Secret To Slithering Is In The Scales

Secret To Slithering Is In The ScalesTalk of the Nation, June 12, 2009 -- How do snakes slither on smooth surfaces? Mechanical engineer David Hu, of Georgia Tech, filmed snakes slithering up inclines, outfitted them in jackets and photographed them through jello to better understand snake locomotion. The researchers published the study in the early edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences this week.NPR's video that accompanies the article has some amazingly fun shots of snakes slithering in place on surfaces too smooth for them get any traction.

Topic by ewilhelm   |  last reply


how are magic tricks secrets revealed ? Answered

PLEASE LET ME KNOW HOW ARE MAGIC TRICKS SECRETS REVEALED.

Question by minootodiwala   |  last reply



Repulsine - the great mystery...

Even before the repulsine saw some attention during WW2 there were sightings of what we know call the classic UFO shape.Be it in Austria, Poland or other places in Europe, people reported weird disk like thing with a dome flying around.What leaked in images and documents after the war shoed that the repulsine looked basically identical to what people saw as a UFO in the sky over big parts of Europe.Then again, the repulsine appearently never made it a usable stage, same for most jet fighters at the time and still they flew around...If we now just take it for granted that actual test flights really happened back then you might wonder why we did not see any after the war anymore.For most critics it is a simple sign of facts and "confirms" that the replusine might have been a nice idea but never anything that really left the ground.As said, I often like to dig deeper and in this case the digging took far more years than what I planned on.I can not provide any solid proof for the following but I am sure even a sceptic will come to similar conclusions after reading it.Try to find some "eye witness" reports from people who saw the so called "Roswell UFO".Yes the one that made Area51 so secret and famous...Reports can be boiled down to some essential features of the hull, for those who saw it proof that it is alien.Three distinct round shpes on the underside, like you add the bottom of an egg to a round disk.Said disc of the bottom was also shaped like a wing, or the flying disk toys our kids like to play with.On the other side the shape grew up like a half shphere with an added cone or round top on it.On these area they claimed to have see engine outlets or similar and appearently the top cone was spinning in another direction than the rest of the UFO.Now I am no expert for Roswell but if I leave area and time out then I could have been fooled to think these people discribed exactly the same thing people saw a few year eariel flying over Europe.The Roswell UFO was not from another world, just stolen from the looser of a really bad war.What was seen was a working Repulsine, be it an original or something the US created from the 5 prototypes that disappeared after the war.Ha, ha, good one, then why don't we saw them flying after this anymore?Well, for starters it was a testflight gone wrong.Presumable it was planned to be limited to Area51 but the pilot lost control.Considering the Nazies appearently did their best to kill everyone involved in the project before the aliies arrived it is no big surprise.What that test flight would have shown is the impossible manouvers people already witnessed over Europe.90° or more turns at full speed instead of making a turn like a plane, sudden changes in alitude as well as accelleration on a level that makes even modern rockets blush.And if it really was the first bigger testflight they did it explains the big secrecy about the Roswell incident and what followed and created Area51 as we knew it.A "weapon" capable of these things would mean total dominance and options to impove planes and more.So why did they not even do that - or did they?The repulsine was created based on what we call today fringe- or pseudo- sience.If there is only one peroson, or a few that can even understand the claimed working principles that it can't be science as we know it.So, lets take a look what things were already heavily used in the repulsine that "we" claim to have developed or discovered decades later.Coanda effect.When air travels over a surface then it will follow the surface.You can try this with paper strips and blowing on them as well as a stream of water and some shaped objects.Long known but never found any real use until the military picked it up.For example air inlets were then developed to utilise the coanda effect.Remember how a lot of them these days look like a ducted fan housing?The round and slightly conical shape of the inlet will actually act like an airfoil and provide lift - of pulls forward in the direction of the air flow direction of the engine.I supercars we use it to create more downforce and better aerodynamics.Venturi effect.Again a very old one but funny enough also a major factor to make a jet engine work.Tesla turbine.In the Repulsine the rotating copper disks acted like a huge Tesla turbine by using a similar effect.The space between the disks got smaller and smaller towards the outer perimiter.Due to the fast rotation the molecules were accelerated and this created a partial vacuum.We use these principles today for specail vacuum pumps but also in military applications.Harmonics.Without harmonics and resonance the Repulsine would have been impossible.And at a first glance it seems we never made any use from that bit of the machine.Then why do we design exhaust systems in such a way than already the extractors ensure a pump like action and controlled backflow?The sound a good exhaust makes is also based on using the harmonics created by the explosions in the cylinders and expanding gasses.We learned that it is far more efficient to use harmonics and resonance in an exhaust system from somehwere ;)Plasma.The repulsine was said to have emitted a bright glow during certain movements or speeds.To create plasma we need a lot of energy, not so much however if the plasma is a by-product anyways.We learned that a high enough voltage differencial in a vacuum can create a nice plasma arc.From there things like analog TV monitors were created.But we never made anything that creates plasma for any use in an atmosphere.Well, unless you start to check supersonic rocket engines and other things.The working principle is very, very close here in some applications like the ramjet.Vortex energy.Today we see all vortex energy stuff as a free energy scam or at best a waste of time.But from the inlet to the outlet the entire Repulsine utilised what we now know as vortex energy, vortex math and so on.The air is twisted and spun around so many times that it is hard to keep track - but it always happened in a harmonic and resonant fashion.In some way this is implepemented in very expensive cars to keep the ventilation system almost silent even at full power.If you ever take an expensive car apart you might wonder why the air system is not as smooth and straight as you would have expected to get this silence ;)There is more but the list would become too long ;)So, if the repulsine was really that great then why was it taken apart to only utilise fractions of it in other things?If you have something really great that combines a lot of things then no one would suspect if you "developed or discovered" some of it in other projects.And to give you a very bad comparison for the other way around:If you know how to combine a petrol engine with some long blades then you could fly!I know, we did that already but you get the point.I can give you a motor and blades but that would not mean you could build a plane or even helicopter!At that time and still today something like a Repulsine would upset the "balance of power".If claims are correct then the engines of the repulsine were only required to provide the enrgy for directional changes or speed but it flew on "free energy" as the main engine system.In lame words like a jumbo jet that only needs a small engine for the hydraulics and electricity...Another big problem is the replication even if you would have a complete and working model to disect.You see most parts were brazed or welded as screw or rivets would have been problematic in certain areas.Other parts like the Kudo horn like intake systems would even today pose a challenge if you want to replicate them 100% correct.And if your understanding of science and physics greatly differs from those who originally created the thing...If your understanding tells you a dice has 6 sides (we all know that) but in my understanding it would have 16 then you would never understand how my dice rolls ;)Bringing true free energy of any form into this world is only allowed if someone can still make good money from it.Just check solar cells and wind generators - we all can have them but our providers make sure they have enough of them as well ;)Will we ever see a fully working Repulsine again?Of course !Some people like old cars, some collect old planes or old machines and tools.A great project for people in the right trades is always to build thier own little steam engine.So to say as a reminder of how it all started.Same will happen with the Repulsine as the first really utilised free energy machine the world had.The war and killings were not what really scared the world.This happened and will happen over and over again to various extends.Really scary was once certain people realised what might happen if over there the war would end with a victory and people would have time to develop for peaceful things instead.Without the war or this idiot Hitler a peaceful war would have taken over the world by storm.Those making sure we know nothing else but paying for our fuel and energy would have lost their monoply.Times change though...We destroyed our world with our needs for fossil fuels and electricity.What is left we destroy by chopping it down, digging it out or just by building new estates on prime farm land.People are now more desperate then ever to find ways to reduce their energy bills or enviromental impact.Otherwise Google wouldn't make billions on all the fake free energy videos out there.But what would it take to recreate the Repulsine?The person able to come up with the understanding of at least attempting to build one again would need to have certain qualifications and titles.He or she would hold a Nodel price for completing some of our known laws of physics or for finding some of the still missing ones.It would be a quite hard to understand and like person too, maybe even highly autistic.The person would also have an addiction like need to complete things, add the missing bits.And of course a totallydifferent understanding on how nature and the universe work.David T. from England is such a person, or at least the closest mankind can offer so far.He can see math in his head as shapes and images.Complex math problems appear to him like developing landscapes in high detail.He even learned to speak icelandic fluently within 7 days!!Imagine such a person would develop an interest in the old pioneers like Schuberger, Newman, Tesla and so on?Where we normal people fail to see any relevance or connection a guy like David would be able to literally see how all these inventions and ideas connect.He would be able to SEE the math behind it!Knowing how something was supposed to work and combining what is known through patents, drawing, videos or reports would enable such a person to make conclusions.For example where we might just see a nice pattern when we throw a stone into an undsturbed lake such a person would also already know and see the corresponding math the created the waves and why they were created exactly like this.Assuming David has no real interest in such things, then is it possible others already try?Sadly yes and even worse they do it with kids.Learning methods that are different can bring great results.For example while we use a calculator for big numbers some kids attend really strict and performance based classes to do this with an ancient abacus!After years of hard and often painful training they are able to it with a small abacus that only has a single row of discs.Shortly after they graduate to a virtual abacus - they only twitch their fingers in the same motions they would use on the real thing, but the disks and rods are all just visualised in their heads.That however is all meant as an improvement and the kids do it because they want to and not because they are forced to.Like learning to be a chess champion before even being old enough to work...In china however we have a very selective education program.Kids are not just trained slightly different to our kids but also closely monitored on their progress.As soon as one stands out for some skill it is subject to examination.Being well above average here means it is an opportunity for the kid and the parents - on paper at least.We in the western world would see it as a viscious circle though.Over the years china developed not only a better understanding of how these special kids brains actuall do their things but also how to create tests for this purpose.What looks like impossible or nonsense to most kids will trigger a scecific response and understand in those that are special.We would create something that allows parents to know early on where the kid has really good skills and what activities should be promoted.In china though the parents receive a nicer flat or some additional income while kids are send to a far away school.Again we would refer to such a school more as a boot camp.Discipline is at least on military levels, same is the punishment system.In most cases families are not reunited for many years, phone or even video calls only happen in the rare times when western TV crews are allowed a sneak peak.I just say: If a kid would see the parents often enough then it would not only know what to talk about but also be happy to talk to them - this however you won't see.It is like they talk to some distant uncle or such.What is really scary though is how these kids are trained to see their purpose and how important it is to be the best in what they do.Imagine you lost your kid at an early age and the only thing you got over the year was letters from the government saying how well it is doing and that you can be proud of it.Then it graduates and you are not even allowed to be there on that day...After that the kid is gone for good, you get a new flat and your proud kid supports you with some nice extra income.You don't get to know where it is working, what it is doing or if it might just be attending some university.By any standards these graduated kids can be seen as a great number of genius young people.Math, music, languages, science, you name it and they will have the experts aged below 20 for it.But what do they do once school is finnished and life starts?So far no reporter or family was able to figure it out.Means they don't appear in some high profile company, they don't start a successful business or teach at any public or private school.I leave it up to your imagination where thausands of kids find secret employment once they graduated....If, at least in theory we could be able to understand all these old technologies then why don't we at least try?Everyone has a goal, some desire a happy family and nice house, other need fame or just money to be happy.With that comes greed.You might have a really nice car but that does not mean you would give to some neighbour for a trip.Even if it just a nice rose garden, you might not want to share the views with anyone.This is true on all levels and we created a term for it "Need to know basis".If you just operate a press in a factory then you don't need to know when or what the next job is that comes for your press.You will know when it arrives and can check the documents attached.You don't need to know that your council is expanding and it is only seen as a courtesy to let you know on some notice board or in the local newspaper.And even our government does the same.What we do from the first days of our new baby we do on all other levels in the same way.What the baby does not need to know we won't tell or show.But we provide all the littly anklebiter needs to develop and be happy.Changing nappies, feeding, proving comfort when sick or having a nightmare.Later we teach language and other skills like walking.It goes on as you know...Humanity as a whole is like a little kid as well.If we would know all the little, dirty secrets then we would riot and go mad.Things that are of no concern are nothing we need to worry about, so we don't get to know them either.Knowing how build the latest fighter jets is seen as a thing that would give a possible enemy an advantage.Makes a lot of sense to everyone as these things might have to protect us one day.The questions that remain are:If humainty is a child, then how old are we now or when do we graduate?If there is a collection of secret and old knowledge then who owns and controls it?What would it take to force the release of all the things people actually created for a better world and not to be locked away?As funny as it might sound but one answer to all these questions would be to do nice orund trip in your Repulsine.Fly over ever single country in this world.Let their guided missle and what not chase you and once enough show then how quickly you can make a 180° turn to get behind them.So called unimportant countries might ignore you and the people only enjoy a nice show.Those powerful enough will fear you and think it was "the other side" showing their superiority.Once done with your round they all will have to realise there is a new power that is at the helm now: Knowledge and understanding.No more secrets, a repulsine for everyone who wants the plans to build one.A new world would start.Ever thought about that when wondering why all these "Aliens" we see in their ships in our skies never land to say hello ? ;)Even if they would be Aliens and not just some human pilot in some experimental craft:Shouldn't this demonstration of absolute power and control without any violence tell us something?The Repulsine need to come back to life to end all this UFO nonsense and Alien theories out there.You hear the sounds, see the ligh show and impossible abilities.And suddenly most if not all UFO sightings would have a common factor again.Just because the Repulsine is claimed to be lost and that it never actually worked despite film evidence showing the opposite does not mean there is no one using the technology.A working Repulsine available to everyone would also kill the doubt on so many other old inventors and "fringe" scientists.Science and physics would need to be redifined as would be able to find a lot of missing links.I know there is not only a lot of people out there trying to get what they can about the Repulsine but also that there are others who try to prevent this.You have a really easy time getting permission examine some old and histrically important artefact from a museum than getting just a hands on approch for what remains of the Repulsine in various places.Not even decent 3D scans will be allowed.Anything like just getting a tiny pipe cam inside is rejected with the excuse it could cause damage.If the thing is a hoax and never worked then why would it be so important to never touch or move it? ;)I recently got word that two of the remaining Repulsine "artefacts" were examined by the same group of "scientists".This happened in the late 80's and said scientists were claimed to have had acces to a collection of spare parts for the original Repulsine that was lost after the war.A private collector was also mentioned who denied all access but what he had in a secure storage facility appearently disappeared shortly after his refusal.Putting all the dots and hints together it would mean that someone in the late 80's was able to get literally everything that is left of the project in his hands.Those who claimed to have seen these scientists working on the Repulsine leftovers claim they used top notch technology to do so, including 3D scanners - and those were basically imossible to get back then for any uni out there...The laptops used were said to use touchscreens and were connected to all sorts of equippment.And they did it in almost total silence, like a group who studied a performance many times and knew exactly what do when and where without the need of many words.Professional in examining something unknown all all possible levels.I was unable to get any information on these scientist or who they worked for.But if you are one of them and readin this then I would love to hear from you!

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


The Moon - What do we really know and what is possible?

If we look up then seeing the moon is the most normal thing to us there is in the sky.But did you ever wonder how it actually got there? ;)Theories are out there by the lot, including those from real scientists.One of the most common is that it all started by catching the thing and that all was perfect at the time.Over time the orbit then stabilized.Other theories include that formed when our planet formed..What they all lack is what is common and true for all other moond out there: These rotate.According to science an object the size of our moon would need to rotate to maintain a stable orbit.No one told this to our moon, so it just stays in a stable orbit anyway.The only other accepted theory, that funny enough never mentioned OUR moon, is that the center of mass must be facing the orbiting planet.Now theories can run and wild if you let schientifically people loose on a subject.Official NASA data obtained by monitoring equippment on the moon supports the theory of the center of gravity.You see, sesmometers recorded "moon quakes" but also the impact of burnt rocket stages - the later were dropped on purpose.At first everyone agreed the equippment must be faulty but going through it again and again confirmed all works fine.So what got them so exited that was never officially made public?You see, every thing with suffient mass will create a sesmic shock on impact.On earth we can located the source of an earthquake or even explosion quite accurately.Same happened on the moon only with one difference to earth.Every impact caused a ringing effect.Like a bell, the soundwaves and shockwaves traveled through the moon for very long times.An early explanation was that the moon is made from really hard rock or that it might even have a metal core.This was rendered useless once the actual mass was calculated and it turned out the moon would rip us apart while spinning around us.The term "hollow moon" was born.Another interesting thing happens when you try to track down what equippment was left on the moon during which specific mission.Everything up there must have been installed at some stage.For some things though it seems there is no record when or where exactly something was left up there.Then there is the thing with the interviews...If you check the fuzz about the first moon landing then back then you couldn't help yourself but got exited as well.None of the three astronauts however appeared to be at least a little bit exited about going where no man has gone before.Somehow like visiting Iceland for the first time only to realise someone was there before you already.But it was the moon, not some easy to reach island...And while up there we did not see any exitement either, like fully staged and planned ahead.Like a not so 100% school rehersal.Claims that it was a fake and actually filmed in some studio have been verified to be false - they really were up there.After they came back two went silent and refused any interviews about the moon.All three though never spoke about anything we did not see on "live TV"...All the missing segments, the drop outs, the silence during communications...The money...Apart from the Pentagon making a disappearing act of 6Billion US, the already planned and staged moon missions were cancelled with no valid reason at all.One mission already ready to go to the launch pad, crew fully trained and briefed.Two more ready for final assembly.Official reason back then was "We have been there, it is time to explore new things."Almost the same statement was made by Obama a few weeks after he claimed "We will go up there again!".If you take away the costs for the abandoned missions then the money blown up to the moon has a huge difference to what can be tracked back.The lost sum equals out to about 8 more moon missions plus tons of state of the art equippment (back at the time it was state of the art).If you add what the Pentagon lost we are close to 15 more missions.The now...A few years back a lot of previously declared top secret documents have been released to the public.What was a good idea however turned out to be a bit too much.Quite a few documents were included that provide missing links to "incidents, missions, money spent"...Within these piles were documents indicating that space missions of the same extend as the much later moon missions were made.Same rockets, similar crafts, same requirements for water, food and oxygen, some though with just payloads of oxygen and water.Mind you though the documents speak from proposed options and not planned missions.And none of them had any exploration within it, just deliveries if you don't mind the comparison.Those documents about the ringing of the moon and how this would impact on the things we assumed to know about the moon were in there as well.What is really interesting though is what came back from the moon.None of it actually indicate that there is suffient ressources up there to justify mining.Funny enough exactly is planned on a military style.Seems fair enough considering the military can provide the best people for such a hard job.Some normal miner might have no problems getting under ground every day but knowing he is on the moon and might never make it back is another.With all the probing done that we know of you would assume the planned mining operations would be in an area rich in minerals, metals or at least something to generate fuel or oxygen.But no, it is planned to happen "on the dark side" and in an area that appearently was never explored in other ways then taking a few blurry pics while flying around the moon.However, both Russia and China claim to have been very close to this area long before details about the mining became public.And that brings us back to the past and what astromauts stated or to be precise refused to confirm or deny.In some videos we can see movements in the background.In several adio stream we hear the comments to what happens in the videos.If there is light moving around then it does not matter that is blue.You just wonder what it is and where it might have come from.Imagine the surprise if then in other videos you hear things like that the lights are back or that steam comes out of the moon like a gysir.There were official explanations for the first sightings made by the normal people when watching those videos on the NASA websites.Soon after the videos disappeared from the servers.Copies were made by the curious and quite a few videos were identified later to have contained "sightings" as well.Some even show what appears to flying machines with great manouverbilities.And if you take the high point of the happenings then it is also the same time when it was decided that we actually have no real interest in the moon.Astromauts later denied to have ever made any comments like that they are being followed or "escorted" by another craft.And the same Astromauts many years later still refuse to deny or confirm that what we could see and hear during their mission videos actually happened.Don't get me wrong but if the deny it then it just means we all saw some refections or such things.If the confirm it then we know something was out there with them.Doing neither usually means what we saw is ture enough to deny any knowledge about more details.Why then the sudden interest?Trump wants to get up there, military mining, private companies not to forget China.If there is nothing at all up there then why would they all spent money that could provide a much better living for those with low incomes?Even if it would be just for new schools and hospitals the money would be better spent if we trust the official claims about what is up there.The not so official claims....We already know NASA does not want to come with an official explanation why the moon sounds and reacts as if it would be hollow.Same for any video, audio or picture evidence indication there is sturctures on the moon or activities.Here is some of things that other people of great knowledge and with nice degrees under the belt say could, might or even is true about the moon.1. We have no evidence that the moon was always there, only what we have in record throughout history.Some claim the moon would be an artificially created structure.Indications of techonlogically highly advanced civilisations before us are there.And mining out a tiny planet and placing it in earths orbit is not far fetched if you consider higher technology levels than what we currently (officially) have.2. The satellite claim.Like the Death Star our moon could be an artifical satellite placed there for a purpose.What speaks for that theory is the impact craters on the moon.If it was never spinning or better rotating around all axis then a lot them would have been impossible.A crater always shows to some extend the direction of the impact.And on the moon they all apear to be direct and straight hits only.And even at some proper angle that against physics did not create a corresponding crater: Our plant would have been in the way.Officially it is claimed though that there would not be much of a directional crater because of the missing atmosphere and all debris settling evenly.Debris however does not explain the deformation from an impact at an angle.The satellite claim would also explain the missing depth in the craters.By the size of the bigger ones the crater should be much deeper and as said show some direction.If however the rocky surface landed there over time or is just the remaining natural hull then the craters could no go deeper.No advanced civilisation would design a stationary satellite that get a hole as soon as some big space rock hits it...3. Undocumented missions.If claims are true then we have been up there a lot more times than what our history lessons tell us.Tiny probes to analyse things, send data and so on are a thing not the the USA did.If you explain the reason for collecting seismic data by wanting to document an impact of an astroid then it is a joke.Sure it would be possible but what could we learn from the data?Nothing unless you consider that in some unoffial missions drilling was attempted on the moon.Sample collection to evaluate what is in the ground of use for future missions.Some documents now claim that all these attempts ended prematurely.Drills failed or broke, drill heads failed to go deeper and upon inspection were totally worn out.And all seemed to have happend at around the same depth.Although there is no atmosphere on the moon - if you stand on it you would be able to feel vibrations of the surface.Something astronauts would have felt during the drilling.And you can feel the difference between a vibration ending by stoping the drill and one that keeps going for a long time after...The dark side is visible in quite a few school books.Looks like the front with the brightness corrected just with different craters.Ever bothered to scan these pictures in and use some software to find matches to craters on the front of the moon ? ;)Anyways, those images show us the moon as near perfect sphere.What they don't show is how the images were actually made.They certainly did not use massive search lights from orbit to provide light for cameras.Means other sources were used, like IR, Radar, Microwaves and so on.Like we found the ruins of old civilisations by using satellites that can "see" through the forest and soil.And with that it would certainly be impossible to create such a nice and detailed image like we get from the front side.If some is edited, then why not all of it...And if all those missions we don't really know about also landed on the dark side it would explain a lot of things.All sightings seem to have disappeared to the dark side.And all leaked informations about previous missions before our first landing idicate the interest in the dark side was actually huge.They all ended though with one mission report claiming to have spotted lights on the dark side.Moving and stationary and when trying to get a better look by adjusting the orbit for the next round those lights were all gone.But audio recording indicate that from that moment on the astronauts were no longer alone and followed until turning back to earth.Several attempts seem to have been made to land near sightings on the dark side.Those where the astronauts returned home the never were the same again.Documents claim long treatment in mental facilites or suicide.The official missions appearntly started with the backstory of exploring.Some now claim it was attempt for a peaceful presence that still was not tolerated.4. Stories from involved companies.Even if NASA builds a craft themself they still need the corresponding supplies.And for a lot of things they are made outside by independent companies and contractors.Trying to track down early space mission again seems to confirm all claims about previous missions.The amount of materials provided would otherwise mean NASA actually crashed the majority of things right after take off without anyone noticing.5. Launches...So far all claims about previous moon missions or just secret ones were denied.I call this "plausible deniability".In all statements it is refered to the official launch sites.Things like being in public view and so on.What is not that commonly known is that there were a lot of capable launch sites available.After all big rockets have been tested in secrecy since we had the first.The claimed landing of the chinese started a big conundrum.At first the US claimed it never happened because there was no rocket that went up.Images prived by the chinese however clearly indicated the opposite.Not much later it was noticed that a few launches might have been misinterpreted as missle tests....What does that really mean?Quite simple: The surveillance is not perfect if the other side insists that it happened.The plausible deniablity is gone.If the US was "forced" to confrim they actually noticed the launches then it also means the chinese claims about the US doing the same could be true as well.And wasn't it a very important thing during the cold war to know when, where and why the other side launched anything?The silent agreement not to go up there again was broken many times...And although most if not all of these mission ended in orbit only it makes you wonder.What would be big deal even if all claims and conspiracies would be true?A hollow moon would defy what we know about how the universe works.With that it would also contradict some of solid laws of physics.So we need(ed) proof.Assuming we had that for a long time already then it leaves the big question of why it is hollow.Natural or artificial.Nothing natural would make sense so we investigate further.And if people still claim that they can use their little equippment to every now and then hear transmissions from the moon...Sure some things up there transmit data all the time but they do so on common frequencies and not in a range that is and never was used for long distance communications.The interest in the mon came back with our modern technology.We have watches with more computer power than what was used for the old moon missions.Materials and manufacturing methods that provide much safe crafts and space suits with a fraction of the weight of old designs.And we have new means of taking more or less limited energy up with us...We are prepared so to say.No matter what really is up there, no matter if it natural or artificial, just the fact that the moon is hollow changes our views on a lot of things....What do you think would be the best explanation for the data showing the moon rings like a bell?

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


How to redirect Bicycle chain?

I'm working on a [secret] project that involves a recumbent bicycle. I'm going to have to use a long, tandem bike chain. The problem is, the pedals are going to be mounted at approximately a 32-43 degree angle to the rear axle, with an obstruction (me and my seat) in the way. Is there a way to some how redirect the chain, so that it would go under me? Thanks!

Topic by Bran   |  last reply


Possible explanation of how Florida's Coral Castle was built.

Edward Leedskalnin built a coral castle in the state of Florida by himself. Somehow he could move stone monoliths. He died without ever divulging his secrets. Years later a man showed how primitive forgotten techniques could have been used in order to build huge monuments in stone. 

Topic by blkhawk   |  last reply


Why doesn't Instructables have a hidden compartments contest? Answered

Instructables shows people how to do everything; except make secret compartments.  They should have a contest for it to see which one is the best, and blah blah blah, they get prizes, blah blah blah, you should all know the drill for contests by now. Afternote: Hey thanks guys!! Hopefully soon there will be a hidden compartments contest.  Can't wait to see the results!

Question by whiskrs   |  last reply


How to build a strongbox for a video camera?

I guess that is what I want to build. I basically need a box to hold a camera and a GPS that can also withstand a lot of damage. It would probably be a lot like the rigs they use to send cameras up with weather balloons.  Any recommendations for materials? I can build it well enough, however, I don't know what can take damage and protect the electronics at the same time.

Question by Rockerx   |  last reply


Chmistry buffs: IR invisible ink?

Hey all science-type people, I've seen invisible ink pens and things for sale that contain ink that show up in infrared, instead of ultraviolet light.  That's really appealing to me for a number of project ideas because digital cameras pick up IR exteremely well (especially with their filter removed). The problem is I think I'm going to want a lot of it, and those dumb little pens are crazily expensive. So any of you chemistry buffs out there have a secret formula I could make?  I'd prefer something invisible in regular light, but hey, whatever you've got. :) Thanks in advance for your help, -Kurt

Topic by PS118   |  last reply


The $2500 Car

From a NYTimes article, a story about a new $2500 car hitting the market in India. It won't pass US or European emissions or safety standards, but still- how neat is this?For Tata Motors of India, which will introduce its ultra-cheap car on Thursday, the question was, what could it take out?The company has kept its new vehicle under wraps, but interviews with suppliers and others involved in its construction reveal some of its cost-cutting engineering secrets — including a hollowed out steering-wheel shaft, a trunk with space for a briefcase and a rear-mounted engine not much more powerful than a high-end riding mower.The upside is a car expected to retail for as little as the equivalent of $2,500, or about the price of the optional DVD player on the Lexus LX 470 sport utility vehicle.The model appearing on Thursday has no radio, no power steering, no power windows, no air-conditioning and one windshield wiper instead of two, according to suppliers and Tata’s own statements. Bucking prevailing habits, the car lacks a tachometer and uses an analog rather than digital speedometer,

Topic by canida   |  last reply


Advice from Brian Jewett- rusting a bathroom counter top to look like one on the website!?

Hi, I'm going to rust a 5' by 2' carbon steel countertop for my rustic, ranch bathroom.  It's being fabricated and will be ground off and ready to go.  I've got copper wire in some muriatic acid, I have a sack of rock salt and vinegar.  I've heard I can put the mixture on cardboard, and apply it that way.  (I'm being very careful....) First, I live in Wyoming.  Should I do this in a heated mudroom (16' X 16') or is this strictly outdoor only?  On a sunny day? it freezes at night. I'd like to finish this bathroom before a busy summer- Anyway, I've seen on the 'net I can get an overall rusty appearance.  Without telling too many trade secrets, can you advise me on achieving some "artistic" elements?  I'm not going in the business- I plan on using the penetrol and then sealing with spray poly (?).  I guess if this isn't going to work for a bathroom, someone should shoot me now. Thanks, the "sheepherdess"

Question by sheepherderes   |  last reply


Vibration feeder anyone?

I am planning on building some sorting rig.Right now I am quite keen to include a vibration feeder system.You know, like the stff used to transport grain, sweets or aling small parts that run up on the inside of a bowl to come out perfectly aligned.I serviced these systems in the past but never put too much concern into the actual workings.The theory is quite simple.One or two vibrators cause the transported media to move.This works like a sawtooth wave.Slowly up and into the right direction, quickly back to where it started.Adjusting the frequency to change the speed or adjusting the amplitudes to match the weights and other properties of the media is easy - in a properly designed system.I tried to find some easy to understand information on the relations between actuator direction and media direction in relation to the trasport systems shape and dimensions but only got extreme complex stuff.In my small scale tests using simple vibration speakers and a frequency generator I had to relise that it is quite hard to find a proper way of mounting the system.To soft and it is just rattling around, too hard and you need to crank the amp to max to get any action.Orientation and angle of these mounts also affect the direction and amplitude of the swing caused by the vibrations.Straight linear I can do, although still not perfect but anything like these feeder bowls only gives me nice vibrations but no movement.Are there any suitable hobby projects on the web or here?And decent info on the basic design criteria for those feeder systems that are not closely guarded company secrets?

Question by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Killerjackalope's social experiment results

Well I've been conducting a secret social experiment using shopping bags and the environmental topics everywhere as a media for this to happen. Basically my plan was to see if I could affect the decision of whether or not to take a bag when it's not completely necessary, to change the course of decision I used different phrases and tried to get a more accurate measure by choosing the same people that come in for milk or bread each day.The phrases are:'Would you like a bag?''Do you want a bag''Do you need a bag?''Wee bag there, mate?'Bag?'The results were really quite interesting, the one putting emphasis on need (very subtlety) reduced bag takings by over half in a day, whereas 'Wee bag there, mate?' produced a very high bag taking day because it detracts from the bags impact as an object. The other things I found was that it's actually possible to control some customers bag taking completely, there's a customer that comes in every day to get milk and I have managed to control his bag taking with about a 95% success rate, so shopkeepers unite and we can eradicate unnecessary bag taking, thereby reducing the majority of plastic bags that end up in the street and ocean, landfills are another story, thankfully my stores bags are fully biodegradable...What do you make of all this, and is it possibly a bit much power to give to a shop worker...On another note I have curtailed the efforts of one customer I know as the bag thief, he used to take five or six for various uses, through gentle shame jibing he's now down to one.

Topic by killerjackalope   |  last reply


The ultimate challenge?

There are always good contests available for those keen on competing, but what about a real challenge that might run for many months? I am talking about rediscovering ancient technologies and ways of creating things. We have a lot of evidence that is in massive contrast to what archeologists want to make us believe. Be it the way the pyramids were build or just in what timeframe, the use of technologies thought to be impossible at that time or just the knowledge of things like star constellations that are not not visisble to the naked eye. In a lot of areas it seems not only archeologists but also some "secret powers" try to put a hold on discovering what was really possible thausands or maybe even millions of years ago. Things like the knowledge of distand star systems that are invisible to the naked eye might never find a suitable explanation. But what about tools and technologies used to create stonework that is hard if not impossible to create with our modern tools and technologies? I dare everyone to participate in the impossible! We know thausands of years ago milling, drilling, machining and lathe work was done but we have no real clue how it was done. At times when the rest of human kind was happy using stone tools and otherwise just hunt and gather for food some areas saw an explosion in technology. Within less than a few hundert years some builders in Egypt went from simple and explainable works to stuff impossible to do in today times. Same for India, the UK and the american continent. No hardend steel tools were ever found, no machines, no evidence on the how to, just the perfect work. Here is the challenge I propose: Come up with: 1. A way to cut or drill granite and harder rocks without modern tools or tech and still do it faster and more accurate. 2. A way to match hard rocks to each other with a precision down to less than a mm - as shown in many ancient buildings preferably on a big scale. 3. A way to create delicate carvings in hard rocks, things like hollow heads less than 5cm in size or cravings with spaces of less than 3mm wide and several cm deep - as shown in many India sculptures. 4. A way to build a lathe capable or turning several tons of steel with an accuracy better than half a mm and without electrical or combustion engines. 5. A feasable way to transport and accurately position several tons of stone - again without electricity or combustion engines. 6. A way to create sculptures with an accuracy shown by the ancient Egyptian ones, meaning perfection... 7. .... I could go on but I guess you get the picture ;) The solutions could be as simple as using sound and vibration or as complicated as finding a way to create tools hard and durable enough to proove the archeologists are right after all. And before you cry out that it is impossible: Consider the evidence! We know it was done but we don't know how, so let's show the world how we at Instructables solve the problems noone can explain ;) I can't offer any real contest, prices or such but maybe someone is reading this and willing to provide the base and soem prices?

Topic by Downunder35m 


A week in a proper car.

I've been driving Womble for exactly a week now, and some things have occurred to me. I thought I'd share them, in no particular order.I enjoy driving again.Because I'm driving, not steering. No power steering, no servo brakes, I am in touch with what the car is doing every second I'm driving. I do something, and I get instant feedback. I'm suddenly redeveloping all the good driving habits I used to have - looking further ahead and watching traffic more, correct hand-position on the wheel, feeding the wheel through my hands as I turn, slowing with gears before brakes.It's a cliche, but it's seat-of-the-pants driving.I drove Kitewife's Focus a couple of days ago, it was a disaster! Taps the brakes, do an emergency stop - steer with two fingers, weave all over the road. There's no feedback, nothing to tell me by feel exactly how much braking I'm doing, or how fast the wheels are turning. I had to look at the dials to check the speed and watch the revs before changing gear.Modern cars, I have decided, are only one step short of video games.Maybe that's part of the reason for the rise in roadrage?There's no need to take pride or care, because the car does it all for you. Spend enough money, and the only thing that will kill you is if you drive at a tree. Even that may not be possible with radar-triggered brakes soon to become more common.If you have abdicated all responsibility for your safety to a mindless mechanism, who do you blame if something goes wrong? Where do you direct your anger? The only target left is the other driver.I seem to have joined a sub-culture.I'm not the only driver of a proper Mini in my area. I pass two or three every day. Amongst others, I've seen a white one, striped pink, with a bubbly blonde driving. I've seen a 70s Traveller in immaculate condition. Several jobbing Minis, in every-day-driving state, and a Mini wedged full of teenage lads, fully kitted out for racing, roll-cage and all.Every single one of them waved, flashed their lights or otherwise said "hello" as we passed. I have never seen drivers of other kinds of car do that. It's pretty good, getting a friendly wave from a stranger. It lifts your day, puts a smile on your face.It's like we share a happy secret. Minis attract comment more than cars that cost fifty times as much.If people see a Ferrari in the car park, they might nudge each other and make admiring comments, but if they see a Mini, they come over, say hello. On Saturday, a huge hairy rocker, returning to his big Japanese family car, children in tow, left his children in his car, and came over for a chat about the surprisingly roomy interior of my Mini, and an idle chat about the type of engine (single-point injection, if you're wondering).People might wish they could afford a supercar, but they are genuinely jealous of people who actually own a proper Mini.Everybody has a Mini in their closet.I'm not really a petrol head, and I don't work with petrol heads, but suddenly everybody wants to talk about cars. They all seem to have had an adventure in a Mini, their own or a friend's. Half of them regret having sold their Mini years ago.OK, so the old Minis don't meet modern safety rules. They're slow, utterly lacking in luxuries (my heater has two settings - on or off), but if somebody started building them new, using the original molds for the panels and frames (they still exist), and charged five or six thousand pounds a pop, they would make an absolute fortune.

Topic by Kiteman   |  last reply


Did you see a UFO or not?

I could not sleep so I went for a little bike ride to get some fresh air and burn unwanted kalories. To my surprise one really bright "star" began to move and because it was night my conclusion was a plane at low altitude or making a turn. After a while however it looked more like this "light" is still coming towards me and if you know planes this would mean it should have crashed already - which it did not. But it definately came closer and once almost over me I also realise it does not move in a straight line, more in a slight zick-zack movement. Biggest surprise was the shape I could make out, definately no plane that I know of! To me it looked like a cigar shape which was much wider in diameter on one end. Can't say front or back as the flight patter did not incate anything like this. Any directional changes happened without the shape changing direction, if it moved to the right than without turning - it just "slided" while the long shape kept pointing in the same direction as before. Took about 10 pics on my phone but even after checking on the computer there is only black on a black background, not even a single star visible :( Just to get me right here - I do believe in other planets out there having intelligent live but I do not think intelligent "creatures" from outer space would come to visit us. The term UFO means unidentified flying object and nothing else was there that I saw - just something that makes no sense in terms of following known laws of physics flying through the night sky. Would not even bother to write about it if any of what I saw would make sense to me. There was no sound, which was really strange. IMHO the craft was at an altitude between 1000 and 3000m not higher. It also seemed the light I thought came from a plane was coming directly from the fuselage or hull and not a lamp, looked like the outer surface was glowing. But seeing something moving quite fast over your head with no sound at all is just weird.... The zick zack movement was strange too but when the craft took off to disappear into the night it was like instand accelleration. Within an instand the light went really bright and was gone over the horizon - never seen anything move that fast! I know there are lots of secret military aircrafts out there, same for people playing with drones but this was much bigger, would say at least 400m long. Even if the altitude would have been much lower in reality than what I thought it would have been huge - and totally silent. Spent the last hour or so checking some videos on Youtube but nothing really matched what I saw. So my question(s): Did you ever see something moving with impossible speeds, making impossible turns or accelerating like no tomorrow in the sky? And if so: Did it look like an oversized cigar, bigger on one end and with a "glowing body"? Do you know of any prototype craft being the size of at least two Airbusses in lenght that can fly without making any noise at all? Disclaimer: I do realise what sort of "crap" I am writing here. I also acknowledge that I don't know everything that can fly. I do not think that I saw an UFO in terms of being "out of this world". Yes, I know my level of insanity ;) I do not claim to have seen or being abducted by aliens either ;) And no, I have neither been blind drunk nor on drugs when I saw this ;)

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Very old shielding materials and techniques for permanent magnets and resulting possibilities

Forromagnetic meterials are not just called that for no reason.It comes from ferrous - iron.Iron has the highest permeability at normal temperatures.That means a magnet is attracted to it very strongly.We utilise this for transformer cores, the stuff inside a relay and the moving latch of the relay itself.Like current from an electrical system magnetic fields like to take the easiest route possible.Air is a very bad medium, so any iron close by will be prefered even if it is at a slight distance.You can check with a magnet, a steel bar and some iron shavings - please cover the are with plate first ;)Slightly less known is the option to also guide and extend the magnetic field this way.If you check how far the magnetic field of a magnet reaches and note that distance,then you can add some steel bars or rods at the poles - the field will extend through the metal.The most powerful example of this are the shielded magnets used for hooks or speakers.Except for a tiny area the entire magnetic flux goes through the metal.So in this lefover area the magnetic flux density will my many times greater than what the magnet alone would be able to.What most people don't know is that magnets also interact with other magnets in terms of their fields changing and distorting.The Halbach Array is a good example of this.Seen as a single magnet the array would have one weak and one strong side instead of even strenght for both.Wherever magnetic fields change a conductor can produce electricity or current.This in return causes an electromagnetic field that opposes the one from the magnets.Just drop a magnet through a copper or aluminium pipe ;)Since these distortions are widely unknow to the hobby tinkerer mistakes can happen ;)In the early days of exploring science some people already knew about shielding.And they also knew that certain metals have certain properties.Where it is quite hard to create a good coil from steel wire, copper works fine as it is not magnetic.What would then a copper shielding do?If you have two moving magnets with only a tiny gap then the resulting field distortions are quite huge.A copper shield around the magnet like a pipe would then react to these changes and also create a megnetic field that works in relation to the enclosed magnet.In simple terms it means the shield would let the magnet appear weaker or stronger depending on the field change.A quite old document I found gave some hints on how people thought in different directions back then.It was in regards to the design of a magnet motor by the way.Here various magnets were shielded in tube made of a copper-bismuth-alumium alloy.These tubes were then electrically connected so it created a single loop conductor.The claim was that the resulting electromagnetic field of this ring would drive the fields of the enclosed magnets sideways out of alignment.Like bending straight pastic tubes sideways.This "pulsating" would always happen when the magnetic binding forces reach max and so basically drastically weaken this binding effect.Another document talks about a "magnetised brass rod".A holes of the rod diameter is drilled through a block magnet.Not from north to south but through the middle where the flux is greatest.The claim here was that if that rod rotates fast enough a very low voltage with a very high current will be generated.Sounds easy and interesting enough that I might have to test one myself one day.The best one however is what I consider a hoax or being as good as Starlite.Someone back in 1908 claimed to have created a material the reflects magnetic fields.In lame man's terms it would be like an insulator around some electrical wire.The claim and some pics showed it, was that no magnetic field can pass the material.Or to be correct only a tiny fraction of what would be possible through air.A small magnet inside a longer tube of this material would create almost the same attraction to steel at the tubes ends as on the magnet itself.Measurements showed the field strength would be almost equal to a long mangnet of the same field strength.Imagine guiding the field of a big and powerful magnet through a tube around some corners or other magnets and then end in just a tiny hole for the entire flux...Too bad he never shared his secret formula to anyone knows to mankind.Isolation...Imagine you have an array of changing magnetic fields and quite strong magnets.Then you might face the problem that your focus on the "working" end neglected the other end of the magnet (stack).Providing some iron core material will keep thes field lines contained and away from interfering with your setup ;)But it also allows to use te otherwise unused end of your magnets more directly.For example by guiding to another magnet to affect its field strenght ;)Placing a sheet or steel between two magnets in a setup provides a "shared pole" so to say.If you have a north and south pole on a rotor at a distance of 5mm then a sheet of steel between will drastically weaken the strenght and reach of this combined field.It is like pulling the arch between the magnets down to make it more flat.And at and an angle the resulting field will also be slightly angled ;)Capping...When I first encounter this many years ago I couldn't really make sense of it.Quite complex..If you check the magnetic field lines with iron filings or similar then you notice how they go in a rounded manner from pole to pole.This is because the single field lines are of equal polarity and will dirve apart like opposing magnets.By capping the ends of a magnet you provide a short.Instead of diverting out like mad they will follow the cap and create very intersting magnetic field in return.If both poles are capped it is like pressing the magnet flat but without having a field on top of the oles - only aorund the center part.For this the thickness much must match what is required for the flux density.As a rule of thumb: if the end is still very magnetic then it is not enough material tickness ;)Interacting fields in a tube...This one is quite old too and seemed to have found no usable inventions apart from simple magnetic spring replacement systems.But it gave me some clues about Tesla "earthquake machine" ;)If you place a magnet in a tube and at it's ends magnets with opposing fields to the one inside then you can fix this magnet in place.Push one magnet deeper and the distance from the inner magnet to the other end will shrink the same amount.In this old paper two coils were around the pipe with the inner magnet between them.In this gap and at about the same width as the magnets length another coil was placed.Violent shaking would then create electrical energy at much higher level then modern shaker torches.In return an AC current on the outer coils would cause the inner magnet to move back and forth to create electricity in the center coil.According to the paper possible uses include: core less transformer, measuring minute changes in AC voltages, providing free power from a running motor...The last one had me stumbled for a very long time.Until I considered a different configuration.The whole thing is basically a linear DC motor - with correct timing of course.And in some motors we use permanent magnets.I am starting to wonder what would happen if we would design a rotor magnet like this?The running motor would be subject to constant field changes that affect the rotor.And a normal motor is always "even".By using four magnets instead of one we can push the field really flat.This means the area where the coil would operate (about 1/5 of the magnets area) will have a much stronger field.The resulting torque should be higher by about 25% !!Even a simple two coil model setup should show a significant increase in performance here.Timing is critical here but I tried some calculations based on 8 poles and the required "on times" for the coils.In a standard motor configuration with a single rotor magnet the coil is active for about 12° of the rotation.With a 4 magnet configuration this "on time" can be reduced to under 8° of the rotation to get the same amount of torque.An energy reduction of about 4% if you neglect losses and only think in time.If you think in terms like impulse energy then we are talking of about 15% !Shorter on time but still much higher flux density overall than for the long standard timings.Going the long run now:If you check how most DC motors work then you realise soon that for most one rule seems to followed.Only use one coild pair at a time.This is quite contradictive if you consider the geometry and options.A dual commutator would allow to use a second coil pair with a field OPPOSING the magnets instead of being attracted to it.After all: on you bike you pedal with both legs and not just one...And if you do it professionally then yu do the same as I suggested for the motor - you use the up pull of your legs as well.Doing it brushless only requires amodified h-bridge desing to drive the second coil pair at the right timing.Some will now say that it requires twice the energy, I say that for the same motor size your get twice the torque!Just imagine what that means in possible weight reduction for a motor - or its size to deliver the same torque at the same power levels when a normal motor is used ;)The more poles the more complicate the precise timing but no big deal really with modern electronics.Can it be improved even further?I though long and hard about that one until I considered EMF.A DC motor produces a lot of it when the elecromagnetic field collapses in the the coils.We do not utilise this energy...There is a tiny delay until the released energy levels are at max.My theory is that it should be possible to divert this energy into another coil set.If that coil is not the next active but still within a strong enough field area then the EMF would actually add to the drive of the motor.Only downside is that according to my calculations at least 16 poles would be required to get an optimum result.Way above of what I can create in my little garage :(In theory it should then be possible to reach about 98% efficiency for the motor....

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


Magnetmotor - really impossible or just supressed?

When someone starts talking about a so called magnetmotor than most people judge right away.Laws of physics, perpetuum mobile is impossible, magnets are static....We all know the limitations nature puts on us... That however did not stop quite a few people since the 1950's to build working magnet motors. Or, to be precise: To make the claim, show them and then somehow disappear. A few though seem to have survived and even claim to make good business. Securely closed machine, stellite tracking and 24/7 online monitoring. Either just a bad and long running hoax or a real attempt to keep a secret secret. Even the somewhat famous Yildiz motor showed off around the world only to disappear.Some like them, some don't. Either way all this sounds like the perfect conspirary theory LOL So lets take a look on what is fake and what might be real but missing some vital clues. You can find several good Youtube channels created by people trying to build a working magnet motor. Some of them have no problems to admit failure and still keep trying and updating their projects. Did long enough and you see two outcomes. The first is giving up or "realising" that it will never work. The second often seems like a user is getting some relly good results and is really close to keep the magnetmotor running. Both disappear without and updates or traces. Now of course this is just confirmation that it will never work, but then again: What if it did already quite a few times? Even Tesla had patents for a magnetmotor and so far none of his patents were a hoax. Although none of his patents allow to actually build a working devices without some additional info and knowledge. And that is the key that I am trying to get: The lost knowledge.How can a magnetmotor never work? That one is quite simple from the start. If a linear model won't work no matter where you start then a rotary version will fail as well. And if a linear version works, it has to do so far at least 5 segments and with preferably increasing or at least constant speed. Having said that and assuming you know a little bit about magnetism: Ever wondered about shapes of magnets?? The common types are block, round like a bar and those disk like ones, some even with holes. A less well known version is the ring magnet. You can look them up as well as their corresponding magnetic field geometry - or what is assumed to be the right geometry. To give you a clue: All those floating spinning toys use a ring magnet in the base and onother one in the spinner. In the center is a dead zone for the magnetic field that is far lower than further out on the ring. And the strnger outer fields also reach further - giving the entire spinner a bowl like area to float on, the spinning just stabilises it like a gyroscope. A similar flat disk magnet wouldn't have this indentation in the field but rather a dome like sphere. The ring just kicks a dint into this sphere if you don't mind the simpification. Similar changes in the field structure happen when you combine two or more magnets. One example we all know is stacking identical smaller magnets. And often we are suprised how much stronger two thin disk magnets are compared to a single. Distance however sets a certain limit. And take those hook magnets... Just a small ring magnet in a metal pot with core. Remove the magnet and just by itself it is far weaker. Why? Quite simple.... The same way a transformer core directs the magnetic flow, the metal part of the hook magnet provides a shortcut for the magnetic field - and in return all is much stronger ;) Now you have some more clues, but still there are tons of options for failure... The most common is the sticking effect. No matter how well you planned and designed in most cases you linear or rotary prototype will stall sooner or later. Even if started manually at high speeds some seem to run very long but once they slow down and stop it is obvious they always stop where the magnetic field won't allow the binding effect to be overcome.Wouldn't dare to say that I have a working magnetmotor, but I might have some clues you want to try if you decide to give it a try yourself. So how COULD a magnetmotor actually work? Like in the Perendiv examples all over the web, you could aloow a moving responder to the rotor. Like a piston the responder will be lifted in areas it would otherwise limit or reduce the speed of the system. Well designed only a few mm would b required but it also means wasted energy to move the responder. Then there is the nice way of modifying fields by adding magnets in different angles and polarities. Lets say towards the end of your stages on the linear model it is hard to overcome the binding effect from the end of the previous stage. The perendiv model would now somehow change the distances. But you can also add magnets to lower the binding effect ;) Like a ring or hook magnet you can shape the field and offer a stronger repulsin field or a lower binding force. Last but certainly not least is the option of adding magnetic metals like iron or somehow weirder ones like bismuth. So, do we have any examples of something very common utilising any of this? We sure do :) Take a speaker apart and you end with the cage, the membrane, the actual work coil and the magnet. We don't need anything but the magnet so take a good and very close look. What in the audio world is called a shield to prevent the magnet from messing with things close by is exactly the same as on a hook magnet ;) Only difference is the tiny gap for the coil. The magnetic field is directed into two paths, one by the metal core, the other by the inner enclosure of the magnet or the magnet itself. The coil operates in the area of maximum flux.Last hints... If you take two identical and strong magnets with north or south facing up then it is quite hard to push them very close together. But check what happens if you try the same wen both soth poles (or both north poles) are placed on a magnetic surface - if in doubt your standard fridge door. Suddenly you can move much closer together with the same amout of force (not considering the added friction!). And similar story for opposing configurations. Where in free air or on a table the magnets would just jump together, on a metal plated you can move them much, much closer before this happens. Copper pipe and magnet fun :) Ideally you would have a straight copper pipe and a cylindrical magnet that has a loose fit in the pipe. Aluminium pipe work too or even a roll of aluminium foil if you have nothing else. A magnet in the pipe will travel very slow down the pipe, friction is not an issue here. So what is slowing it down? The magnet creates a field in the pipe and through that the pipe generates electicity. And funny enough this electricity creates an opposing magnetic field in the pipe - the magnet slows down. Even if you glue it onto a wooden stick it won't rush through it. Trying to push it by hand and you feel the created resistance. The faster you push, the harder it is to push! If you made it all the way down here with the reading then I have to assume you fit into one of three of my categories. a) You are a total sceptic and just read it for your amusement. If so, then please don't post a reply with usual negative feedback, instead see it as the same fun you had reading it ;) b) You are at least curious and like to play with magnets. In this case take the above as inspiration to explore more ways to have fun with your magnets! c) You are more or less frustated because you wasted a lot of time and some money to build a magnet motor that just won't work. A and B might go on and enjoy the fun, C however might want to read very attentive now ;) If you take some indicator sheet for magnetic fields, like these funny green ones, and play with moving magnets then you see a very interesting effect on the "screen". The otherwise static field lines change chape and sometimes even seem to disappear or shrink. With a small rotor assembly it almost looks like flashes when the magnets move past each other. This effect is often totally neglected and to be honest I overlooked it for a long time as well. Being able to see how the magnetic field changes gives the thing an whole new dimension so to speak. Creating a magnet with a complex shape is difficult to say the least. Only ferrite or ceramic ones can be used and you would cut of machine them according to your desired shape and with regards to the orginal center of the magnetic field. So most people revert to the classic way of shaping by adding magnets of various types, sizes and amounts. Modern neodymium magnets make this trial and error process easier as there are many sizes and strengths available. Add a detector shield of suitable size and you have hours of fun time ahead of you. But doing so in any rotary assembly is next to impossible. So what did Yildiz differently and what was missed so many times? Yildiz took it a step further and not only provided "shunts" to create very strong magnetic field from the generated electricity but also a second rotor. Since we all start small lets focus on the basics first. Remember the hook magnet and speaker or the copper pipe? Some examples for shape shifting your otherwise static magnetic fields: 1. A magnetic metal "connection" from one (low in the armature) pole to an opposing (high in the amature) pole with cause the field from the "high" pole to "bend" towards the connected magnet. 2. A magnet with an orientation of 90° to the last magnet is the sequence will severely influence the field of this last magnet! This goes for either orientations! 3. Adding a non-magnetic "shield" around a magnet, like a piece of copper pipe, will not affect the static field of the magnet. However it will severely alter the field of the enclosed magnet when another magnet passes it! It will also affect the overal field during the passing as the moving magnet will also induce a field in the copper by affecting the field of the enclosed magnet! Thickness and lenght of the shield influence the strength of these effects. 4. In a simple perendiv motor design the bar that creates the attraction for the spinning part is a magnet too. Either a long bar type or two small ones with an iron or nickel rod between them. There is no need for a piston or something that drives the bar up or out of the way ;) Just use the right magnet at the right spot on your rotor to repell the bar ;) Mount the ar with suitable springs and you suddenly can have multiple stages on your rotor instead of just the usual one! Don't forget the moving magnet on the opposing side of the segment in question though as otherwise you still will get stuck. (Hint: You can place a small but powerful magnet in the center of the opposing bar ;) Just make sure you limit the springs movement so the bar won't be pulled closer)Ok, hold on now! Does a magnet motor actually work or not? I can only give hints and say the laws of physics as we know them apply to magnetmotors the same way as everything else. Unlimeted motion without supplying energy is not possible. Limited motion with adding or using energy however is still possible and real. The same is true for being able to machine, 3D print or otherwise manufacture at very tight tolerence and accuracy levels. This includes bearings or bearing systems with very little friction losses. Just check these floting and rotating magnet toys that look like a spindle. Only a tiny needle like pin makes contact with a glass surface - next to no friction loss. A proper and supposedly working magnet motor should provide more energy than what it uses - one way or the other. No law of physics lets us get around the fact that such a motor could only keep spinning if the produced power or motion energy is at least the same as what is required to make it move. Magnets lose their strenght over time, they are like a very slowly depleting battery. So, isn't it funny that all magnet motors so far that claimed to work also had the requirement to replace the magnets once the things fails to work or start? And if you leave a very strong neodymium magnet shielded from outside fields or magnetic stuff than your grandkids will still find a quite strong magnet. Do a little performance test with your new magnets, like how much force is required is required to lift them off a steel plate. Make the same test with the magnets once you played around extensively with them in your motor. Now take a spare magnet that was never used from the orginal batch and compare both against each other ;) If the motor would not use energy then why are the magnets depleted to a certain degree, realted to runtime and usage time? Wait a minute! Does that now mean it actually works? Lets just say energy is certainly used. We only know similar effects from electromagnetic systems. But did anyone ever really check how much actual energy is in magnetic field generated by a non electric magnet? Get a good sized N52 neodymium magnet and check how much force is required to pull it off a steel surface. Now try to get the smallest sized electromagnet capable of that force and check how much energy it consumes at the level that equals the pulling force of the N52 magnet ;) Makes no sense to even try to compare these you will say now. I just say energy is energy and we were formed to only think in certain ways and don't even try silly things like this ;) To keep the fun up let us imagine we would actually have a similar energy available than what our electro magnet would require. In reality more because we wouldn't have electrical or flux related losses in the metal around the coil. Or is the imagined reality, no clue ;) If true it would mean even a motor with very bad efficiency would be able to create huge amounts of torque. Well, torque is basically acceleration. Which would mean our motor would not just be happy to spin, it would speed up until the bearing fail or the thing is ripped apart. Imagine a dental drill of that size and weight suddenly falling apart at full speed... Every example of motors claimed to be working, that are not fakes, seem to be happy no matter what the load is. It the thing turns a generator than it would have to slow down a bit with the increased load but they don't. With no limited factors otherwise this makes them a fake. Even a perfect motor would have to react to load changes.... Don't we agree that the stronger the magnetic force or field in a conductor the stronger the resulting magnetic and opposing field of the conductor? We use the difference to either drive a motor or take out electricity... But if you take the "open" shielding of a magnet in a changing field than the influence of the shield on the overall field gets stronger with stronger field changes. And properly desinged and orientated they would actually double as a natural limiter for the rotation speed. Once the electrical energy in the shield becomes too strong it will be able to cancel out the field of the enclosed magnet...If we assume a magnet motor is really possible and works with the intended output to keep it spinning or even take energy out: Then what would be possible downfalls that stop this thing happening in everyones garage? We can explore the stars but so far no one bothered to invent anything to visualise magnetic field in a 3 dimensional way other than by simulation. No realtime and true observation like this. The few working technologies that exist rely on sensors, interpretaion and filling in gaps. But imagine something like a detector shield as cloud! And then even better with selctive spacing to get a realtime view of where exactly the field lines go. All we can do is forget our teaching and try it out anyway ;) If by some mistake a magnet motor would really work right away, then chances are high the inventor would wonder why that thing takes off like mad and how to stop it. Unless well prepared it would certainly end in the destrution of the motor. But the inventor would know what to look for in the next prototype. The logical conclusion would be to the couple the energy taken to the speed while physically limittin the free load speed. The other one would be the design the electrical generator around the and within the motor. To even get close to this point you would have to spend endless days and nights working on finding a solution. The closer you get the more disappointment when the final model still fails to keep spinning for more than a few hours. Most people will then accept defeat and move on... Still not saying it actually works but if you made it to this point in time where it could be easier to move on and do other things:Ever wondered what would happen if you "shield" a magnet with a coil? Of course nothing would happen as we know. But try this in some fixed assembly that allows you move another magnet through the field of the shielded one. Perferably witha force gauge or some option to read out the energy required to move it through the various stages of the field. See what happens if you short the coil or add a resistor to it ;) Now if this coild is able to produce electricity then the more we use the more the effects on the required force would change. What do you think would happen if you combine common coil relations of electric motors to a "coil shielded" magnet motor? Right, all these coils would interact with the magnetic fields of the coils they are connected to... And through that with the overall field surrounding the enclosed magnet..... I leave up to you to imagine how these interacting coils could provide "resistance" or "acceleration"/"surplus electricity"...Like they say: You can only find out if you try ;) To keep up the positive thinking: A permanent magnet just sticks to any magnetic surface and does so with the same force. But the real energy loss in terms of getting weaker can almost be neglected. Any electromagnet capable of the same holding force woul require ongoing energy supplies to keep it up. It is using energy the same way the permanent magnet does! The difference is the permanent magnet is not seen as anything that would provide us with energy.... And if it can't provide energy other than passing through coils then why the heck does it keep sticking to the fridge year after year? It does require energy to keep this weight up doesn't it, even if you add a thin teflon disk and oil to reduce friction? ;) No magic, no "free energy" bogus, just plain physics viewed from a slightly different angle than what we learn in school ;) Have a good laugh and a good beer, then read it again and just consider some of the things here that are not mentioned in any literature about magnetism that we commonly use. Now I got you thinking, didn't I ? ;)

Topic by Downunder35m   |  last reply


"Sonic" drilling or cutting

If we look up sonic drills today we usually get some fancy machines driving pipes in the ground, preferably softer ground.But the term includes all types of machines that use sonic vibrations to advance through a media.With the ancient and claimed to have never existed technologies in mind I did some digging...In the food industry vibrating knifes are quite common, same for "air knifes" on softer food.Even in the meat industry they find more and more uses now.Ultrasonic cutting or welding is the same thing and included in "sonic".Same for some experimental sub sonic drilling methods currently being tested.The general idea might be as old as using vibrating equippment to compact stuff, like concrete, bricks and so on.What you can compact by vibration you can also make "fluid" by vibration.Industrial feeder systems utilise this to the extreme by even making light and fine particles like flour move like water without causing any dusting.What all the techniques have in common that a suitable tool or tool head is used and that it is attempted to use the most suitable vibration frequency for the job.Anyone operating an ultrasonic welder knows the pain of finetuning for a new electrode or just new part to be welded.What does that tell us now that makes the understanding easier?Take a bottle of ketchup, preferably one that is still quite full.Turn it upside down and noothing comes out.Shake it a bit and you are either lucky or drowned in red.But hold it at an angle and start tapping it and the red sauce flows out easily.What it true for most newtonian fluids is in some way also true for non-newtonian fluids.Ever mixed corn starch and water to make these funny experiments with it?Hit it hard and it reacts really hard and is not sticky at all.Leave your hand resting on it and in sinks in and sticks to it.Stirring it very slowly is easy, go faster and you get stuck.You can do similar things with by using an external source for vibrations.For example a vibration speaker mounted to a smal cup of the goo.If you place sand on a sloped piece of plastic or sheet metal then at a low angle it will pile up easy and stay.Start vibrating the plate and the sand will start to flow off.Works fine with a vibration source mounted to a piece of steel bar or rod and a bucket of sand too.Trying to press it into the sand requires a lot of force, especially once you are a bit deeper.Let it vibrate properly and it slides rights down.If we can do the simple stuff as well as really complicated stuff in the industry then what about other materials?So far we use vibrations to make things move out of the way, compact things, transport them or to heat them up for welding plus some cutting applications.Considering the variety one might wonder why no one tries it for "difficult" materials.Machined surface can be found throughout ancient history.Finding "machined things" were vibrations was clearly used is a bit harder.The great walls are not a perfect example here as the views differ quite a bit on how they could have been created.But if we leave things melting them or a secret concret like recipe for creating for example granite then vibrations start to make some sense.You find some interesting videos on youtube where people use speakers, wires and rocks to confirm you can actually "machine" them by vibrations.Especially granite has some quite musical properties, big boulders as well as smaller ones produce destinct sounds when you hit them hard.Tests and measurements were made on granite and other hard rocks to check how fast sound travels in them , how it is refeclted and where the sound comes out or affects the surface the most.Lets just say every sample gave different results.Shape, density and dimensions affect not just the resonant frequency but also where and how the sound travels in the rock.What if??We can use a simple speaker, a plate and some rice to see how patterns form under various frequencies.Works with sand or other granules as well.The interesting patterns are the so called harmoncis.Here we see clear and destinct patters, sometimes with extremely fine lines and areas of softly vibrating granules.Some people say these harmonic frequencies have all special meanings and uses.We mainly used them to avoid problems.Imagine your new TV would not have a housing tested to be stable with all frequencies the speakers can produce.All of a sudden your back of the TV might start to rattle ;)Same for car engines.Harmonic vibrations are eliminated wherever possible.Otherwise they could multiply and affect other things in the engine or around it.Simply put it means we have various options to detect and measure vibrations on a surface or in a system.Back in the day every half decent backup generator had a mechanical indicator for the frequency of the supplied electricity.A set of tiny forks with the desired on painted red and several on either side of it.These forks were designed to get into harmonic and therfor quite intense vibrations at their set frequency.If the one for 50Hz looked blurry then all was good ;)The same principle god be applied on a big boulder of granite.Place the "vibration meter" at the desired spot and start moving around the vibration source on the surface until you find a spot that causes maximum response on the meter.Best thing here is that if you then place that surface area onto another peice of fixed in place granite both pieces will start to loose substance if vibrations are applied.The fine sediment forming is then usable as an indicator where to move the vibration source to continue once the effect literally wears off.Is it feasable?Well, if we trust mainstream science then the answer is no.A huge amount of vibration energy would be required for such a hard material, despite ancient proof that says otherwise.Semi industrial test also seemed to confirm the theory as only with very high amplitudes (loudness) and while automatically adjusting for the resonant frequency changes a measurable amount of material was removed.I struggle a bit with that as for the testing tool heads made from hardened steel or carbide were used.And that with little or no regards on how the head and tool itself affects the output.I mean in terms of having the max possible movement happening right t the tool contact surface!There is a huge difference between applying a vibration to a tool and using a system, tool and tool head DESIGNED to work at the desired frequency!Otherwise we wouldn't need a computer to design and test a horn for welding purposes or shade a knife spefically so that the vibration go along the right axis and in the right direction.You not break a hard thing with a very soft thing unless it travels fast enough to become harder as the target!This complicated explanation basically just confirms that if you hit water at a too high speed then it will just break you into pieces instead of offering a soft splashPlease do not jump of bridges or such to confirm this yourself!!If that is really true and science says it is, then how about the other way around?Works fine too, or we wouldn't have pressure washers or water cutters.Now for the part where I hope some really smart people leave helpful comments:If we can cut steel with just a stream of water, then I ask:Isn't for example copper much harder than water?Steel is much harder than copper but water cuts through it.The answer here it simple or complicated, depending on how you want to expain how it works.Comes down to speed and pressure plus the right nozzle shape to prevent a beam expansion.But then water is indeed "harder than steel".Questions:Lets say we would use a copper pipe that in lenght, thickness, hardness and diameter is optimised to transmit a frequency so the pipe end sees the max vibration like a feed horn for ultrasonic welding.Not to hard to calculate these days :)Now imagine said "main frequency" would be optimised for the pipe but also be a harmonic frequency of the rock to be worked on.The pipe end would deform quickly, abrasion does the rest and it fails before even making a decent sratch that is not copper metal on granite.No matter how hard we press nothing good enough will ever happen.BUT: If we would add more hormainc frequencies to feed our pipe we can multiply the amplitude quite easy!Just try with a sound generator from your app store, needs 2 or more channels to be usable.Pick for example 400hZ on one and 800Hz on another, then finetune around these number to hear how the tone changes ;)My theory goes like this:If all "working frequencies" would just harmonics of the resonant frequency of the granite, then they can be tuned so the effect on the pipe end is minimised.The overlaying frequencies however should result in the same effect a water cutter has: The pipe becomes ultra hard.The better the match and the more you have to get it right the harder the pipe will be.Adding now a "drilling frequency" or multiple could be used to drive these harmonics slightly out of phase.Like with the sound generator on your phone we end up with a pulsating sound, or vibration.While the pipe still vibrates at the same "hardening" mix the drilling frequency creates a peak like a jackhammer.Try it by using the heaphone output on a small speaker and placing some light and tiny things into the cone.The will violently jump around during these pulsing tones.For a drilling system the output can be mechanically maximised by utilising a pitchfork design.A head holds the vibration speakers and the tynes are tuned good enough to the frequency of the speakers.Always two would have to operate in sync though as otherwise the pitchfork movement that transfers the sound down the center bar won't work.This head could then be desgined to act as a holder for a quick change of work out pipes that are no longer long enough for tuning.I guesstimate that a well tuned design would result in a copper pipe being able to drill at least 10 to 15cm into solid granite before it wears off too much.And we are talking here about just a few mm to get the thing out of tune!But would dare to desing such a thing just to confirm a theory that no one ever really dared to test? ;)And if friction welding works as good as ultrasonic welding, then what would happen if we try this with the right frequencies and vibrations instead of wasting tons of energy?

Topic by Downunder35m