THE SECOND PRINCIPLE OF FORCE

THE SECOND PRINCIPLE
OF FORCE

.

Transfer of momentum through mechanical application of force between two or more bodies always tends to follow the direction of the least resistance.

When two bodies collide, the result of the collision depends on the properties of the materials of both bodies as well as mass ratio of the bodies. I will concern myself here with bodies from materials, which exhibit near perfect elastic properties, like hardened steels, but bodies with different masses. I will further concern myself with collisions along common axis, that is "head on" colissions. I am concerning myself here with the record of Bessler Hammerwheel, and the argument is limited to the speeds and masses and materials, which were available at the time of Mr. Bessler and applicable to his wheel.

RELATION 1

When two hardened steel balls of equal mass collide, one in rest and one in motion, the ball originally at rest begins to move at the speed of the originally moving ball and the originally moving ball stops at rest. The momentum of the moving ball had been completely transferred to the ball originally at rest.

RELATION 2

When a small ball “m1” in motion strikes a huge ball “m2” at rest, m1 rebounds at its original speed (almost), but in opposite direction, while the relative speed of m2 remained barely affected, if at all. This fact points out that next to no momentum, if any, had been transferred from m1 to m2 in this collision. This fact further points out that although the momentum of m1 had been preserved in m1, its velocity direction reverses without a substantial transfer, if any, of momentum to m2.

We can conclude that when there is a large difference in mass values of two elastic bodies in a collision, the momentum does not get transferred between them to any appreciable degree and stays with the smaller mass, although its dirrection of motion reverses. The force value at the instant of the collision can be probably expressed by the formula F = (m1+m2)(v1+v2)/t, where t may be negligible, never the less the momentum of m1, or at least its substantial portion does not get transferred to m2, while its direction of motion is reversed.

The dirrection of motion can be guided and transfered with negligible losses of momentum to the guiding body.

The ratio of momentum and/or energy transfer is directly proportional to the ratio of the masses of the two bodies in collision to a degree, but when the mass values of the two bodies in collision are beyond so far undetermined ratio (as it also depends on materials), the large mass does not move at all while the small mass rebounds at its impact speed. The situation can be understood once we admit friction between the large body and its substrate, shock wave and its dependency on the shape of the body Wave 5 and other loss factors into the picture. Any imperceptible momentum, which could be transfered to the large body from the small body can be made to become loss of energy to the smaller body although they occur within the large body and at its related bodies like its substrate, which can be calculated with as a loss of momentum of the small body, but not loss of momentum of the large body.

When the small m1 is made of the same elastic material as a bearing ball, but only a part of the large m2 serving as collision contact “surface” is made of such a material, the result is still just about the same, as if m2 were completely made of such elastic material. This is again conditioned by the properties of the not so elastic material. Jelly will not do while hard wood will. Body m2 can be made of any reasonably solid material (mild steel, even wood), as long as its contact portion is again elastic and reasonably large. It is actually reasonable to have the large body made mostly of a material, which will dump any momentum transfer to the large body and convert it into heat etc. rather than allowing the transfer of momentum from the small m1 to the large m2.

RELATION 3

When large m2 in motion hits small m1 at rest, m1 gains close to twice the velocity of m2, but m2 may not loose any of its momentum to m1 as long as the energy transfered to the large body is dumped, or converted into frictional heat and/or internal wave oscillation. This is an exact reversal of “Relation 2”. The motion of two bodies is relative and only a third reference point can relatively establish, which body moves and which is at rest, but no point of reference can establish absolute motion. Therefore, we can state that the body m2 has no energy even though moving relatively to us and that m1 has KE even though relatively stationary to us. Then a large mass body in motion can be construed so that it can accelerate a relatively stationary body without a substantial, even any loss of energy to itself. This is a bit tricky propopsition, because there are other factors of energy losses to be considered next to frictional and heat losses.

HAMMERWHEEL (K3)

Lets say we have a large body m2 in slow rotating motion. Lets say m2 consists of a heavy oaken wheel m2A, geared with a much smaller hardened steel wheel m2B so that the circumferential speed of m2B is six times that of m2A. We have two-body system behaving as one unit. This combined system can be considered to be one body built from two different materials. It has high mass momentum at low circumferential speed in its m2A wooden wheel portion and low (but elastic) mass momentum at higher circumferential speed in its m2B wheel. The gear between the two parts is made of hard steel again in order to secure solid transfer of impact forces from m2B to m2A to be dumped at wooden m2A without any loss of momentum to m2A.

Lets say we make pockets along the circumference of m2A, which will accept bearing balls m1 one per pocket. Lets say we have 6 such pockets over the span of 1/3 diameter of the wooden wheel m2A. Lets say that we allow bearing balls m1 to load by gravity into these pockets at elevation 2/3 of m2A diameter, and travel along 1/3 of the diameter of m2A to elevation 1/3 dia of m2A, being pulled down by gravity and pulling one side of m2A along with them.

Lets say we allow discharge of bearing balls m1 from m2A at elevation 1/3 dia of m2A onto m2B circumference, which has a paddle like projection(s) on it serving as a hammer head. Lets say the whole system has sufficient RPMs so that the circumferential speed of the hammer head of m2B is sufficient to kick the balls m1 up (with the help of a guide) 1/3 of m2A dia back to 2/3 elevation for reloading into the m2A at elevation 2/3.

While we are gaining 6 x m1 force and therefore acceleration over 1/3 diameter of m2A and therefore a constant driving force m1 x 6 transferring into the rotational motion of the whole m2 system, we are loosing very little energy at m2B hammer kicking the balls m1 back up, because the kick of the collision between the low mass m2B and m1 is backed up by the high mass of m2A through the hard gearing. The momentum of m2 system is preserved save for the friction and dumping of shock waves, which can be well offset by the m1 x 6 constant force.

Therefore, a hammer wheel like the one constructed by Mr. Bessler can be built on this principle and part of its rotational motion gained at m2A by the falling balls m1 in the pockets can be collected as free energy. Such a wheel is not a self starting gismo, but it is a self sustaining gismo as long as it is given enough initial momentum and most of all speed at the circumference of m2B to kick the balls m1 up 1/3 dia of m2A.

fig. 1

legend: green = m2A, red = m2B, magenta = gears, cyan = m1, yellow = guide