Re: 'Spinning'

[William Beaty <billb@ESKIMO.COM>]

On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, brian whatcott wrote:

> In scattered NG discussions, there have been plausible reductio
> arguments for perpetual motions if this effect were available.

Podkletnov was said to have found that, yes, the "energy barrier" that C.
O. E. would require exists around his "column" of reduced weight... is not
there.  He stayed very quiet about this.  If people choke on the idea of
"gravity shielding", then they'd have a field day if his phenomenon allows
perpetual motion machines to exist.  From a "theory" viewpoint, PM
machines are impossible, so if his gravity-shield leads to a PM machine,
then the gravity-shield experiment must have been a mistake in the first
place.  Right?  After all, theory is always right, and any experiments
which say differently must be in error, and we must desparage the
experimenter.  But from an experimentalist angle, if gravity shielding
exists, then PM machines must have been possible all along.  After all,
experiments are always right, and any theories which say differently must
have been in error!  :)

Science trundles on.  If his discovery is mistaken, then memory of it will
fade.  If his discovery is real, chances are that this won't become
acceptable until a couple of generations of physicists obey the Planck
rule and die off, leaving behind younger physicists who grew up hearing
about crazy reports of "Podkletnov's spinning SC disk."  Or maybe we'll be
lucky, and a modern Goddard or a Wright will step forward and buzz the
White House in a home-built flying saucer.


((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                                  SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb@eskimo.com                                  http://www.amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits          science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA   206-781-3320          freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L