From: heathjohn2@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, April 2, 2018 at 5:21:47 PM UTC-4, Edward Prochak wrote:   
   > On Friday, March 23, 2018 at 7:51:24 PM UTC-4, John Heath wrote:   
   > > On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 8:00:05 AM UTC-4, Edward Prochak wrote:   
   > []   
   > > >   
   > > > The problem is that you are confusing angular speed and   
   > > > angular momentum.  The angular speed is indeed different   
   > > > after stretching the band, but the angular momentum of the   
   > > > combined Person, elastic band, and turntable system remains   
   > > > the same. This is because the moment of inertia changed also.   
   > > >   
   > > > Linear inertia is due only to the total mass of the object.   
   > > > The moment of inertia is dependent on the total mass and the   
   > > > distribution of that mass (IOW, its shape).   
   > > >   
   > > > So there is no rub which allows you to escape. It may be time   
   > > > for you to do a little experimenting. Note that since you are   
   > > > only dealing with the person, band and moving part of the   
   > > > turntable, you can do the experiment at home.   
   > > >   
   > > > But again I suggest that the "band" be something massive that   
   > > > can make a more significant change in the moment of inertia.   
   > > >   
   > > > It doesn't have to be elastic like a spring. A heavy weight   
   > > > tied to two handles via pulleys. As you hold the handles   
   > > > and widen your arms, it lifts the weight which is at the   
   > > > center of the rotation. Make the handles something also heavy   
   > > > (heavy enough to change the moment of inertia, but light   
   > > > enough that even rotating, they can lift the heavy weight).   
   > > >   
   > > > But also, you really need to look at the equations and work   
   > > > a few examples, to see that there is no free energy here.   
   > > >   
   > > > Enjoy,   
   > > >   ed   
   > >   
   > > You have made some good point and I agree. From this let us establish   
   > > a foundation that can be trusted.   
   > >   
   > > A]There is no free energy. All forms of energy must be accounted   
   > > for.   
   > >   
   > > B] Linear momentum conservation in x y and z direction can not be   
   > > violated.   
   > >   
   > > C] Angular momentum conservation may be violated by exchanging it   
   > > for energy , stretch elastic band.   
   > >   
   > > You agree with A and B but you are not liking C.   
   >   
   > It is not a question of like/dislike.  It is a case of having   
   > done measurements and from those never observing violation of   
   > angular momentum. This is why I suggested that you get out of   
   > your thought experiments and into the lab to do some physical   
   > experiments.   
   >   
   > >                                                  If you have a   
   > > stretched elastic band in your pocket caused by angular momentum   
   > > and not willing to reduce angular momentum you in violation of A.   
   > > Do you have an alternative source of energy that stretched the   
   > > elastic band?   
   > >   
   > > [[Mod. note -- Your statement (C) is false.  Angular momentum   
   > > is conserved, and there is no way to violate that conservation.   
   > > As other people have pointed out, your stretched elastic band is   
   > > not violating conservation of momentum.   
   > >   
   > > Your stretched elastic band is also not violating conservation of   
   > > energy.   
   > >   
   > > It might be instructive to consider a different example of stretching   
   > > an elastic band.  Let's consider a room on the Earth's surface,   
   > > containing a heavy weight which is clamped in place, and an   
   > > unstretched elastic band connecting the weight to the ceiling of the   
   > > room.  Now move the tabletop out from under the weight, so that the   
   > > weight falls down to the floor, stretching the elastic band as it   
   > > does so.  For simplicity, let's assume that the elastic band stretches   
   > > sufficiently to slow the weight's fall such that the weight comes to   
   > > a stop (zero instantaneous vertical velocity) before the weight hits   
   > > the floor, and that at that moment we then clamp the weight again.   
   > >   
   > > So... we now have a stretched elastic band.  Where did the energy   
   > > come from to do that stretching?  Clearly it came from the gravitational   
   > > potential energy of the weight, i.e., it came from the Earth's   
   > > gravitational field doing work on the weight as the weight fell down   
   > > towards the Earth's center.   
   > > -- jt]]   
   >   
   > Much thanks to our esteemed moderator for the additional example.   
   >   
   > John Heath,   
   > you seem to be searching for a means to escape the conservation   
   > of energy. Many others seem to follow this same path (as judged   
   > by the many flawed perpetual motion videos on youtube). The motion   
   > of rotation is one that fascinates us humans (evidenced by how many   
   > amusement rides are based on rotation!).  Verbal descriptions   
   > fail in conveying the interactions involved.  I sincerely suggest   
   > more study and experimentation on your part, then your understanding   
   > will come.   
   >   
   >  Ed   
      
   I am starting to understand. You are not on the working end of physics   
   where measurements are made. I am an old ham at this so I can help.   
      
   A] You do not apply for a grant to prove free energy as the answer will   
   be no and is a red flag of a questionable understanding physics.   
      
   B] You do not apply for a grant to prove a violation to the conservation   
   of momentum as the answer will be no for the same reasons said above.   
      
   C] You do not apply for a grant to prove momentum may be exchanged for   
   energy as it happens every day when two cars crash head on turning   
   momentum into energy.   
      
   There is not a need to test A B or C as they are known to be true with   
   experiments that have already been done.   
      
   The question at hand is conservation of momentum or is it conservation   
   of the center of mass. I think it is the latter as momentum may be   
   exchanged for energy as stated in C.   
      
   Now that we are back on subject I would enjoy hearing thoughts on   
   this. Is it momentum or the center of mass that is being conserved?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)