Definition of Tractor force vortex in a physical experiment related to mass inertia.

  • 103 Views
  • Last Post 2 weeks ago
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

‘Something great is nothing new’ 

 

intro

hello id like to add to the conversation with regards to a force vector I call :

Tractor vortex Force

it is a probably somewhat well kown force of various different titles however I’d like to add to the conversation by defining it here with various illustrations and outline it’s incommensurable relationship to mass inertia and mass inertia offset on the 3D plane. 

I hope that some people can gain further insight into the physical force as described /outlined

{edit I had the term backwards ‘Tractor force Vortex’ } correction 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Vidura
Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

Please observe Fig T

This is a 2D illustration of a 3D entity 

it is a circular mass that for our experiment is balanced the mass is marked in the image as {a} 

upon rotational frequency of this mass there is an tangential velocity marked {b} 

then as per well known 3D physics there is an angular velocity which is marked as {c} directionally and is represented by the lines that are at a 90deg angle to the center point of the rotation.

then there is a seemingly less known force but still well known which I have termed the ‘Tractor vortex force’ although I have heard it be termed in this case as ‘centripetal’ force. However that is in my opinion not a ‘general’ enough term and seems to be specific to this physical example. 

Explaining Fig T

 

as the rotational velocity increases the tangential velocity increases and the angular velocity and angular force increases, however an equivalent but incommensurable force also increases that is the ‘Tractor vortex force’ which is a ‘pulling’ force that is ‘like the angular force’ a 3D force. 

So there are two {2} primarily forces in action other than the energy to rotate the mass to a velocity they are 

 

1# The angular velocity or angular force expansion 

2# The Tractor vortex force the ‘pulling’ force 

however these two forces are incommensurable to each other in the 3D plane. 

 

With careful observation of Fig T one will note the numbers 1 2 3 4 , if you would like to visualize how the Tractor vortex force is a 3D plane force you could draw a line {or lines} that spirals inwards toward the center vector marked as {e} 

it is important to note that both forces are 3D plane forces. 

 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

The result on Mass in rotation 

Mass offset inertia on the 3D plane. 

 

The result of these two 3D forces action is that the mass of the inertia {based on variables like the speed of rotation, the angular velocity and the mass} is offset to the 3D plane. 

that is to say , a fixed observer in the 3D plane will observe an entity of less mass. 

This is also a fairly commonly observed effect with many ‘YouTube’ video outlining an individual lifting a rotational mass whereas they could not have lifted the same mass before mass offset via the means I have just described. 

The prime mover that is initiated the rotational velocity is not exceptional to that rule.

it is a fixed observer in the 3D plane so it sees an entity of ‘less mass’ once these two forces are at action.

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

Observing Fig {ab} and a General top view Fig {bb}

 

the device that is providing the rotational force has a pulley of 9’’ and an rpm of 600

the resulting ratio means that the shaft with the rotational mass {c} is rotational at or about 1800rpm 

if based on equivalent forces as outlined i.e mass , rotation etc then the results will be that the device driving pulley {a} if started from an instant force would see a larger force action upon it and then in a non linear time event in the 3D plane less force to move the entity that would {at full rotational velocity} have a % of its inertia mass offset to the 3D plane. 

We can call this ‘state 0’ and is primarily due to the Tractor Votex force action which is simultaneously acting in an incommensurable way on the angular force. 

State 0  A mass offset state. 

 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

State 0 an offset state with non local offset mass.

the mass that is offset to the 3D plane is non local as it is still related but offset to the 3D plane that might inspire any reader that has interest in Tractor vortex force, to understand it is still directly relational to the 3D plane but in a non local manner.

 

 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

State 1 actuality of offset mass into the 3D plane. 

 

To actualize non local offset mass in the 3D plane Tractor vortex force must be reversed the most simple way to reverse Tractor vortex force in this example is to decelerate Tangential velocity and thus angular velocity and decrease Tractor vortex force, the result Is actuality of offset mass {in this theory} 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 2 weeks ago

"however these two forces are incommensurable to each other in the 3D plane."

?

 when stationary they are proportional to each other. when a rotational body exists these two forces become incommensurable to each other thus a cancellation of Gravitation in one or two gravitational planes causing the body or mass to exhibit and up ward force or velocity resulting in loss of apparent mass or weight. the object in question does not exhibit increased or loss of mass just the counter force of gravitation is cancelled causing an unequalibrium of forces acting upon said object.

unless i miss understood your presentation which is quite possible.

Interesting.

Marathonman

  • Liked by
  • KolinLCAtar
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

I think you didn’t misunderstand except I would say: 

‘there’s no ‘up’ in space’ or in this case the non local offset state. 

So I would myself term it as ‘mass offset to the 3D plane’ 

i would say ‘offset force’ instead of ‘up ward’ force but those are just ‘splitting hair’ terms I would use. 

I guess if we want to refer to the local state as having an ‘up’ and ‘down’ then yes. 

I like your example of a ‘incommensurable cancellation.’ 

Thats how I say ‘mass adjacent offset’ 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

The above image outlines multiple offset states and actuality events 

All pulleys are 3’’ and 9’’ in this example except for the last two which are 12’’ and 2’5 which results in an end rpm of 2880 rpm in this example. 

{a} is an offset state 

{b} is the non local actuality of that offset state

{c} is again an offset state 

{d} is the actuality of offset states %

  • Liked by
  • Chris
Marathonman posted this 2 weeks ago

"i would say ‘offset force’ instead of ‘up ward’ force"

Much agreed upon and thanks for the correction. upward force limited to earths atmosphere since gravitation is semi cancelled or slowed on one plane.

again very interesting subject.

marathonman

  • Liked by
  • KolinLCAtar
  • Chris
Chris posted this 2 weeks ago

Hello and Welcome KolinLCAtar,

A Chas Campbell Energy Machine:

 

 

 

How does it go:

But if you can, wheeewahe, get more energy out than you put in then you can create a perpetual motion machine, so you can build a machine that has an infinite amount of energy. And that's simply not fathomable.

 

Yet the Electron is exactly that? Yet using several hundred horse power we can lift many tons in our Cranes, and we have the Math to support this? Scientists USE the term "Generation" in "Generating" Electrical Energy, which implies EXACTLY Perpetual Motion Machines!

Generation:

   the production or creation of something: "methods of electricity generation"

synonyms:

  • creation
  • causing
  • causation
  • making
  • engendering
  • spawning
  • production
  • initiation
  • origination
  • inception
  • occasioning
  • prompting
  • kindling
  • triggering
  • inspiration

    "creativity is the generation of novel ideas"

 

Sorry, but this sort of advice from Genius's is just not right, not true and a completely uneducated way to approach Real Solid Science! The tone and scripting in the news clip, oozes un-educated foolishness!

Oh, David, Look a perpetual Motion Machine:

 

and several more:

 

Do you see the difference between Public Level Science and Military Level Science:

DARPA goes to great lengths to identify, recruit and support excellent program managers—extraordinary individuals who are at the top of their fields and are hungry for the opportunity to push the limits of their disciplines. These leaders, who are at the very heart of DARPA’s history of success, come from academia, industry and government agencies for limited stints, generally three to five years. That deadline fuels the signature DARPA urgency to achieve success in less time than might be considered reasonable in a conventional setting.

Ref: darpa.mil

 

The Brain Washed Minds in our Society, we call scientists, are the human races greatest dissability!

 

KolinLCAtar, It took me a little reading to get the ideas and concepts. I would like to have seen more in the first post, an introduction with a good clear direction. You can edit your posts, and the title to perhaps give this thread a more descriptive name?

Chas Campbell is a Genius, a true Humanitarian and is also very humble! I have great respect for Chas!

Good work, keep it up!

   Chris

  • Liked by
  • Wistiti
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

Thank you for the reply, I agree that Chas was a great inventor and he worked on most of the aspects just with products he had either lying around or that could be purchased locally.

one will notice that Chas {likely} did not modify the generator/ alternator which means it was probably an induction type as is common in Australia I believe he stated that it was requiring 3100 rpm

the theoretical problems for a single offset event would in that case be that there is no actuality event taking place.

if no actuality event into the 3D plane takes place then no offset mass is actualized in the 3D plane

 

One will note in the first image which has a end generation device it is at 450rpm which would mean that actuality of offset mass occurs on the shaft at that event, that would be an example of a single offset event {on the shaft with c and e pulleys} and then a single actuality event occurring on the shaft with the generator. {G}

i have also provided an example of multiple actuality events and multiple offset events, {see below} you may note that Chas device had multiple offset events and I’d have to look but most certainly one actuality event. 

 

 

I will review the first post to see if there is anything I can add, however My intentions is in describing a key force and that is ‘Tractor Vortex force’ a generalized force. 

 

Oh I can certainly simplify any of these outlined forces and mechanisms but that will be up to probably the actions of others {and so the game goes.}

theoretically we humans could start a ‘diy’ type site where we sell or give all sorts of mechanizims with a ‘Patreon’ type funding system, theoretically, the ‘sky’ is the limit I suppose. 

 

Regards

Kolin

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

But if you can, wheeewahe, get more energy out than you put in then you can create a perpetual motion machine, so you can build a machine that has an infinite amount of energy. And that's simply not fathomable.

I understand the contex that you have posted this but I would answer this by explaining the Two {2} incommensurable forces which act to offset mass to the 3D plane.

if the person could understand that perhaps with a physical experiment which has been conducted many times then they would understand that as a fixed observer {as I explained in these posts} in the 3D plane any 3D plane observer will see less mass, and that experiment is repeatable easily. 

I also explained the non localities of mass offset to the 3D plane so, an actuality of mass can be achieved by the means of deceleration As i described. 

The result is mass offset to the 3D plane and then actualized in the 3D plane in a non local manner.

Mass is actualized back to the 3D plane to ‘act’ or be put to action in the 3D plane. 

Chris posted this 2 weeks ago

Hi Kolin,

I was having a dig at the closed mindedness of some scientists, it was an openly directed comment, to try to expose those that are happy to play in the Mud.

Unlike us, the ones that choose to think on a higher level, with critique of the establishment's views, open views and new possibilities available to us...

It was my bad sense of humour, poking fun at those that cant think their way out of a Paper Bag.

Please ignore my humour, there is no need to reply to comments like those, its not directed at you.

   Chris

KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

Thanks Chris yes I understand, I was just explaining it also maybe to help further define the overall process for any other readers, so for example to explain it to an ‘ultra skeptic’ would perhaps help to define the overall outline, yes I saw that news peice a while ago, quite an ‘amusing blessing’ as such.

the ‘news’ will always bring in an ‘authoritative’ figure to ‘explain away’ this or that.

Speaking personally for a second...

its hard for me to explain exactly, in some {many } ways I look at those things and think about all the greatness that is there in that action of ‘ignorance’ because if it did not exist, just think, the opposition to it would also not exist. 

And thus in many respects our ‘reality’ would possibly zip out of existence in its present state.

so to some degrees if we look upon such ‘ignorance’ we might look at it as the ‘anchors’ of our present ‘reality’ 

 

A curious paradox 

  • Liked by
  • Vidura
  • Chris
Vidura posted this 2 weeks ago

Hey Kolin
Interesting subject, although i lack to understand the principal for the moment, as i can't imagine or visualize how it works. could it be related to this phenomenon:

Harold Aspden performed an experiment
known as the “Aspden Effect” which also indicates the presence of this medium (Aether- Space).
Harold made this discovery when running tests not related to this subject. He
started an electric motor which had a rotor mass of 800 grams and recorded the
fact that it took an energy input of 300 joules to bring it up to its running speed of
3,250 revolutions per minute when it was driving no load.
The rotor having a mass of 800 grams and spinning at that speed, its kinetic
energy together with that of the drive motor is no more than 15 joules, contrasting
with the excessive energy of 300 joules needed to get it rotating at that speed. If
the motor is left running for five minutes or more, and then switched off, it comes
to rest after a few seconds. But, the motor can then be started again (in the same
or opposite direction) and brought up to speed with only 30 joules provided that the time lapse between stopping
and restarting is no more than a minute or so. If there is a delay of several minutes, then an energy input of 300
joules is needed to get the rotor spinning again.
This is not a transient heating phenomenon. At all times the bearing housings feel cool and any heating in the
drive motor would imply an increase of resistance and a build-up of power to a higher steady state condition. The
experimental evidence is that there is something unseen, which is put into motion by the machine rotor. That
“something” has an effective mass density 20 times that of the rotor, but it is something that can move
independently and take several minutes to decay, while the motor comes to rest in a few seconds.
Two machines of different rotor size and composition reveal the phenomenon and tests indicate variations with
time of day and compass orientation of the spin axis. One machine, the one incorporating weaker magnets,
showed evidence of gaining strength magnetically during the tests which were repeated over a period of several
days. 

Quote from Patrick Kellys guide for free energy machines.

Regards VIDURA.

 

  • Liked by
  • Chris
KolinLCAtar posted this 2 weeks ago

Thank you for the reply, very interesting.

Well to help explain I am just outlining one of the two key forces that explains the confusion on the face of the professor in this {badly named in my opinion} video of some 25 million ‘views’. 

 

With regards to the other information I find it very interesting, being part ‘ultra skeptic’ or in other words just curious to learn things, I would like to see the same experiment conducted with only the physical attributes unrelated to the possible relative relationships between ‘rotor’ {and rotor materials} and ‘stator’ {and stator material} 

if that could then be defined one would have a clue as to what effect was occurring. 

However I guess you could say it is related to the effect because if the rotor has a mass and is spun up at rotational frequency then a Tractor vortex force will act on the rotor angular force to offset some of its mass.

however the effect is most prevalent and observable where it is in a larger circumference, larger mass balanced system such as in the video I linked here in this post. 

The reason for that is that the larger circumference means larger angular velocity which means there is more angular force and thus more Tractor force, thus more mass offset and a more ‘observable’ effect. 

 

Regards

Kolin

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Vidura
Marathonman posted this 2 weeks ago

Quote;

"The rotor having a mass of 800 grams and spinning at that speed, its kinetic
energy together with that of the drive motor is no more than 15 joules, contrasting
with the excessive energy of 300 joules needed to get it rotating at that speed. If
the motor is left running for five minutes or more, and then switched off, it comes
to rest after a few seconds. But, the motor can then be started again (in the same
or opposite direction) and brought up to speed with only 30 joules provided that the time lapse between stopping and restarting is no more than a minute or so."

AS Mr Bearden and i think Sparky Sweet,  possibly a few other have stated once the window to the Dirac sea of energy (Paul Dirac in 1930)  is open is does not close or stop abruptly unbeknownsed to most.  the flow continues for some time even when all traces of magnetism has vanished.  in my estimation and research magnetic and electric fields do NOT react at the same speed.  studies on the bench proved that a magnetic field retracts at a significant speed and is undetectable with meters. yet i do believe once the Energy momentum is achieved from the open window to the dirac sea this energy wave momentum continues to wind down as to say until the momentum ceases thus the window is closed.

since every atom of all material interacts with this dirac sea of energy "Us included"  i would suffice to say that a spinning vortex (Rotation) causes an amplification of this effect to exist ie..  the energy of the wave is amplified which has a slight cancellation in the three planes of Gravitation leaving one plane of gravitation which is the flow of energy from counterspace (Dirac Sea) into space. this wave or flow of energy does not abruptly stop thus winds down as does the spinning momentum of the object in question. thus the flow of energy continues to flow like that of a water hose which will continue to flow even though the faucet is closed.

another interesting aspect of the Dirac sea is when the energy of the wave (Momentum) exists according to the Dirac Sea equations,  implies that the number of particles cannot be conserved so not only does that imply a Motional Electric field in this process it implies it does NOT conform to the laws of energy conservation. Maxwell's original quatrains implicated this very same fact and it took Millions of J. P. Morgan's money to rid all traces of this fact from existence even though Heaviside was unbelievably gifted he was also greedy thus taking bribe money from good ole J.P. Morgan to rid all existence as did Lorenz.

So the basic take away to the moral of this story is YES ! more can be taken from a system then it takes to run it as long as the original excitation is not depleted in any way. 

Good thread, thinking outside of the box from standard status quo.

Regards,

Marathonman

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Vidura
Show More Posts

Please Support Us

All Visitors: since Nov 27 2018
Members Online:

No one online at the moment

The great Nikola Tesla:

Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe. This idea is not novel. Men have been led to it long ago go by instinct or reason. It has been expressed in many ways, and in many places, in the history of old and new. We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who drives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians, and in many hints and statements of thinkers of the present time. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.

Experiments With Alternate Currents Of High Potential And High Frequency (February 1892).

Weeks High Earners:
Your Support:

More than anything else, your contributions to this forum are most important! We are trying to actively get all visitors involved, but we do only have a few main contributors, which are very much appreciated! If you would like to see more pages with more detailed experiments and answers, perhaps a contribution of another type maybe possible:

Support Us (PayPal)

The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!

Support Us (Patreon)

Thank You So Much!

Close