due to lack of the variable Inertial Mass. He explains the mechanism but he does not have:

i)Electromagnetic type Experiments.
ii)Engineering Equations.
iii)Inertia Control Equation.

His discoveries are based on the kinetic effects where he wrongly postulates according to my opinion that it is possible to control gravity with his theory. You could simulate it by creating an opposite acceleration to Earth with his findings.

His theory is also very straight to understand and very crucial to our discussion. I just did not want to mention it from the beginning but to be discovered by yourself.

Now you have plenty of material to study!

Good Luck!

Ioannis



Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1

I have stopped experimenting with this material and I am not going to use this kind of ferrite anymore 


If the experiment is not reproducible, then it's not science!

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0

I have stopped experimenting with this material and I am not going to use this kind of ferrite anymore 


If the experiment is not reproducible, then it's not science!


I think I was very clear! It was working until lately. I wanted to test it again when I took it from the Cellar (it was there for three years. Since 2009) and I try it, it worked on the floor too but then I heard a "crack" coming from the inner part of the ring. Outside you see nothing.

So I tried many times to recover it but it was impossible. When the ferrite goes defect, you hear only the noise without to be able to move. I investigate this issue and I found what probably is (the insulating layers inside the structure of the core where partially destroyed which results to different electromagnetic properties).

The ferrite ring is not for this application and it was working on the limit. These are the facts. Take it or leave it!

Regards

Ioannis

Offline LegendCJS

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 2
Dude, your equations from the first post, please define all variables and their units.  I want to check your units but I can't even do that right now without the definitions. 

I can only assume right now that you have frequency in the denominator, which is a very obvious problem for your equation when you turn your power supply off and the denominator goes to zero. 

Don't ask me to read your paper or go to your links.  I'm not going to do it.  I'll watch a youtube video any day, but that is as far as it goes.
« Last Edit: 02/01/2013 06:15 pm by LegendCJS »
Remember: if we want this whole space thing to work out we have to optimize for cost!

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Dude, your equations form the first post, please define all variables and their units.  I want to check your units but I can't even do that right now without the definitions.

I see nobody likes to read a complete paper. I would exactly the same. OK, I will help you (for the ferrite ring equation):



mi=Variable Mass (Kgr)
m=Rest Mass (Kgr)
I=Current (Amperes)
Rr=Radiation Resistance (Ohm)
v=Propagation Velocity of the E/M Waves (m/sec)
f=frequency (Hz)

I hope it helped!

Regards

Ioannis



Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1

I think I was very clear! It was working until lately. I wanted to test it again when I took it from the Cellar (it was there for three years. Since 2009) and I try it, it worked on the floor too but then I heard a "crack" coming from the inner part of the ring.


Then buy another one.

And, if you buy another one and cannot recreate the experiment, then according to the scientific method... your theory is wrong!

Offline Nathan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Sydney
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3

I think I was very clear! It was working until lately. I wanted to test it again when I took it from the Cellar (it was there for three years. Since 2009) and I try it, it worked on the floor too but then I heard a "crack" coming from the inner part of the ring.


Then buy another one.

And, if you buy another one and cannot recreate the experiment, then according to the scientific method... your theory is wrong!

Yes. This experiment needs to be repeated in order to be proved. If you are now working on something else then you need to stop and go back to the first task and run a complete test program. That is the best feedback we can give you.
Given finite cash, if we want to go to Mars then we should go to Mars.

Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0

I think I was very clear! It was working until lately. I wanted to test it again when I took it from the Cellar (it was there for three years. Since 2009) and I try it, it worked on the floor too but then I heard a "crack" coming from the inner part of the ring.


Then buy another one.

And, if you buy another one and cannot recreate the experiment, then according to the scientific method... your theory is wrong!

Come on antiquark! Are you out of serious arguments? I spent many hours with this material in the past. I do not need to spend more. I know what it works and what not. If you like, try it by yourself!

I am a serious person and I do not have time for nonsense. I registered to various forums but most of them are people who like to argue with pointless discussions without to be prepared or have spend the necessary time to confront such kind of subjects.

I am working seriously on these subjects the last 13 years. I read hundred of patents and Scientific Papers as also I was partially experimenting according to a very limited budget.

Please do not waste any more time on my thread since I will not answer on such kind of questions anymore without to understand or have read my work/experiment. It is very sad, since my theory is simple and straight which can be understood from a person with high school education. The only demand in advance is to have interest in Physics and to know at least the basic.

Best Regards and Good Luck!

Ioannis Xydous

Web Site: http://www.ioannisxydous.gr/

Electronic Engineer

Greece




Offline Ioannis

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Switzerland
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Quote
Yes. This experiment needs to be repeated in order to be proved. If you are now working on something else then you need to stop and go back to the first task and run a complete test program. That is the best feedback we can give you.

This experiment was repeated tenths of time. You have it now on a video. You must have the will to understand and to spend time to study the theory. Otherwise, do not lose your time on this thread. It is useless!

For once more, I think I am on the wrong forum. As I wrote I will not answer anymore to such kind of claims. I explained myself and I was very clear!

Good Luck!

Ioannis

Offline antiquark

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Refuse to discuss your theory? Not really a trait of the true scientist.

Anyways, for your reference here's a diagram of the scientific method. Ignore it at your own risk!



From what you have described, you've failed to pass the "cyan" section of the diagram.
« Last Edit: 02/01/2013 07:33 pm by antiquark »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37440
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 21451
  • Likes Given: 428
The motion is caused by vibrating against the table.

Proof: hang it from a string and run the experiment again, the sideways motion will disappear.

Correct, there is no other explanation.   The OP's explanation is nothing but nonsense.
« Last Edit: 02/01/2013 07:36 pm by Jim »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1