Experiment to Demonstrate that the Uncharged Electron is a “Rotating Unit of Space”

Experiments being conducted by ISUS, primarily on "alternative" systems that the RS provides an explanation for.
drwater
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 9:12 pm

cylindrical bearings

Post by drwater » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:07 pm

"I have also tried it with cylindrical bearings, and they actually work better because of the larger, conductive surface."

Bruce,

If cylindrical bearings work, that would disprove the ball bearing heating explanation. Are you going to compare your results with the theoretical torque?

Sun
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:50 am

I doubt the orientation

Post by Sun » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:43 am

I doubt the orientation process. If the orientation of electron can be aligned, all electrons can be thought as one with adding up speed of rotation.Then torque can be calculated. It must be much larger than the torque by heat expansion, because the heat expansion is random.

User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1407
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Electron Torque

Post by bperet » Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:01 am

Could you compute the theoretical torque here?
I attempted to compute the spinning electron torque yesterday, but ran into a bit of a problem that had not occurred to me before. In the RS, mass is a property of temporal displacement, and the uncharged electron, being a rotating unit of space, has none. No mass, no force. No force, no torque.

In RS2, the electron is not a material particle, but a cosmic positron, so being an "anti-particle," it actually possess negative mass from a material sector perspective. (The mass associated with the conventional, charged electron is the mass of the temporally-displaced charge--not the mass of the electron.)

So, I checked to see what kind of torque thermal motion could produce. Because of the microscopic values used with the bearing and shaft sizes, the torque was also microscopic--far too small to account for the observed torque and acceleration. (I had to rough guess most of it, as I don't know the material composition nor have a micrometer to get precise measurements. The results of that approximation was so small, it was insignificant against the mass of the steel shaft. Perhaps Horace has the tools to do a more detailed study.)

So I have gone back to investigating where the torque is coming from. I have noticed that when passing 220 amps through a steel bolt, it generates a considerable magnetic field, which is a 2D rotational vibration. I've also noticed my test setup is magnetized now, from all the little bits of dirt stuck to it. When I get a chance, I'll have to try it with a diamagnetic axle to see what effect that has, to get a better understanding of what the shaft material, itself, is contributing.
Every dogma has its day...

User avatar
Horace
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:40 pm

The purpose of the commutator

Post by Horace » Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:49 am

The purpose of the commutator is to transfer current to a bulk conductor (the axle) directly to its ends effectively bypassing the bearing balls. I do not have any additional coils to supply with current.

drwater
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 9:12 pm

experiment

Post by drwater » Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:15 pm

Hmmm... Too bad. It would be great if there were some experiment to prove the existence of uncharged electrons.

User avatar
Horace
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 3:40 pm

Bruce's experiment still

Post by Horace » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:43 pm

Bruce's experiment still might be a good idea to prove that. He just needs to redesign his experiment to make it impossible to explain it away by localized metal expansion and Apere and Lorentz forces. Most likely a clever geometry would be sufficient to accomplish that.

Post Reply