http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/GravitySummaryNews.txt Date(s): 19 March 2011 To view this plain text Internet file, one could right click -> View source, then if possible Format -> Word Wrap ---------- Subject: Gravity Summary News release in new energy era. Bessler's principle observed, tested, & used. To (via BCC): Editors, Reporters, Publishers, Producers, Managers, Researchers, Educators, Scientists, Engineers, Students, Scholars, and Leaders To: AldenEugenePark@gmail.com CC: LA4Park@iwvisp.com More BCC: to some others such as relatives, associates, friends From: Alden Park 922 West Franklin Avenue Ridgecrest, CA 93555-5110 AldenEugenePark@gmail.com LA4Park@iwvisp.com Attached: .TIF and .JPG figures for GravitySummaryNews.txt Dear Editors, Reporters, Publishers, Producers, Managers, Researchers, Educators, Scientists, Engineers, Students, Scholars, and Leaders, This is important information about gravity that is not being very well distributed or published. I am attempting to publish findings about gravity, in an unusual manner that the subject seems to demand (because of currently prevailing unreasonable beliefs and because of powerful self-vested interests). Few people are aware of these findings, despite the important, far reaching implications and despite much of the information being available for a long time. This information depends upon: logical resolution of various scientific dilemmas, the preponderance of observations, and the experimental method applied to many tests. Many future tests are possible. We must stop rejecting, ignoring, and suppressing the large amount of empirical evidence for the gravity-dependent Bessler principle, if we want to make great scientific, technological, educational, environmental, social, and economic progress. We must stop hiding/overlooking a fundamental mechanical property, if we want our energy sources to be more reliable, more "green", and less expensive. In the article below (Gravity Summary), I tried to make the information understandable to average readers, who try to understand the information. As much as ordinary people can understand some portion of it, it should be of benefit to them. For example, they might improve their vehicle miles per gallon by modifying their driving-related habits, while also improving their safety. They might also better understand some of the new energy devices that the future will soon bring. The coming reinvention of the very low friction Orffyrean roller bearing and the reinvention of the Papp engine may make some inventors/manufacturers rich, but I have thought that these inventions were too important to humanity for me to (in any way) delay providing potentially useful information about them. I have been giving the world various gifts of information hints about the reinventions, that should have previously been properly disclosed long ago (by the inventors). I want others to be successful with respect to making these devices. I have not built them myself, but I think that some talented people will somehow succeed, given the hints of others, given my own hints, and given that others have previously succeeded in making these things. The world needs them, as soon as it is reasonably possible. You may pass on as much of this file of mine, GravitySummaryNews.txt and the corresponding figures, as you would like to. You may edit these things for publication, as you see fit. You have my permission to publish it. I can't give you exclusive copyright, as I think that many should publish it. If I learn of any typos or errors, I can try to show them in GravitySummaryNewsErrata.txt. The email addresses that I am sending this article initially "To (via BCC)" should have all come from public sources. Galileo Galilei's central message was that people should try the experiments and record the results. This is the experimental approach to physics. We need to return to this experimental approach regarding gravity. Maybe the truth concerning the greatly ignored Bessler principle concerning gravity will only come very slowly, as we experience it by doing experiments or running devices. We should neither deny nor suppress our findings. For various reasons, there has been much ignoring/suppression of findings. This subject has been unreasonably difficult to be published/printed/made-well-known in shorter versions. Many seem to have vested self-interests but if we are rapidly racing to the edge of an energy cliff, then someone should speak up and offer solutions with understandable explanations. This news story has been suppressed or hidden for a very long time. It should have been record-shattering news 299 years ago (and it was) but it was incorrectly labeled (despite the many demonstrations and certificates regarding Bessler's wheels) and unfortunately the world quickly forgot the message. Some of the news is almost 300 years old (if not much older), but it is still news if the information has somehow been hidden. Now various "new" forms of substantiating information (regarding what gravity really is) have also appeared. With more complete understanding of the subject, the time is approaching, when those who desire/seek more complete understanding (with respect to gravity) may obtain that understanding. It is not wise for us to continue racing toward an energy cliff. Instead we should stop, turn around and go toward correct understandings/solutions regarding energy, gravity, and related things. Given the long history of the situation, it is supposed that this message may be almost completely ignored even now. Still, there is a chance that the message may reach the ears/eyes/minds/hearts of some reasonable people, who may be preparing to hearken-to/behold/study/ponder the message or who may be willing to do experiments or who may even begin to prepare to peacefully remove the ancient shackles (some more than 300 years old) of energy bondage. It is becoming more obvious with time that almost all of the "cherished" laws of ordinary physics are either incorrect or have limited applicability. We have opened the door to a new energy era. This is a news message of great hope and optimism. I have put this file GravitySummaryNews.txt and both .TIF and .JPG attached versions of the nine accompanying figures on my Internet site (http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/). I am giving you permission to publish/print/forward/edit these files (at your own expense). You may use as much or as little of them, as you would like to pass on. The new energy era has come and will continue to progress, even if some news organizations (and those with vested self-interests) ignore or suppress its coming. If news organizations ignore it, they will just be depriving themselves and others of important useful knowledge or news. Ignored words by Bessler, Newton, and Einstein support my message. If people want to argue with the experimental facts and if people want to also argue with those ignored words, they are free to do so. I suggest that any physics or engineering department chairs (who might receive this) pass this message on to their students and faculty, to inform them about many correct ideas and research opportunities. The Bessler principle is an ultra-fine "probe" of matter. Those who study the many facets/implications of the Bessler principle will have an advantage (in this new energy era) over those who ignore/reject the concept. Accepting and making use of the truth will be inherently advantageous over rejecting the truth. People must consider the evidence and decide for themselves. I don't know if anyone will publish what I have written (given the very long history of message suppression), but I suspect that some will be interested in the related subjects. Even if there is much duplication of publishing, it does very little to make up for more than 300 years of message suppression at every turn and great useful energy opportunities lost over such a long time. We can not turn back the clock to undo those many errors, but we can start where we are and build from there. Some may later look back on the situation and greatly wonder how a fundamental mechanical principle could be suppressed for such a long time. Partly because of associated friction, almost every modern manifestation of the principle has been suppressed or ignored (often with little thought). Maybe some of the suppression is because embracing such a physical principle destroys almost all the supposed physical foundation that has traditionally been built up (one card after another card in a house of cards or one stick of driftwood after another stick of driftwood in a house of sticks) for such a long time. Embracing such a Bessler principle strongly suggests record-shattering news today, with the promise of many more record-shattering events to come. It may become more clear with time, where some of the suppression came from. I hope that electrical, mechanical, civil, nuclear, and chemical engineers will understand the far reaching implications of the Bessler principle with respect to new devices and processes. I mention John Collins' 1997 book many times, as it was that book that broke the story about the Bessler wheel, which was a story that had long lain forgotten in obscurity. Many are still unaware of the still indirectly-suppressed story. It was an important story that properly should not have been forgotten. I tried to follow up on the story. I had previously been following up on the unfairly suppressed cold fusion story but there was still one piece of that cold fusion puzzle which was missing. I was surprised to discover that the solution to both the suppressed cold fusion puzzle and the suppressed Bessler wheel message depended on a common or underlying principle (the Bessler principle). I am trying to help penetrate a great wall of unbelief that holds back many in their scientific progression. There are many new devices that are illogically held back in part because of great unscientific disbelief. For example, the GEET reactor has been invented but it is still being held back in large part by great unbelief. The GEET reactor progress has also suffered from others perceiving that it would take away part of their "turf". In our turf wars, why not consider the idea of us voluntarily helping out each other so that we all (by wise efforts) can become very rich? Energy is not a constant sum game. It is not even physically conserved (assuming that the electric fields given off by charges are continually discrete and that electric fields later absorbed are also continually discrete). With the energy-dependent raw resources and products not being a constant sum game, total wealth should properly not be considered, as a constant sum game. Few people seem to know about an important additional property of the GEET reactors (besides their use in energy production). Properly designed GEET reactors apparently can transform vapors of long lifetime radioactive nuclei having nuclear magnetic moments so that they are no longer radioactive. That is done by the GEET reactors creating rapidly rotating nuclear ground states. Those rapid rotations greatly alter their nuclear stability and thus greatly alter their decay rates. The lifetimes of radioactive nuclei are greatly reduced upon their being rotated rapidly. In view of recent events (regarding the Japanese nuclear power plant) in which long lifetime nuclear isotopes are becoming of interest, this information should prove useful with respect to many situations. It is time that we no longer ignore such possibilities with respect to storage of dangerous nuclear wastes. We don't need to rely on storing them. We just need to render them harmless with respect to radioactivity by rapidly rotating them. Then there would no longer be a radiation problem. If there had been extra power supplied by engines using GEET gas (so that water pumps could have been pumping in more cooling water), I suspect that many problems could have been avoided at the Japanese power plant (after the earthquake/tsunami). Better than that would be for the power plant to have been previously safely shut down and all the plant power produced by nearly closed cycle GEET gas burning engines (with Tesla turbines to help cool down the exhaust vapors for reuse), then many of the problems could have been avoided. It would be nice if both the Papp engine and the Orffyrean roller bearing could be reinvented by 6 June 2012, which will be the 300th anniversary of Bessler's 6 June 1712 Gera wheel. I think that those two inventions have been suppressed by unbelief, by "turf" wars, and by the lack of adequate invention disclosure information (on the part of both inventors). With knowledge of the Bessler principle, I have attempted to fill in some information gaps, that were not clearly provided by the inventors. Important information has been available for a long time on the Internet, but the information has been going up against such an amazing wall of disbelief that has effectively made the information unavailable to almost everyone. It is this huge wall of disbelief that my article is aggressively seeking to tear down. Despite the long history of suppression of much available information, the "Gravity Summary" article below is effectively important-sudden news. In case this message is basically ignored, I can later send out updated versions of this information to others (who were not sent this message), who I think might be more interested in such developments. Any publication or news media or individual that is not specifically sent any of this information would also have my permission to publish (at their own expense) any amount of this file, GravitySummaryNews.txt, and the nine associated figures. My article may be published as a series of messages, as space allows. If I have written too many words in Gravity Summary, one might initially (in this order) consider: the Gravity Summary Initial Paragraph, the list of sections, the first section (Internet Introduction to Gravity Summary News), and the last two sections (Physics Based on Discrete Entities and Some Future Implications). I hope people like what they do read and I hope it helps them to consider new beneficial paradigms with respect to gravity and energy. Sincerely yours, Alden E. Park - 19 March 2011 - Ridgecrest, California AldenEugenePark@gmail.com LA4Park@iwvisp.com 922 West Franklin Avenue Ridgecrest, CA 93555-5110 http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/ Thoughtfully conserve energy using tips from the Bessler principle. ---------- ---- Gravity Summary ---- Gravity Summary Initial Paragraph. Gravity is simply explained, as being composed of two discrete electric fields from opposite fundamental charges traveling precisely together at the speed of light. This explanation provides a Bessler principle of continual power production from gravity. This principle is due to the time-separated attractive absorptions of the two discrete field parts of gravitons by opposite fundamental charges rotating about each other. The Bessler principle is a fundamental mechanical property of all wheels rotating about horizontal axes. The principle may not be noticed due to friction. The Bessler principle provides the basis for explaining a large number of phenomena. The Bessler principle may be tested, observed, and beneficially used to extract power from sources of two-part gravitons. Hints are given for reinventing Papp engines and very low friction Orffyrean roller bearings. These inventions should be combined, when they have both been reinvented. People might currently consider doing experiments to make better use of the explained GEET reactors to save on fuel costs. Foucault pendulum anomalies observed during total solar eclipses provide strong evidence of absorption (within the moon) of gravitons coming from the sun. The main sections of this "Gravity Summary" article are: Internet Introduction to Gravity Summary News, Gravity Comes from Electric Fields, Graviton Formation and Absorption, Kinetic Energy of States, Rotational Kinetic Energy from Absorbed Gravitons, Bessler's Principle and Very Low Friction Roller Bearing, Bessler Principle Experimentation, New Bessler Principle Devices, Mass Related to Gravitons, Limitations of Prior Physical "Laws", New Mass from Energetic Gravitons, Physics Based on Discrete Entities, and Some Future Implications. -- Internet Introduction to Gravity Summary News -- I put the following paragraph of this section into my current Internet file (http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/index.htm). Gravity Summary News Introduction. Here is a news email release, GravitySummaryNews.txt (with associated figures), summarizing gravity, the Bessler principle. and the following related subjects. Gravity is simply explained to be the composition of fine discrete packets of two electric fields from opposite fundamental charges traveling precisely together. Ten to 13 constraints during the formation and absorption of gravitons cause gravitational "forces" to be much weaker than electrical "forces" with only two constraints. When unconstrained externally, nuclear ground states can have seemingly-insignificant unquantized amounts of translational velocity and thus unquantized translational kinetic energy. With no external constraints, nuclear ground states can have seemingly-insignificant unquantized amounts of rotational angular velocity and thus unquantized rotational kinetic energy. A Bessler principle (increasing the unquantized rotational kinetic energy of rotating nuclei, as gravitons are absorbed) can be observed, tested, and beneficially used to obtain power. The Bessler principle explains many phenomena, including how the sun actually gets almost all its power. The Papp engine is simply explained (in PappEngine.txt) using the Bessler principle. The Papp engines and Stirling engines, with masses often rotating about horizontal axes, may be combined to form new types of engines. The engines burning gas from GEET reactors may have more power extracted from their exhaust gas by Tesla turbines. Besides using the GEET reactors (also explained in PappEngine.txt using the Bessler principle) for useful power production (and saving on fuel costs), those reactors may in principle also be used to reduce radioactivity in materials by the deformation of nuclear ground states, as those nuclear ground states are rapidly rotated. Electric field intensities are absorbed by fundamental charges. Gravitational field intensities are absorbed by pairs of nearby fundamental opposite charges. For example, Foucault pendulum anomalies observed during total solar eclipses provide nearly direct evidence of absorption of gravitons from the sun by the moon. Because of absorptions, Gauss' law neither can be correctly applied to electric field intensities nor can it be correctly applied to gravitational field intensities. The "laws" of thermodynamics are often useful but are generally invalid, because internal rotational-kinetic-energy-changing attractive gravitons can penetrate into any system, whether isolated or not. The "laws" of conservation of mass-energy, linear momentum, and angular momentum are often useful but are generally invalid. The universe will never die a heat death. Consistent with what Einstein wrote, physics might be properly based on fine discrete quantum entities, meaning that continuous forces and energy potentials are non-physical abstractions. The big bang theory of the universe is incorrect. Stars continually produce much light or photons by the Bessler principle. The mass in the universe is expanding by light or photon propulsion. Vast fluxes of energetic gravitons are continually produced from all matter. The universe is locally increasing in observed mass, as energetic gravitons (pulling down on starlight) free opposite fundamental charges momentarily-existing within starlight. The fundamental opposite charges may be organized to create hydrogen atoms. Since the infinite universe keeps moving/expanding and locally increasing in mass so as to "reproduce" itself, it may therefore be considered to be perpetually alive. The steady state theory of the universe would be more correct than the big bang theory. Physics must be properly based on very fine discrete entities. Having understandings of both the Bessler principle and the manner in which Bessler constructed his very low friction Orffyrean roller bearing, provides the keys to properly decoding Bessler's "Apologia" or more precisely Orffyreus' "Apologische Poesie und Poetische Apologie Von seinem MOBILE PER SE und PERPETUUM MOBILE". The chiasmus is a type of Hebraic poetry. An attempt has been made to decode the major chiastic structures of the portion of Bessler's "Apologia" that he calls "this little book". See BesslerLittleBookChiastic.txt for my most recent chiastic structure analysis of Bessler's little book. For much extra efficiency, the very low friction Orffyrean roller bearings (after being reinvented) should be used within almost all types of engines. Until the Orffyrean roller bearings are reinvented, more people might consider making better use of the existing GEET reactors (or the Papp engines which are currently being reinvented) to save on fuel costs. The GEET reactors are a well established invention with many people using them. Despite many ancient uses of power coming from the Bessler principle, I think that the use of the GEET reactors marks the beginning of a new energy era. There has been much progress shown on the Internet (both experimentally and theoretically) with respect to reinventing the Papp engine. The new energy era would have begun sooner, if the inventions of the Orffyrean roller bearing or the Papp engine had become established. Energy costs should begin to drop as the new energy era is more firmly established. Greatly decreased energy costs would have many economically beneficial impacts, including a decrease in price of many raw materials, which materials depend upon energy prices for their production. Figures associated with GravitySummaryNews.txt are: Fig1_PullOrPush.TIF (or Fig1_PullOrPush.JPG), Fig2_Direction.TIF (or Fig2_Direction.JPG), Fig3_Offset.TIF (or Fig3_Offset.JPG), Fig4_Timing.TIF (or Fig4_Timing.JPG), Fig5_BesslerPrinc1.TIF (or Fig5_BesslerPrinc1.JPG), Fig6_BesslerPrinc2.TIF (or Fig6_BesslerPrinc2.JPG), Fig7_BesslerPrinc3.TIF (or Fig7_BesslerPrinc3.JPG), Fig8_Equal_Component.TIF (or Fig8_Equal_Component.JPG), and Fig9_Roller_Angles.TIF (or Fig9_Roller_Angles.JPG). AEP - 19 March 2011 -- Gravity Comes from Electric Fields -- Radiated Electric Fields. Electric (E) fields radiate outward from a bare charge at the speed of light. If the bare charge is moved to a new stationary location, the E fields radiate out from the new location in spheres which have radii that increase at the speed of light. As suggested by figure Fig1_PullOrPush.TIF (or Fig1_PullOrPush.JPG), any initially stationary charge, within such a sphere, that is encountered by the E fields is either pulled toward or pushed away from that new location of the charge, at the center of the sphere. The E fields spread out or their intensity is decreased, as they extend to more space. The measured E field intensity decreases, as the surface area of the sphere increases (which area is proportional to the square of the radius of the sphere). The decrease of E field intensity is identical to that, as if the E field intensity were composed of many distinct entities traveling outward at the speed of light. The measured E fields do not diminish more rapidly (than the inverse square of the radius of the sphere) until charges are encountered. When an E field does interact with an encountered charge the field conveys origin direction information and discrete origin charge sign information. These characteristics for simplicity suggest that the E field intensity is composed of fine discrete information packets that travel at the speed of light. Each discrete E field packet would act somewhat like either an attractive or a repulsive blow (on the charge absorbing it), while the E field packet is being absorbed. Discrete Electric Fields. The direction of each discrete push or pull blow depends upon the sign of the charge encountered by the E fields. Opposite charges attract and the same charges repel. The E fields may be considered as discrete packets of electromagnetic radiation, just as a photon or "particle" of light is a discrete packet of electromagnetic radiation. The discrete packet of electric fields may be considered to deliver discrete amounts of energy to encountered initially stationary charges, as particular E fields cause the encountered charges to acquire speed relative to their prior stationary state. Each bare charge may be considered as a source of power. If non-stationary charges absorb electric fields, their kinetic energy may be either increased or decrease during the electric field absorptions. The question should be asked, "How can useful power be extracted from such power sources?" One continual process for harvesting this power is described below by using gravity. Gravity. Gravity can be simply explained in terms of the discrete electric field packets coming from two opposite charges, with the discrete field packets traveling together. These E fields coming from opposite charges need to be precisely aligned with one another, to form a graviton. The idea that combined electromagnetic fields or radiation can travel together (as a packet) is evidenced by the photon itself which is a discrete packet of light or rather electromagnetic radiation traveling together. -- Graviton Formation and Absorption -- Matter Charge. Ordinary matter may be considered to have many opposite charges within it. A free neutron (with little internal rotation assumed) decays into a proton and an electron with a mean lifetime of about 15 minutes (see for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron). A proton and an electron could form a hydrogen atom. The proton is much more massive than the electron. The proton (and likely even the electron, since the electron has some characteristics of apparently interfering with itself) might be considered to be composed of many fundamental charges. Two opposite fundamental charges might be both equal and opposite each other. The total charge for an electron would be negative. The total charge for a proton would be positive. There would be at least as many fundamental charges in a proton as the mass of the proton divided by the mass of the electron. That estimate of the number of fundamental charges in a proton would be increased by multiplying by the number of fundamental charges in an electron. Graviton. Fundamental charges within matter radiate E fields continually (though one should not assume continuously). Any such perpetually existing charge would be a continual source of such electric field packets forever. There may be some very special cases in which pairs of equal and opposite E fields (originating from equal and opposite fundamental charges) travel precisely together so that they may survive being absorbed by other nearby fundamental charges that they encounter. Such a special case could be known as a graviton. Together these paired E fields form particularly simple solutions to the Maxwell or the Hertz field equations, in that they correspond to total electric and magnetic fields very nearly zero. The total E fields are very close to zero, as they are composed of equal and opposite E fields traveling together at the speed of light and coming from opposite fundamental charges. One can think that those total E fields are usually neither able to push nor to pull on encountered charges, as the gravitons pass by without effectively interacting. The gravitons travel at the speed of light since their E field constituents travel at the speed of light. A graviton is not absorbed, until eventually conditions are exactly satisfied so that both its E field parts are separately absorbed by two fundamental charges. I like to think of individual fundamental charges (at one time) and individual E field packets (at one time) as spheres of about the same spatial extent. They may each be considered as quanta or discrete entities. Graviton Formation Constraints. Unaligned E fields would be absorbed by directly encountered fundamental charges, unless opposite E field entities happen to be aligned according to at least five constraint conditions. Five constraints associated with the formation of the two-part graviton are: two directional constraints, two spatial offset constraints, and a timing constraint. For a graviton, the pair of E fields must each be traveling in the same direction (meaning two directional or angular constraints or else the E field packets or entities would diverge and be separately absorbed by charges). Gravitons Are Quantum Formed. The graviton formation is an all or nothing sort of situation governed by there being sufficient E field overlap according to the formation constraints. With the graviton being formed, it travels together as a single entity or quantum. There are many examples of quanta or solitons. Graviton Direction. The Fig2_Direction.TIF (or Fig2_Direction.JPG) as considered from a particular projection, could represent (on a very fine scale) one of the E field entities going in a particular direction, which particular direction would need to be identical to the other E field entity. It is supposed that the angular tolerances for directional match must be exceedingly small, since even a very small directional mismatch would mean divergence. The lines, that the E field entities travel along, would be constrained to be parallel (otherwise they would diverge by their not being parallel). As considered from a particular projection, the directions that both the E fields are traveling in must be essentially the same angles. The particular direction that they travel in defines "up" with respect to that graviton. The following is an example of the two directional or angular constraints for the formation of a graviton. For an orthogonal x,y,z coordinate system with the "z" or "up" direction defined as the direction in which one E field is purely going in, for the other E field to be parallel or to only go purely in the "z" direction, it must not have an angular component allowing it to change its "x" coordinate with time and it must also not have an angular component allowing it to change its "y" coordinate with time. Only its "z" coordinate can change with time. That the "force" of gravity is not of zero strength relative to the electric "force" would require that there is some sort of directional quantizing between the two discrete electric fields. Otherwise the graviton would not form because the two discrete electric fields would be slightly off in their separate directions and so would eventually drift apart. This directional quantizing between the two discrete electric fields could be due to either there being a fine interaction between the two discrete electric fields or space being locally-directionally finely-quantized or both. There might be a fine interaction process between the two electric field parts of the graviton during initial formation, intermediate propagation, and eventual absorption. A local-directional fine-quantizing of space might denote that there is some sort of underlying very fine structure of "empty" space. Such a very fine structure of empty space might be due to discrete electric fields being a soliton wave phenomena of fundamental charge masses temporarily appearing and disappearing. Offsets within Graviton. Two offsets are each perpendicular to the upward direction of travel. One of the offsets is represented in Fig3_Offset.TIF (or Fig3_Offset.JPG). The constraint conditions of each offset being nearly zero imply that the parallel lines (that the pair of E fields travel along) must be nearly identical, so that the E fields are not each individually soon absorbed by charges (which would prevent the graviton from being formed). The offsets might be very slightly off from zero. Timing within Graviton. The timing difference is in the upward direction of travel, as depicted in Fig4_Timing.TIF (or Fig4_Timing.JPG). The final timing constraint would need to be nearly zero for the gravitons to be very precisely aligned in time, so that the E fields are not soon separately absorbed by charges (which would prevent the graviton from being formed). The timing constraint might be very slightly off from zero. All these constraints mean that the pair of E field entities need to each be at very nearly the same packet place for any particular time to form a graviton. The E field packets may have much overlap at any particular time. If these constraints are not all met, then the gravitons would not be aligned precisely enough to survive rapid separate absorption by fundamental charges. One might consider that there is a sixth understood formation constraint condition (so that the total E field of the graviton is nearly zero) in that the pair of E fields must have come from fundamental charges of opposite sign. If not so, the E fields would have been quickly absorbed, as their passage through matter would not be transparent. A graviton would not pass through matter nearly transparently unless its total E field is nearly zero. Graviton Absorption Constraints. Because the gravitons have nearly zero total E fields, the gravitons can travel long distances through matter, until at least five absorption constraint conditions are met. Five precise graviton absorption constraints are: the lower elevation or first encountered charge is subject to two absorption offset constraints (of the E field with respect to the lower charge), the higher elevation or second encountered charge is subject to two offset constraints (of the E field with respect to the higher charge), and the relative absorption time is subject to a single timing constraint. There might be two more understood graviton absorption constraints corresponding to the graviton being attractive. With elevation increasing in the direction in which the graviton is traveling, the lower elevation charge absorbing one of the E fields (of the graviton) must be of opposite sign from the charge that originally produced that absorbed E field. The higher elevation charge later absorbing the remaining E field (of the graviton) must be of opposite sign from the charge that originally produced that E field. One could merely come to these conclusions based upon experimental evidence of gravity being attractive, but I will attempt to give a rationale for this situation below. Gravitons Are Quantum Absorbed. If all the absorption conditions are not met, then the graviton will not be absorbed. It is a total all or nothing situation. All constraints must be attained or else the graviton, as a whole, is not absorbed. The basic notion of the quantum is an all or nothing type of situation. Graviton Attraction. One should consider why the gravitons are attractive. The repulsive E field portion of the graviton might not interact with a charge, as the repulsive portion would tend to "push away" from proper absorption, while the attractive portion would promote proper absorption of the E field. Attraction is thus essentially a given requirement for stable absorption of the graviton. A reason that the intense bare charge repulsion portion is not similarly weakened (with respect to attraction) is that to "push away" from proper absorption would only line up proper absorption of neighboring discrete E fields. In the all or nothing situation, one of the intense E fields of repulsion is absorbed. Initially, the E fields from bare charges are intense until by enough absorptions their neighboring E fields are weak enough so that attractive absorption is favored. Because of the two part nature of the graviton, the interactions are extremely weak relative to the solitary electric field interaction, which accounts for the gravitons being attractive. There generally do not exist enough neighboring two-part gravitons such that both charges would simultaneously be unstably pushed away to neighboring pairs of repulsive absorptions. Gravity Weak. The gravitational "force" is much weaker than the electric "force", because of the many constraint conditions on the graviton relative to the few constraints on ordinary E fields traveling alone. There are 10 to 13 logical constraint conditions for the formation or absorption of the graviton. Given the production of electric fields, there are no constraints on the formation of the solitary discrete E fields and only two offset constraints for the absorption of the solitary discrete E fields. Thus, the two-part graviton over its "lifetime" is subject to eight to 11 extra constraint conditions beyond that which the solitary discrete E field is subjected to. The eight to 11 extra constraint conditions for the graviton beyond the constraint conditions for the electric force qualitatively account for the gravitational force being much weaker than the electric force. For two electrons, the relative strength of gravitation attraction to electrical repulsion has an upper bound of 1/4170000000000000000000000000000000000000000 = 1/(4.17(10^42)). See p. 7-10 of Volume I of "The Feynman Lectures on Physics" (1963) by R. P. Feynman, R. B. Leighton, and M. Sands. Because of the eight to 11 extra constraints, it should be clear that the "force" of gravity can be so much weaker than the electrical "force". For the particular case of the forces between two electrons, the gravitating mass of an electron would likely be less than its inertial mass, since the negative electron would contain fewer (if any) fundamental positive charges than fundamental negative charges. Only with the assistance of positive fundamental charges would the electron be capable of forming gravitons. The gravitational mass of an electron would likely also be less than its inertial mass, since the electron would contain fewer (if any) fundamental positive charges required for absorbing gravitons. No Continuous Forces/Potentials. As there is no actual continuous "force" of gravity, there is no actual continuous gravitational "potential" energy. What appears to be the force of gravity and the gravitational potential energy are artifacts associated with energy production or destruction associated with the absorption of the large fluxes of discrete gravitons. With the old theory there would seem to be forces and potentials mathematically to a coarse or approximate level, but when we consider detailed behavior with respect to anomalies we begin to understand that there are neither gravitational forces nor potentials continuously hanging out in space, and magically providing continuous forces and continuous energy sources/sinks. It may be approximately mathematically convenient at times for us to think of things like energy conservative gravitational forces, gravitational potentials, static electric fields, and static magnetic fields. Still, all these physical notions would likely be crudely approximate macroscopic artifacts of many discrete electric fields emitted from and eventually absorbed by fundamental charges. -- Kinetic Energy of States -- Unquantized Kinetic Energy of Unbound States. There is likely no coarse kinetic energy quantization for states that are not bound with respect to translation. The unbound states can have any kinetic energy value (meaning nearly any energy of motion). Total Energy of System. Given the possibility of a system having some kinetic energy due to translational motion, even for particle states (consisting of many fundamental mass particles) that are bound in a system, the lowest energy quantum state (called the ground state) need not be an absolute total energy value. Any extra internal rotational kinetic energy would allow such total energy to be even less absolutely fixed. Velocity of Quantum States. One can ask many questions with respect to translational velocity of quantum states. For example, does there exist a universal coordinate system with respect to which all nuclear ground states (with the same quantum states) have zero velocity? Do all such nuclear ground states (with the same quantum states) have the same velocity? Are all nuclear ground states (with the same quantum states) frozen with respect to each other according to translational velocity? Would unquantized velocity be a hidden state variable? I will let the interested reader answer these questions to the reader's own satisfaction. Angular Velocity of Quantum States. For the lowest energy or ground state of a particular nuclear system, the question comes up, "What is its internal angular speed?" Must its internal angular speed be zero? If so, with respect to which coordinate system must it be zero? Is there some universal reference frame with respect to which it is zero? Are all such nuclear ground states (with the same quantum state variables) frozen in angular velocity with respect to a particular universal reference frame? Would unquantized angular velocity be a hidden state variable? Are all such nuclear ground states frozen in angular velocity with respect to each other? If they are somehow rotationally bound with respect to each other, by what mechanism are they rotationally bound? Would such a binding mechanism span galaxies? If two nuclear ground states of zero internal angular velocity are isolated and unobserved, are they rotationally bound to one another so that they both have a common zero angular velocity? Would such a common zero internal angular velocity be guaranteed to remain with them both forever? One might want to ponder many such questions (as these example questions), answer these questions, and defend the answers to one's self. I will let the interested reader address these situations to the reader's own satisfaction. Internal Rotational Kinetic Energy Changes. Though internal rotational kinetic energy may seem to be an academic subtlety that few might be interested in (as there would seem to be little relevance), I will attempt to show below that the subject has great relevance. Not only can internal rotational kinetic energy of a nuclear ground state be decreased by the interaction with some things, it can also be increased by the interaction with other things. -- Rotational Kinetic Energy from Absorbed Gravitons -- Upper Blow Delay. With the graviton (and its two parts) traveling at the rapid but finite speed of light, there would tend to be a time delay between the initial downward attractive pull-blow on the lower charge and the final downward attractive pull-blow on the upper charge as applied by the two-part graviton. This means that the upper charge may have moved in between the time of the absorptions of the two parts of the graviton. If the two charges were rotating in a circle (at opposite ends of a rotating diameter) about a horizontal axis through their center, the higher elevation charge on the opposite end would often move further around the circle before being pulled down. Because of the time delay between the pulling down of the rotating charges, there would often be a net torque on the charges, so as to increase the rotational speed and rotational kinetic energy of the charges about their center. Torque may be considered as a force or blow on a point located at some "lever arm" distance from a center of possible rotation. Some examples of this will now be shown. Rotational Power Acquisition. In each of these three figures, there is a very fine scale example of a rotating pair of opposite fundamental charges attractively absorbing the two E fields of a graviton at different times: Fig5_BesslerPrinc1.TIF (or Fig5_BesslerPrinc1.JPG), Fig6_BesslerPrinc2.TIF (or Fig6_BesslerPrinc2.JPG), and Fig7_BesslerPrinc3.TIF (or Fig7_BesslerPrinc3.JPG). As we view each figure, the two opposite charges are approximately rotating counter-clockwise in a circle about their center. One might think of the solid dots representing the centers of charges. Possibly much larger solid circles could have been used to represent the size of the charges but that might have detracted from the main purpose of the figure. The dots on the ends of each solid diameter represent earlier time locations of the centers of opposite charges (when the lower elevation charge is given a vertically downward attractive blow or impulse). The dots on the ends of each dashed diameter represent later time locations of the centers of opposite charges (when the higher elevation charge is given a vertically downward attractive blow or impulse). The larger the initial angular speed of the charges about a horizontal axis through their center, typically means the greater is the kinetic rotational energy acquired from the two-part graviton, because the upper charge moves further around the circle before the second downward attractive impulse is received. In each of the examples, there would be a net or total torque about the charge/mass center, which would increase the angular speed of the charge/mass pair about their center. Up. For a graviton, vertical upward corresponds to the direction that the graviton is traveling in. For a graviton, horizontal is perpendicular to the vertical upward direction that the graviton is traveling in. Effective Horizontal Component. If a fundamental opposite charge particle pair is rotating about an axis that is not horizontal, with respect to a graviton to be absorbed, then it would seem reasonable that only the portion or component of the angular velocity that is horizontal, would be effective, in increasing the angular speed. It would also seem reasonable that the only portion or component of the graviton that would be effective (in increasing the angular speed of a fundamental opposite charge particle pair rotating about an axis) is the portion that is perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the charged particle. In the plane of the graviton and the axis of rotation, both those viewpoints have equivalent angular components or are off by equal angles. See Fig8_Equal_Component.TIF (or Fig8_Equal_Component.JPG). The angles are equal, as one can think of one of the squares in the figure tilting over (or rotating about the lower right corner point) by that particular angle. The direction in which the graviton is moving could be represented by the arrow shown going upward toward the tilt point (or corner point about which the square is being rotated). The dashed line represents the axis direction about which two opposite fundamental charges are rotating. The two charges might be rotating near the corner point about which the square is being tilted or rotated. Zero Initial Angular Speed Remains. An angular speed of zero about a horizontal axis would cause the charge on the higher elevation end of the diameter to not move around the circle during the absorptions. There would be no net torque increasing the angular speed. There would be no increase in rotational kinetic energy of the charge pair. Friction Effects. Friction could cause a loss or dissipation of any acquired rotational kinetic energy. If friction were not present, the charges would increase in their angular speed (assuming a non-zero initial angular speed about a horizontal axis). If there were no friction, there would be no limit to the angular speed attained and thus there would be no limit to the acquisition of energy (assuming that the system does not rupture). -- Bessler's Principle and Very Low Friction Roller Bearing -- Bessler Principle/Wheels. This acquisition of power (from energetic gravitons) by opposite fundamental charge pairs rotating about a horizontal axis could be called the Bessler principle after the first known person, whom I am aware of that both demonstrated and symbolically discussed the principle. Without understanding the Bessler principle, Bessler's many demonstrations of his wheel might seem to be miraculous. Even with understanding of the principle, it seems miraculous. I think that Bessler demonstrated the principle using horizontal axis rotating wheels, which were equipped with special very low friction mechanical roller bearings. Johann Ernst Elias Bessler (also known as Orffyreus) was born in 1680 or 1681 and he died in 1745. See pp. 23, 177 of John Collins' 1997 book, "Perpetual Motion: An Ancient Mystery Solved?", Permo Publications. The principle applies to all wheels rotating about horizontal axes, as opposite fundamental charge pairs within such a wheel would tend to similarly rotate about horizontal axes going through the centers between each fundamental charge pair. One can see many such things (regarding the Bessler principle) by study of Bessler's symbolic writings/drawings. Bessler wrote, "A driver drives. A runner runs. The seer sees. The buyer buys." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. Whether a person is a driver with wheels on opposite sides or a runner having two legs or a seer with two eyes, a balanced effort is required for benefit to be derived. A buyer can not buy, if he has nothing to exchange for that which is bought. The Bessler principle works in a balanced way with effort expended to obtain results. Nothing could be obtained, if nothing were expended. The Bessler principle would not provide additional rotational kinetic energy, if there were not initially currency of initial angular velocity or initial rotational kinetic energy. Gravitons spat upward from below are expended and they like poltergeists penetrate through locked doors. See Bessler's symbolic writings on p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. Because the dog creeps over-through the hoop, there is no slipping friction contact with the hoop and no slipping friction contact with any of his protruding pads on any of his feet. So too is the bearing stress distributed without slipping friction contact with any of the lobes coming from any of the rollers in Bessler's bearing. It is a highly cooperative distributive effort with large contact angles with different parts of the lobes or pads taking the burden with progressing time. Different rollers or dog legs take varying amounts of stress at different times. A pat on the dog's paws would be a torque (with only rolling friction). The cat-lattice of the wheel completely surrounds with frictional-teeth the rotating-energetic mice-nuclei and so the cat-lattice of the wheel acquires rotational kinetic energy. Bessler's Symbolic Writings. Bessler wrote these translated words, "A great herd of fat, lazy, pump horses wanders aimlessly." Again see p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. Individual horses rotate at approximately the same rate as that in which a pretend herd of horses as a whole rotates. Because of cat-teeth of photons and electron wave-functions, we might now think of nuclei rotating at essentially the same rotational rate as the wheel in which the nuclei are embedded. He also wrote, "An anvil receives many blows." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. This might cause the reader to carefully consider all the many downward blows that an anvil continually receives. Bessler wrote a great many other things which I think become much easier to understand in hindsight, assuming one has a basic understanding of his principle and his very low friction mechanical roller bearing invention. His writings indirectly discuss a wide variety of physical phenomena. If one has enough understanding, one acquires greater understanding, as one reads what he was writing about. As evidence for this sort of process, consider Bessler's 1716/1717 book of dual poetic title, Apologische Poesie und Poetische Apologie Von seinem MOBILE PER SE und PERPETUUM MOBILE , which chiastically has Matthew 15 verse 16 near his book's beginning and end. That verse contains the translated words of Jesus, "Are ye also yet without understanding?" (after Peter had said "Declare unto us this parable."). Bessler's book contains many poetic chiasms. A chiasm is a pattern that repeats itself in the opposite order. Even the title of his book has two second level chiasms. Can you see them? The formation and absorption of the two-part graviton are a second level chiasm. For example, two opposite "E fields" form a "graviton" and later from the "graviton" the "E fields" are removed by absorption. Also, "two opposite charges" contribute to form a "graviton" so that later the "graviton" is absorbed by "two opposite charges". A complete analysis of the symbols in Bessler's writings could take up volumes (as one would need to ask and answer all sorts of physical questions that he seems to indirectly suggest) but a reader, who is familiar with his principle and his roller bearings, should be able to understand (with proper pondering or rereading) what is going on in his symbols. His symbols often simultaneously convey information on several different levels. It also seems that over and over again Bessler tells us (or paints for us pictures with many brush strokes from a variety of different perspectives) what is going on, if we just have ears to hear what he is saying (or eyes to see what he is showing us). Chiastic Little Book. I think that it very much helps to understand what Bessler is saying by studying Bessler's little book chiastically. One can see Bessler's little book portion on pp. 225-227 of Collins' 1997 book. One might also find a similar translated version of Bessler's little book by doing an Internet search for "greed is an evil plant" or for "Saturn, Mars and Jupiter are ready to join in any battle". I have studied the situation some more. Here is my most recent attempt to chiastically break up Bessler's little book parable according to assigned labels and some beginning translated words. I(Only Reveal Later) "Those who are keen to ask ..." I0(Growth by Low Friction) "For greed is an evil plant." I01(Two-part Gravitons) "An anvil receives many [pulling]" I012(Pattern Replication) "blows." I0123(Large Jupiter) "A driver drives." I01234(Small Mars) "A runner runs." I012345(Saturn) "The seer sees." I0123456(Motion from Quality) "The buyer buys ..." I01234567(Matter) "The rain drips down. ..." I012345678(Vegetable) "The bow twangs. ..." I0123456789(Animal) "Acrobatic feather fencers ..." I0123456789A(Rotating Nucleus Wheel) "x A wheel appears ..." I0123456789AB(Glorious Power) "x Seen sideways ..." I0123456789A(Rotating Nucleus Wheel) "x It turns ..." I0123456789(Animal) "All things ... (animal," I012345678(Vegetable) "vegetable or" I01234567(Matter) "matter) ..." I0123456(Motion from Quality) "x the qualities ..." I012345(Saturn) "Saturn," I01234(Small Mars) "Mars and" I0123(Large Jupiter) "Jupiter are ready to ..." I012(Pattern Replication) "x Even the things we eat ..." I01(Two-part Gravitons) "x A crab crawls from side ..." I0(Growth by Low Friction) "x But softly ..." I(Only Reveal Later) "x But he shall be thwarted ..." See my file, BesslerLittleBookChiastic.txt which contains my most recent chiastic structure analysis and some retranslation of Bessler's little book. I spotted more chiastic levels than I found in my 2001 paper. I think that my current structure is a much better fit. I now have chiastic splits at all the locations that Bessler marked with an "x", which symbol itself is inherently chiastic. If there is a chiastic level split, there must be a split at the location of its chiastic counterpart. The eight x's (from the original) were essential to my current chiastic analysis. In my chiastic structure, there is now an introductory level "I" which I have given a label of "Only Reveal Later". This introductory level may correspond to the outermost wheel. The level "0" may correspond to the containing cylinder of the bearing. The nine levels, 1-9, may correspond to Bessler's use of nine just barely fitting intermediate rollers in his bearings. Going through all those levels produces a new type of wheel which is glorious in power production. I note that the center of Bessler's little book would be at levels "A" and "B". The chiastic level "A" may indicate the central roller of Bessler's very low friction roller bearing. The chiastic level "B" may indicate that glorious power radiates from all such wheels, because of the power delivered to them by the Bessler principle. The chiastic level "B" is the very chiastic center of "Apologia". The chiastic poetic structure is quite appropriate both for the Bessler principle and the Orffyrean roller bearing. The many level chiasm forms an internal mapping structure for "Apologia" centered about the chiastic center of Bessler's little book. It may behoove people interested in Bessler's thoughts on these subjects to study the total structure of "Apologia" and especially Bessler's little book. The structure of Bessler's little book goes through a hierarchy of concepts. The structure of the rest of "Apologia" may provide the chiastic hierarchy and may fill in some details for the person considering the concepts in Bessler's little book. The Wheel Revealed. The wheel is not fully invented or revealed until its most basic properties are known and completely understood. At the very chiastic center of Bessler's 1716/1717 book, Bessler discusses about a wheel appearing. The wheel appearing may be the glorious rotating nucleus. It represents all rotating nuclei, atoms, molecules, wheels, planets, stars, etc. Those statements and surrounding statements are well worth reading and pondering, as there is much information in them for those who have indications of what he is talking about symbolically. If one wants more understanding about the Bessler principle or the Orffyrean roller bearing, then one might want to read Bessler's writing, somewhat as one should be reading the scriptures. One should put a lot of effort into the reading (likening them unto one's own situations/experiences), if one wants to get benefit from them. Little effort expended in understanding and applying them, typically results in getting little benefit from them. That is how the scriptures are symbolically encoded. That agrees with the basic Bessler principle that something must be put into the system, if one wants to receive greater output. One typically needs to reread Bessler's writings, as new things will occur to the reader, when studied further. Bessler wrote, "For greed is an evil plant." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. The Bessler principle is a principle of growth. It demands thrifty low friction to grow the rotational kinetic energy. It requires a well nourished sprouting plant for it to grow. Bessler's wheels may be compared to living things. Even the surfaces of Bessler's very low friction roller bearings were grown so that they would have an attribute of low friction. Bessler's Roller Bearings. These are my current guesses about Bessler's roller bearings. Bessler's bearings had totally synchronized internal motion and so could be compared to one of the clocks/watches that he built (see pp. 24, 26 of Collins' 1997 book) but with a much different construction process. The Orffyrean roller bearing is like an intricate-highly-coordinated yet-sublimely-simple dance. Bessler could dance, as he wrote in "Apologia". See p. 24 of Collins' 1997 book. Bessler could replace the bearings on millstones. See p. 26 of Collins' 1997 book. I think that the basic idea of his invention was that he was able to form his very low friction roller bearings by asymmetrically growing tough, minute, very-high-quality steel lobes on his surfaces which rolled within carved out tough, minute, very-high-quality steel lobe holes. Such a growth process would seem anti-intuitive but there are strong suggestions in his writings that he got much help from God, after he did all that he could. For example, see p. 29 of Collins' 1997 book. Asymmetric Lobe Lobe-Hole Growth. Very fine ground up ferromagnetic meteorite/iron spheres would be preferentially attracted to and held in place next to the lobe side, as that side would tend to provide greater exposure to magnetic outcroppings. Upon their sudden contact with tiny encapsulated gunpowder spheres typically on the lobe hole side (with all spheres possibly suspended in mercury during growing cycles, to keep things moving during bearing surface formation) could asymmetrically with each tiny explosion more deeply carve out the lobe hole side and add a very high quality, tough, steel to the opposing lobe side. The tough steel may have also been slightly flexible and able to convey stresses without breaking. Bessler wrote, "The bow twangs." Though solid, the bow conveys stresses without breaking. The twanging also refers to fine small motions. Bessler specifically mentioned "Without such things as sulphur, salt, and mercury all things will come to a standstill". See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. We might also translate it, "Without such things as sulphur, salt, and mercury, all things soon run to waste". The gunpowder might have been encapsulated by a thin salt shell to form very tiny spheres of gunpowder that explode on impact. Even simpler than that might be that the "salt" might refer to the ingredient saltpeter used within very tiny spheres of gunpowder. The tiny spheres of gunpowder might not need to be separately encapsulated. Charcoal and sulphur would also be needed to make the usual gunpowder. Like a gun explosion chamber, the mercury could help keep the tiny gunpowder capsules in place when suddenly struck by a tiny ferromagnetic sphere, as a lobe comes down upon a lobe hole. The surrounding mercury could then form a micro-miniature gun barrel. Bessler wrote, "The shotgun shoots." as seen on p. 225 of Collins 1997 book. The magnetic domains of the formed steel would be very tiny or fine, having been specifically broken up by the tiny explosion and "bullet" shot at point blank range. The quality of steel that Bessler produced was of the then highest quality as it was locally produced at nearly the very finest of levels. The properties of materials can greatly change when they are broken up at the finest of levels. One can think of how the finest steel swords are produced were produced by repeatedly folding, beating the material to break up the magnetic domains. Bessler seems to have gone far beyond that process by the local production of the finest grade of steel. It seemed that nothing was beyond the capabilities of Bessler. But it is also possible that Bessler suffered from exposure to mercury or mercury vapor (from the explosions). Nowadays, we should use robots, where the manufacturing procedures are hazardous or dangerous. Flail for Bearing Formation. Bessler probably used a flail to exercise/form his bearings as he wrote, "The flail would rather be with the thresher than the scholar." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. The swingle bearing joint of a flail in the hands of a thresher would not experience such abuse as in Bessler's hands, because of the many tiny explosions, when Bessler caused the swingle end to go around and around. After those tiny explosive balls of gunpowder were almost completely used up, he would have injected new material into the bearing for the next cycle. It might be that "Apologia" could contain information about how many times fresh energetic material was injected into the bearing being formed. Too many cycles could weaken the outer wall (by growth of the holes in them) or could cause the lobes on separate rollers to collide, if the lobes grow beyond the roughly half of one degree of separation between the rollers with respect to the center of the central roller. I suspect there may have been at least three fiery cycles to form the roller bearing since Matthew 26:44 and Bessler makes many references to the scriptures in for example his declaration of faith. I could not find him specifically referring to that scripture but it would fit his pattern. As our Lord then suffered even more, prior to his death, three cycles may be a lower bound. Bessler may not have made direct reference to the scripture, so as not to make the situation too obvious. The proper number of cycles might be determined by experimentation, as it would depend upon how well other things are done. Blind Leading Blind. The formation materials could be flushed out after the last formation cycle. The completed bearings would have very little friction, as the grown lobes would roll without slipping inside the carved out steel lobe holes. With blind guiding eyes, the blind lobes would be lead down into the lobe holes (Matthew 15:14), because of the exact positioning of the portions of the rollers that were touching by rolling without slipping. I think that Bessler's "Apologia" declares a parable of Matthew 15:13-14 (regarding bearing formation) and much more, if we are with understanding. See the second level chiastic references to Matthew 15:16 that Bessler gives. He chiastically repeats it in two ways both near the beginning and then in opposite order near the end of "Apologia". Initial Formation Constraints. The cylinders were likely initially held accurately and precisely in place by roller end pins during the bearing surface formation period (to maintain the relative positions of the rollers and to not rub rollers against other rollers). See Bessler's "The dog creeps out of his kennel just as far as his chain will stretch." on p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. That portion was under the chiastic animal portion. An intermediate roller was being compared to a moving but constrained dog. The dog was kept from wandering too far away from its proper location. To complete the bearing, the roller end pins sticking through the holes in the bearing end circles were removed after the bearing surfaces were properly grown, as they and the bearing end circles were no longer needed to hold the intermediate rollers precisely in place. Bearings Unlubricated. No lubrication was used in the bearings, as none was needed. Adding lubrication to such a bearing would add friction to it by the surface tension of the lubricant and the blockage of material motion by the lubricant. Bessler produced remarkably very low friction mechanical roller bearings. There was no record of Bessler needing to lubricate his bearings half way through the 54 day (or nearly eight week trial) of the Kassel wheel. He would have not dared to lubricate them and wreck them. The bearings that Bessler invented were a new class of bearing, which bearings might almost be compared to the bearings within the Liahona, which device came from God. See 1 Nephi 16:10,28-29 and Alma 37:38. Bessler used the most lackluster terms in referring to his bearings or iron bearings. Bessler, as a true magician, put the emphasis on the smashing of his wheels when he destroyed them. He never openly said, "I think I should save these bearings, as they might come in handy for another project." He smashed his wheels in outrageous fashion, but one can be sure that he privately saved his bearings. He always focused attention away from that which he was "hiding" the most. His bearings were often out in plain sight but this situation explains such things, as why he had his own guards to watch the guards. He wasn't concerned as much about the guards looking inside or taking the wheel, as he was concerned about the guards taking his bearings. If the guards were kept from looking inside, they would be less likely to consider taking his bearings. It is amazing that no one seemed to notice that Bessler's tiny roller bearings could allow the rapid rotation of such massive loads without heat building up in them or their not burning out. When a magician performs to an audience, someone in the audience should consciously direct one's own attention away from where it is being directed and look for the "hidden" things, if that person wants a clue about what is really going on. Bearing Geometry. I think that the radius, d, of each of the nine intermediate rollers (or cylinders) was precisely half the radius of the central roller, 2d, so that the grown hole and lobe hole opposite patterns could be quickly transferred to all the opposing surfaces, with those forming patterns distributed or spread throughout the entire bearing. Bessler wrote, "Even the things we eat do not lose their elemental influence -- for it spreads itself through every limb and sinue of our bodies." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. The containing cylinder had an inner radius, 4d, that was precisely four times the radius of an intermediate roller. If I am misreading Bessler's messages, then someone else would need to correct my errors. I suspect that I am not wrong, as these ratios may be roughly seen in the small bearings actually shown in the diagram at the end of Bessler's book (Collins' 1997 book p. 189). It is almost as if he has symbolically told us the answer over and over again (in many different ways), but in case we somehow missed understanding his many messages or all his brush strokes, he is just making one last attempt to directly show us what is going on, if we just have eyes to see. Also, observe the bell ringer playing the nine bells from below with two hammers on p. 195 of Collins' 1997 book. Nine Intermediate Rollers. Bessler found that nine such intermediate rollers would just fit, as long as the lobes were not grown so large that they begin to collide with lobes of neighboring intermediate rollers. Somewhat like opposing shadow boxers (or more appropriately his untranslated German words "Feder Fechter" which I might instead translate as feather fencers), the lobes would just pass by each other in the dark without actually hitting each other. If hypothetically or unworkably, such neighboring intermediate rollers of radius, d, just touched (prior to forming their surface), then the sine of half a roller angle (with respect to the center of the central roller) would have been d/(d+2d) = 1/3. See Fig9_Roller_Angles.TIF (or Fig9_Roller_Angles.JPG) for that relationship. With trigonometric/scientific calculators available on many modern computers, we can now easily compute in degrees the arcsine angle or rather the inverse sine of 1/3 using a few keystrokes. This would have been a considerable mathematical challenge for Bessler in 1712. It is possible for people today with access to such modern calculators to easily determine that nine such rollers could just fit, since 360/(2(arcsine(1/3))) > 9. Bessler claimed he became "successively a Cleric, a Doctor and finally a Mathematician". See p. 24 of Collins' 1997 book. We should now begin to understand why Bessler could properly make this claim about becoming a mathematician. Bessler could have put nine such intermediate rollers around his central roller with a total of about 9.51803 degrees to spare or about 1.05756 degrees of separation between each neighboring intermediate roller. He had about a degree to spare between each roller but he had to be very careful with that degree as it was required for his surface growth. Each roller could grow outward by less than about half a degree. He didn't have much room to spare. Once Bessler somehow figured out the proper relationships or how to capture these very detailed relationships, it must have been quite challenging for him to carry out such accurate/precise work in the early 1700's. One of Bessler's pair of roller bearings was only three-quarters of an inch in outside diameter. See pp. 20, 110, and 162 of Collins' 1997 book. His roller bearings were like mini-marvelous miracles. Collins estimated that a wheel weighing 700 lbs was carried by the bearings. See p. 20 of Collins' 1997 book. Orffyreus. The lobes, the lobe holes, and the tiny spheres used in the formation of his bearings were some reasons why he took on a pseudonym of Orffyreus, but there are many other reasons associated with the macroscopic and microscopic behavior of things (from rotating sphere-like objects within atoms to rotating planets) which I think he symbolically discussed in his writings. If one puts the 26 letters of the alphabet on the edge of a horizontal axis great circle of an orb or sphere, then going directly through the center will map between "Bessler" and "Orffyre". Each Orffyrean lobe hole could be somewhat like an orifice. The lobe and corresponding lobe hole surface patterns would be unique for each produced roller bearing, as the patterns were locally grown somewhat as a plant is grown. "Apologia". All these things simultaneously give a defense of his gravity driven wheel and give a defense of his faith in his helpful God. See the old definition of apology. Bessler gave credit to his helpful God (see p. 29 of Collins' 1997 book) for helping him and so do I give credit to my helpful God for helping me. If one puts one's trust in the laws of physics, one may want to carefully consider the evidence of that trust. Bearing Contact Angles. My current best guess of the meaning for the rest of Bessler's large circle or O shaped diagram at the very end of his book (see p. 189 of Collins' 1997 book) is that it chiastically corresponds to "ORFFYREUM" located very near the beginning of Bessler's book (after the dual second level chiastic title and starting the large level chiastic part of the book). In the diagram the light wedges appear to point to the intermediate rollers of his bearings. I think that the angles of the light wedges represent the total angle that an intermediate roller may be rotated relative to a fixed opposing surface over which an individual Orffyrean lobe (or an individual Orffyrean lobe hole) stays in contact with the opposing surface. Lobes in Dark Space. The other portions in black (with many tiny points of light showing) represent when exposed individual Orffyrean lobes are not in contact. The lobes and lobe holes are then out in the blackness of space not bearing any load. If one were to look in from an end of the Orffyrean roller bearing, I think that one would actually see tiny points of light, as many tiny protruding Orffyrean lobes reflect light back out. Huge Bearing Contact Angles. It is interesting that Bessler could have the Orffyrean lobes/holes of an intermediate roller in contact with its opposing surface over a large angle. Normally for an ordinary cylinder rolling inside another open ordinary cylinder, there is only a small amount of full contact. Ideally for a circle of radius d rolling inside a circle of radius 4d, there is only a single point of full load contact. The radius d circle rotates through a zero angle for a point staying in full contact with the circle of radius 4d. For real or actual cylinders, the contact angles can be larger than zero for protrusions, but those protrusions would tend to be smashed during the rolling process. One could think of Bessler's rollers acting effectively at their original specifications (d or 2d or 4d) but as the surfaces are transformed, the dimensions are changed to both larger and smaller values (because all the surfaces have lobes and lobe holes). Bessler's intermediate cylinders did not slip because the lobes were within the same reoccurring opposing holes. Bessler's protruding lobes were not smashed down because they were already locally flat as Orffyrean lobes rolled without slipping within slightly larger radius Orffyrean holes. The lobes on Bessler's intermediate cylinder were miraculously able to stay in continuous contact for about 25 degrees, which angle I suspect that Bessler determined from direct end on observation of his roller bearings. This would be an astounding amount of angular coverage for mere cylinders (by today's standards and especially for a year 1717 or 1712), but they were not mere cylinders. They were cylinders with specially modified/grown surfaces. It was an amazing engineering feat then. Even now it would be an amazing mechanical engineering feat. Bessler's tiny bearings could work well while having very low friction even while carrying very heavy loads. Even the low friction Rolamite bearings of today are not just material purely rolling over material. They require flexible materials which add somewhat to the friction. Bessler's bearings were nearly-three-centuries-old lower-friction bearings that could carry very heavy loads. Gently Come, Roll, Go. To phrase it another way, I think that Bessler (or Orffyreus) was astoundingly claiming that he could attain about 25 degrees contiguously of bearing-load angular-contact for any particular Orffyrean lobe or Orffyrean lobe hole on the surface of his intermediate rollers. The angle would be measured relative to the opposing surface. For example, an intermediate roller goes through about 25 degrees of rotation relative to the (say stationary) containing cylinder, while an individual lobe or hole on the intermediate cylinder stays in full load bearing contact with its counterpart on the containing cylinder. They come gently together into strong contact without slipping and keep bearing the load over a huge angle, as they roll without slipping and then they gently depart (like a non-slipping pat on a paw). Each lobe touches on one side of a lobe hole, rotate-rolls across the lobe hole, and then departs the touching from the other side of the lobe hole. There is large angular coverage in a runner's leg, in a driver's wheel, in a seer's eye, and in each of the dog's legs as the dog creeps over-through the hoop (and transfers stresses in the process). Ordinary Poetry. The "ORFFYREUM" was within an ordinary pair-wise end word rhyming poem, which title page (see p. 183 of Collins' book) poem transitions to the Hebraic or chiastic poetry of the book. There is also more ordinary pair-wise poetry in the book but it is the chiasmus that is more important. Bessler sometimes also manages to provide pairs of adjacent rhyming pairs. The ordinary rhyming poetry may have just kept people from searching more deeply (for the important informative hidden poetry) as the ordinary poetry part was seemingly obvious. I can detect that Bessler used at least three different types of poetry in "Apologia". It probably never occurred to many people that they might benefit from looking for a couple of other hidden poetry types beyond the obvious poetry type. There may also be a correspondence between Bessler's normal many rhyming poetry adjacent pairs and the more usual aspects of gravity (coming from many pairs of charges to form the many gravitons, and absorbing many gravitons by many charge pairs). There might also be a similar correspondence between Bessler's spatially separated hidden chiastic poetry and the spatially separated hidden two-part nature of the graviton. Huge Level Chiasms. Bessler's book likely was chiastic to a very large number of levels because of the large number of curiously listed Biblical references in Orffyreus' declaration of faith. See pp. 228-229 of Collins' 1997 book. The Book of Ether is an example of this technique of generating a large number of chiastic levels, using in part a large list of things on one side of the chiasm. I have only dealt with the chiastic structure of Bessler's central little book and the chiastic structure of the outside edges of "Apologia". There could have been an intermediate chiastic structure that could combine three structures into a single huge level chiasm. It would have been very easy for Bessler to insert a reverse order list of scriptural references near the end of his "Apologia" so that there was a chiastic correspondence with things in the first part of "Apologia". I have not checked this out but I strongly suspect that this was what he did. It would explain why he listed this unobvious list of scriptural references. It would otherwise not be clear what the scriptures were in reference to or why he chose those particular scriptures. It would have been a huge poetic flag right in front of anyone trying to learn his secret over the centuries. Bessler intended that his writings would only be understood in hindsight (or after his invention was understood or built or sold). We only now begin to understand these things, because we understand now what he was hiding and how he was hiding it. It remains to be seen, if anyone can actually identify the many details of a large number of intermediate chiastic levels elsewhere in "Apologia". Mass Powered Wheels. A Bessler wheel (by means of the Bessler principle) received power from all the mass rotating within the wheel, with the rotational power delivered by the energetic two-part gravitons. All the weights that Bessler put within his wheel contributed to power for the Bessler wheel. The more massive a wheel was meant more power was collected by the wheel, assuming that power was not lost to friction. Bessler let people feel through a cloth an example of a weight from his wheel. The weight within the cloth was a source of power for his wheel. He neglected to say that all the masses rotating in his wheel contributed to the continual power for his wheel. This bit of showmanship took attention away from that which he was most interested in protecting (his roller bearings). Bessler had great invention hiding success because of this example trick. His distracting ruse focused people to thinking what his weights were, how they were arranged, and how they moved. Though serving Bessler's purpose, such concentration of effort on understanding the arrangements and dynamics of weights was clearly a futile exercise for diversion, assuming one understands the Bessler principle. Each of Bessler wheels had different properties and initial conditions so as to keep people distracted and not considering his bearings. Bessler attacked the greatest enemy of useful perpetual motion, namely friction. He didn't want people to know that he had overcome that enemy, which enemy once disarmed allowed the Bessler principle to be apparent. If Bessler did not have distracting moving weights within his wheels, and if Bessler had shown people the insides of his wheels, there would have been two unfortunate consequences. Exposure of the center of the wheel (without the tight oiled covering) might have created slightly more air friction and slowed down his wheel somewhat. More importantly, a wheel rotating continuously on its own accord (and even delivering a small steady amount of useful power) would have caused people to think more carefully or deeply about what was going on. They may have considered that their attempts to duplicate his wheel just wouldn't work. They may have understood that it was not the massive wheel that was the real invention but rather his thrifty very low friction bearings that allowed rotational power collected from gravity to not be drained away to friction more rapidly than it was collected. He wrote in his little book parable, "For greed is an evil plant." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. He would have also then needed to provide much more protection for his bearings, until he sold his complete wheel (including the bearings) for his very large asking price. It should be clear in hindsight that not exposing the interior of the wheel was a smart sales approach. Nonetheless Bessler's sales approach was far from perfect. He never sold a single wheel, because his asking price was much too high. He probably should have sold his wheels for much lower prices and charged people for the privilege of being instructed on how to make his very low friction roller bearings. In the special case where Bessler showed the interior of his moving wheel to Karl, the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel (pp. 20, 89 of Collins' 1997 book), Bessler let his distracting moving objects within his wheel do their job. The internal moving weights made noise and vibration when they hit the inside edges of the wheel. I suspect that he used eight cylindrical weights (pp. 131, 194 of Collins' 1997 book) that slid along wire segments. These simple things likely focused Karl's attention on the visibly moving hitting weights. It kept Karl's attention away from considering the many rotating massive entities (within the wheel) that were continually picking up rotational kinetic energy from gravity. The moving weights especially kept Karl's attention away from the bearings. As objects rotated more rapidly within his wheels, they picked up more rotational energy by the Bessler principle. As objects collided with the edges of Bessler's wheel they lost some energy to friction/sound/vibration. Bessler would not have dared to disable the internal movement of the weights within his wheel. Without the internally moving weights, the wheel would have still worked but Karl would not have been distracted. Saturn, Mars and Jupiter. Bessler wrote, "Saturn, Mars and Jupiter are ready to join in any battle." See p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book. That could apply to the many battles to reduce friction from the central axle roller to the wheel: (1) central roller axle, intermediate roller and containing cylinder and (2) many cases of a lobe hole allowing a lobe to run over it so as to help rotate the large connected entity. That could also apply to the many fiery battles for production of the bearing by surface pattern formation and pattern transfer: (1) gunpowder sphere, ferromagnetic sphere and Orffyrean lobe and (2) central roller, intermediate roller and containing cylinder. That might even apply to the many battles to transfer energy from the graviton to the power productive wheel: (1) slowly rotating fundamental charge-matter pair, two-pull graviton, and more rapidly rotating fundamental charge-matter pair, (2) more rapidly rotating fundamental charge-matter pair, discrete electric fields given off, and more rapidly rotating nucleus, (3) more rapidly rotating nucleus, electron, and rotating atom, and (4) rotating atom, electron lattice structure, and rotating wheel. Simplified Bessler Pendulum. There are appropriate time delays or quenching times (over the energy transfer battles as rotational kinetic energy is conveyed to the wheel) as should be made more clear by the observed behavior of the simplified Bessler pendulum. See a representation of Bessler's drawing of it, as it is only the center pendulum within MT 13 of Bessler's "Maschinen Tractate" (http://www.orffyre.com/mt1-20.html). The simplified Bessler pendulum should use very low friction Orffyrean roller bearings. This is how the pendulum is operated. Using sensors, internally release (with respect to the pendulum) the very low friction somewhat massive wheel at the maximum elevation point on the lighter end of a low-friction otherwise-solid pendulum and then internally stop (with respect to the pendulum) that wheel at its lowest elevation point (using sensors). Because of the quenching times in conveying the extra acquired energy and angular momentum from the rotating nuclei to the electron lattice within the rotating wheel, the heavier pendulum end should stop at its highest point, begin to go back down, then curiously stop and go back higher than it had just previously been (as if defying gravity). It is not defying gravity but rather it takes some time to extract rotational kinetic energy from the rotating nuclear ground states within the rotating wheel, which nuclear ground states had been allowed to increase their angular speeds for a little while longer. The extra rotational kinetic energy comes from the Bessler principle. I think that it takes time to extract the rotational kinetic energy because of the small overlay of the nuclei by the electrons. Orffyreus' Code Partly Decoded. Collins wanted someone to decode his Appendix A "The first encoded passage." and his Appendix B showing "all the Biblical references contained in the section entitled Orffyreus' declaration of faith." Though I have not given the volumes of details associated with a proper decoding, I think that I have provided the key for decoding of those writings of Orffyreus. I think that I have provided the basic chiastic structure within the masterful Bessler's little book (shown in that Appendix A). I have provided many of the important hidden details, though others should be able to provide many more details. The main point of his writings was that he discovered a far reaching fundamental mechanical property of the wheel. Bessler was able to make this discovery by his important very low friction invention. I have explained why the Bessler wheels worked. I have explained what Bessler's invention was. I have given my current best guess about many of the curious means by which he built his roller bearings. If others spot errors that I have made or if they can provide more insight, they would be most welcome to pass along such information. We might be able to take many modern day shortcuts that Bessler was not able to use. We can nowadays accurately machine the rollers and other parts (instead of forming them from molds, though forming them with very accurate molds might be more cost effective) so that they can be put together, prior to the growth of the surfaces, which would lock the rollers within the containing cylinder in the proper precise configuration. Many Perpetual Motion Mobiles. Bessler's horizontal rotating wheel experiments were not limited to the four most famous wheels. I think that with much help of his trusted assistant/brother, Gottfried (under the guise of working on Orffyreus' wheel), Orffyreus built large numbers of wheels with different internal arrangements that were each perpetual motion mobiles. All those different interior wheel designs were inside wheels that rotated around a horizontal axis, using Bessler's very low friction bearings. To see diagrams of many of these perpetual motion designs that were all built and worked, see non-original illustrations of "Maschinen Tractate" at http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html, or see reproductions of originals by John Collins. Also see "Das Triumphirende Perpetuum Mobile", 1719, by Orffyreus (meaning J. E. E. Bessler). I have seen on http://www.free-energy.co.uk/html/books_for_sale.html that Collins has five books for sale including “Apologia Poetica”. I don't have a copy of “Apologia Poetica”. If I obtain a copy of "Apologia Poetica” and have time for an analysis, I could look for and then study the large number of levels of chiasms, which I have for a long time suspected are there. Some others with better knowledge of German and access to the Bible in German might be in a better position to study the situation, to see if they can see the chiastic levels and to see if the writings provide further information related to the Bessler principle or how Bessler specifically constructed his roller bearings. I don't know if there is more information hidden within "Apologia", though I suspect there is more information. Since the Bessler principle is far reaching, it surely relates to his writings. I just don't know whether or not it gives specific clues about how he constructed his bearings. Maybe one can infer from talents he mentioned how he did certain things. Principles. Bessler (Orffyreus) wrote in a 1723 letter, "I have in mind a great 'Treatise on Mechanics' which I plan to publish, with many hundreds of machines and drawings that could be printed at my home. ... I have many different kinds of machine all running on different principles. They can be moved by weights, balls, springs, internal gears, internal water, oil, alcohol and wind." See pp. 141-142 of Collins' 1997 book. Though Bessler referred to many different principles, they all depended on a higher principle of all the rotating mass particles or fundamental charge pairs within each perpetual motion mobile obtaining more rotational power from gravity in the presence of low enough friction of the wheel. The meaning of the term perpetual motion has changed in the last 300 years. Now (with a modern implanted circular argument to exclude the possibility) the term specifically excludes the external input of power. Now the term excludes the input of continual power from gravity, which is currently mistakenly called an energy conservative force. Bessler's many perpetual motion mobiles all used an external continual power source of the non-conservative gravity "forces" or rather two-part attractive blows. When we reproduce modern versions of the Orffyrean roller bearings, we could replicate all the many perpetual motion machines that Bessler illustrated. We would then be able to verify Bessler's many experimental arrangements and see for ourselves that Bessler was quite correct that it really was a triumph of the perpetual motion mobile. Kassel Perpetual Motion Example. Bessler's wheel at Kassel rotated at a rate of twenty-six turns in a minute, when its axle was unrestricted. When it was hooked up to an Archimedean screw to raise water continuously, it only rotated at a rate of twenty turns a minute. See p. 107 of Collins' 1997 book. Friction Versus Angular Speed. As with Bessler's four most notable wheels and modern day examples of the Bessler principle, there is typically a balance between angular speed and friction. As wheels rotate faster more about an axis, there could be a greater separation of the fundamental charges rotating with respect to each other, which could increase the effectiveness of the Bessler principle. The angular speed is the friend of the Bessler principle, but the enemy of the principle is friction. Fire Appears. Fire is not fully invented until its most basic properties are known and understood. One does not fully understand fire, until one understands the Bessler principle. Now we can consider the effect of strong electric and magnetic fields (relative to the vertical direction) on fire and other plasmas. I think that strong vertical magnetic fields would suppress fire. Think of the suppression of the plasmas by the strong vertical magnetic fields in sunspots. Strong vertical magnetic fields tend to only allow rotations internally about vertical axes. In the presence of a strong vertical magnetic field, a small charge filled sphere could only rotate about a vertical axis. A nucleus could be considered as a small charge filled sphere. The strong vertical magnetic fields tend to prohibit positively charged nuclei from internally rotating about horizontal axes and so not able to acquire more rotational kinetic energy by the Bessler principle. Strong horizontal electric fields would also tend to suppress fire, since fundamental opposite charges in matter would tend to be more stretched out horizontally and thus the opposite fundamental charge pairs would not be able to rotate very much about a horizontal axis and not acquire much more power via the Bessler principle. I have seen videos of this on the Internet. For example, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzGkEfdcoLw for "YouTube - Electric Field effect on Flame 20kV". I think that Bessler paints with multiple "brush stokes" the connection between fire and his principle in his writings. -- Bessler Principle Experimentation -- Theory Versus Experimentation. The correct explanation for the Bessler principle should be considered separately from the experimental evidence in favor of the Bessler principle. If I somehow have the wrong explanation for the Bessler principle, that should not detract from studying the many phenomena associated with the principle. Bessler Principle Extent. The Bessler principle could be observed in a large number of situations. It would apply to every wheel rotating about a horizontal axis, whether the wheel be the size of a planet or the size of a nuclear ground state. The observation of the principle would be masked by the presence of friction associated with the rotating system. Bessler Principle Applications. Applications of the Bessler principle could include explanations for these observations: relatively stable power produced in the 6000 degrees Kelvin solar photosphere (unlike inherently unstable "hot" fusion), strong vertical magnetic fields causing sunspots to be clear-"cool"-dark by the suppression of rotations about horizontal axes, snowflake formation, "strange" superfluid properties associated with low friction, extra heat produced by rotating planets, tornado formation, leakage currents in horizontal magnetically confined "hot" fusion experiments (caused by rotating nuclear ground states creating counter magnetic fields which weaken the fields of the magnetic confinement bottle), massive low-friction rapidly-rotating horizontal propeller-shafts for ships, and "cold" fusion as interpreted to be the interaction of highly-rotating nuclear ground states of small translational speeds. As the Bessler principle is a fundamental friction masked property of every wheel rotating about a horizontal axis, one would expect it to have wide applications and account for many hitherto unexplained or insufficiently explained phenomena. There is plenty of evidence for the Bessler principle. We just need to open our eyes and view the evidence. Reference. For more details/discussion, see the URL http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/ and files therein. The file, Gravity.txt (12 Aug 2010), explains what gravity is. The file, PappEngine.txt (5 Aug 2010), explains how/why the Papp engines worked by means of the Bessler principle and how new versions may be made to work. The file, PappEngine.txt, also made an attempt at explaining why the GEET reactors work using the Bessler principle. The file, BesslerPrinciple.txt (3 April 2010) somewhat explains how and why the Bessler principle works. Solar Corona. The friction masked Bessler principle explains how the million degrees Kelvin radiations from the solar corona are obtained. The energetic photons do not come out of nothing. In the near absence of friction at the far edges of the solar atmosphere, a very slightly rotating hydrogen atom with help from two-part gravitons can (given enough time) produce nuclear ground states rapidly rotating about horizontal axes. Low energy photons striking the rapidly rotating nuclear ground states come away with large energies. Other particles such as electrons interacting with such highly rotating ground states, rapidly acquire energy and can produce energetic photons. If not ionized, bound electron states could pick up an extra rotation because of the internal rotation of the proton (nucleus). Also, because the proton (nucleus of the hydrogen atom) has a nuclear magnetic moment, a rapidly rotating proton can sometimes radiate away electromagnetic energy. Sun Temperatures. Temperatures of materials on the sun's surface and above generally increase in temperature, as distance from the center of the sun increases. The increase in temperature also tends to correspond with a decrease in pressure (less disruption by others). The increase in temperature curiously corresponds to greater exposure to the very cold 3 degrees Kelvin background temperature of space, which temperature is cold enough to cause helium to be a liquid (if it were at one atmosphere of pressure). These temperature increases (as elevation increases) are completely counter to the idea of the sun obtaining its energy primarily by hot fusion. These temperature increases (as elevation increases) are completely in accord with the Bessler principle. Upon consideration, it becomes clear that the Bessler principle is a much larger source of power in this solar system than hot fusion. Railroad Efficiencies. The Bessler principle explains how CSX.com can correctly state that they can move a ton of freight nearly 500 miles by railroad using a gallon of fuel. With some fairly obvious gradual improvements (of using more rotating mass for the same or less friction, and of efficiently generating their own internal chemical energy storage, especially when their trains need to slow down, if they are not already doing so), they should gradually be able to more than double that figure. They should eventually (prior to "inexpensive" fossil fuels being depleted) not require any external chemical fuel consumption, especially if they switch over to the Papp-Stirling engines, when those engines become available. "In 2009, CSX trains averaged 468 miles per gallon per ton." The massive railroad wheels rotating about horizontal axes acquire much rotational kinetic energy from the two-part gravitons and not all this acquired energy is lost to friction in the bearings. Even without gradually doubling their number of same-mass wheels per railroad car, they could gradually double their miles per gallon of fossil-fuel used for moving a ton of freight, by starting to use supplemental water-fuel for GEET reactors to produce GEET gas to be burned in engines. The trains may need to hold off going to no external fossil-fuel consumption, until they are sure that vested criminals will not attack them for doing so. It should be very clear that the railroads are obtaining power from another source. To understand this, one can go safely near a rapidly moving freight train and feel/observe the powerful vibrations, mighty wind, and roaring noise being generated and think to one's self, "These trains can move one ton of freight nearly 500 miles using a gallon of fuel." The "physics" is very incomplete, if we don't begin to incorporate the Bessler principle into our models and simulations. Bessler Principle Tests. There are many tests of the Bessler principle. Here are a few example tests, which either have not been done or the experimental results have been somewhat ignored: rotate a coin in space under a condition of very low friction (especially if its symmetry axis, about which it is rotated, is perpendicular to the plane formed by the centers of the earth, the sun, and the moon), qualitatively replicate the 1968 McKinley low friction demonstration (a modern-day horizontal axis Bessler wheel, using a modern day very low friction bearing by completely excluding magnetic fields with the Meissner-Ochsenfeld effect in very low temperature superconducting lead), measure energy efficiencies of horizontal axle turbines (with the same collection surface geometry) with respect to rotating mass, measure energy efficiencies of horizontal axle flywheels with respect to mass of the flywheel, measure performance degradation of a Stirling engine when its flywheel/rotating shaft rotates about a vertical axis instead of a horizontal axis, measure performance degradation of a Tesla turbine when its rotating shaft rotates about a vertical axis instead of a horizontal axis, double the rotating mass on railroad cars (by doubling the number of wheels and bearings) prior to new measurements of miles per gallon for transporting a ton of freight, measure train fuel efficiency as a function of angular speed of the railroad wheels, and test for two "dragon-fire" hot spots on an end of a rotating two-chamber water-filled cylinder (likely the source device for the ancient yin-yang symbol, with the chamber boundaries specified by the ancient symbol). The ancient Chinese likely found that using the dragon fire or rotating a yin-yang cylinder about its horizontal axis of rotational symmetry was an efficient method for heating a large volume of water. More heat energy was delivered to a water-filled partitioned cylinder than was expended in rotating it. Friction in some of the bearings of the yin-yang cylinders could also be used in heating water. One should be especially concerned with safety in experiments producing large amounts of power by the Bessler principle. For example, one should provide pressure relief valves so that the yin-yang cylinders do not rupture. -- New Bessler Principle Devices -- Transition from Burning Fossil Fuels. We should make an orderly and smooth transition away from burning fossil fuels, prior to running out of fossil fuels. With new Bessler principle devices and with the current redevelopment of the previously demonstrated Papp engines, there should come a time when it is no longer necessary to burn fossil fuels in engines. GEET reactors are currently beginning to be used for using/producing alternative fuels. GEET Patent. Paul Pantone obtained patent #5,794,601, which was filed on 16 May 1997 and published on 18 Aug 1998 (as one can see on http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5794601.pdf). GEET stands for Global Environmental Energy Technology. GEET Reactor Use. GEET reactors may currently be used in special cases to greatly reduce the need to burn fossil fuels. To avoid being suppressed, the GEET reactors and devices using GEET gas are currently being mainly used for experimental or research or educational purposes. Running GEET reactors off of pure water is not openly being done to apparently avoid suppression from organized criminals, which organized criminals are established by rich-powerful self-vested interests to maintain the prevailing energy/money-flow situation. Burning Water & Gasoline. I have seen a long video on the Internet where they were willing to demonstrate for research purposes that (using a GEET reactor) one can burn a blend of 50% water and 50% gasoline fuel and where the fuel were used up in roughly equal amounts. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXygPuWltyU by TheGEETGuys (an authorized dealer associated with www.geetinternational.com or the GEET International Institute Educational Website) which proved that water and gasoline fuel can be burned in equal amounts using a GEET reactor. {It looked to me as if slightly more fuel was used up but since he spilled some liquid while initially pouring the mixture into the fuel container, it was likely that more of the gasoline was spilled, as gasoline is lighter than water.} The implications of burning water along with a fuel should be obvious. Pure water is a fuel, if one uses an appropriate GEET reactor. The hidden reason for this is that GEET reactors use energy from two-part gravitons to rotationally break up the water molecules. At some time in the future we will be allowed to openly burn 100% pure water without suppression, but that time is not yet. If someone is currently burning 100% pure water, they would be wise (for their own safety) not to refer to their doing so. Not burning fossil fuels would be good for our world's environment and would keep us from running off an artificially-created yet-dangerous fossil-fuel energy-cliff like lemmings. We should be prepared by protecting our own energy security. A gradual transition into this new energy era will help our energy security by peacefully removing the shackles of energy bondage. Free License Plans. A variant of the GEET reactor free license plans (for educational, personal, and non-commercial use for a single engine of less than 20 horsepower) may be found at the URL of http://www.teslatech.info/ttstore/articles/geet/geet.htm (which shows an enlarged diagram http://www.teslatech.info/ttstore/articles/geet/jnldwg.htm). The original plans had some large inefficiencies. For example, Pantone on a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXrHLNRmCOk) said don't heat the fuel prior to delivery. I take that to mean that you don't want to have hot vapor going into the entrance of the GEET reactor. The vapor being cool would encourage rapidly rotating nuclear/molecular ground states to be formed (and not encourage large translational or rather hot ground states). In short you don't want the hot material to quickly pass through the GEET reactor without being rapidly rotated about internal axes (to break up the molecules). The blunt cone located on the front central rod end at the fuel vapor entrance of the GEET reactor is also for the purpose of slowing down forward translational speed of the vapors (so as to enhance or better allow the rotational interactions). GEET Tips. There are many other tips out on the Internet so one might want to do some study prior to constructing a GEET reactor. One should make the inner surface of the cylinder containing the central rod very smooth. See Naresh Vasant's video on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sqeqmy14ps which specifies many such details such as having no inside weld ridge. The video also shows some reactor plans and recommends better diagrams & more information (at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/VortexHeatExchanger). A discussion of hooking up the fuel processor is found on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMWWScFyjH0&NR=1 but there is much other information on the Internet about interfacing different types of GEET reactors to engines. Initial "Burn In" Run. On the initial "burn in" run of the GEET reactor, one apparently should use this particular initial alignment. One should have the GEET gas exit end or magnetic-north-pole-end of the central rod closest toward geographic north and thus one should have the fuel-vapor entrance magnetic-south-pole-end of the central rod closest toward geographic south. More precisely, the central core should best be initially aligned with the prevailing magnetic field lines, as if it were somewhat like a floating rod compass needle. The north geographic pole of the earth roughly corresponds to a south magnetic pole, so that the north end of a compass is attracted to the earth's south magnetic pole. The south geographic pole of the earth roughly corresponds to a north magnetic pole, so that the south end of a compass is attracted to the earth's north magnetic pole. A simple quote (from http://www.rexresearch.com/pantone/pantone.htm) about the "burn in" process said 'You must point the exhaust end of the rod due North while starting the engine the first time and let it run for 30 min to "burn in the rod".' I am currently suspecting that the "burn in" process allows individual nuclei (or those with nuclear magnetic moments) within the GEET reactor to turn or to align with and reinforce the currently prevailing magnetic fields (typically along the axis of a reactor when in use), despite any prior presence of local magnetic domains in the materials. This should mean that any material magnetic domains are greatly broken up on a fine level and thus flexible nucleus size domains are established (that can reinforce current longitudinal magnetic components). GEET Closed Cycles. The URL (http://www.keelynet.com/interact/archive/00000363.htm) told of a success of using a closed loop cycle. I think that closed loop processes (or close to closed loop processes) are preferable for reason of sustained fuel use efficiencies, for reason of protecting the environment, and for convenience. For improving GEET reactor performance, closed loop processes would appear to require some means for keeping the input fuel vapor cool, prior to going into the GEET reactor. One obvious way for cooling down the hot exhaust from an engine and simultaneously extracting energy from it would be to use it to power a Tesla turbine rotating about a horizontal axis. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_turbine for some example details. Toward Helicopter Closed Cycles. See http://FreeEnergyNews.com/Directory/Geet/ (referring to "QuantHommeSuite" - page created on 15 Sep 2006 which later on site www.quanthomme.com contained 19 Sep 2006 comments apparently showing a video taken of the ground from the helicopter) regarding the first helicopter running by using GEET (though apparently not a closed cycle). In the case of running a helicopter using GEET gas, I suggest that some of the Tesla-turbine cooled-off exhaust vapor could be reused in principle to improve fuel efficiency (and thus have longer time in the air for a reduced flight weight of fuel), if the cooled-off water vapor could be further cooled off. I think that it would not be necessary to send cooled off water vapor through a heat-sinked Ranque-Hilsch tube extracting the cooler vapor for fuel reuse. The hotter vapor from the tube could be sent back through another Tesla turbine (then reusing that cool exhaust as fuel). Again, I don't that it would be necessary to use a Ranque-Hilsch tube, as I think that a single Tesla turbine and a heat sink would be generally good enough. Still, one could consider the option if the return vapor is not quite cool enough. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_tube for some information on the Ranque-Hilsch tube. It might be advantageous to radiate away some heat to the passing outside moving air (assuming that the air is cold enough). Such a helicopter could thus be made more fuel efficient by using more nearly a closed cycle and especially if it were run in somewhat colder environments. The Papp engines would not suffer from the limitation of needing to keep the input fuel vapor cool, as they are inherently closed cycles and run very cool. Purchase GEET. For people who don't want to build GEET related items themselves, I saw on the Internet that various GEET related products can be purchased, for experimental or educational or personal research purposes. As it is a new market, I suggest that people initially only buy products that have previously demonstrated their value. I assume that with the GEET products beginning to appear, that limited quantities of and limited power production capabilities for Papp engines might soon begin to appear for experimental or educational or personal research purposes. Power Production Using GEET Reactors. Many experimenters around the world have been observing excess power usefully produced because of GEET reactors. I suggested (in PappEngine.txt) an explanation for how the GEET reactors operate, based on the Bessler principle. Paul Pantone has made many discoveries related to his GEET reactor. I think that the free licensing (of one of an older type of his GEET reactor) has helped generate much interest in experimenting with GEET reactors (in using the GEET reactor to produce combustible GEET gas) to do useful work, and in avoiding the payment of as much money on fuel. Use of GEET Reactors. These are some thoughts concerning the use of GEET reactors. It seems reasonable that once certain "sufficiently well designed for water" GEET reactors are running, then ordinary water should be an acceptable fuel substitute for producing the GEET-gas for combustion in a GEET-gas engine. Again, if someone is running off of just pure water, they probably should not currently let it be known. The energy for the breaking apart of the water molecules in the GEET reactors comes from the Bessler principle, or energy for increasing the internal rotational kinetic energy of nuclear ground states (rotating about horizontal axes) because of the two-part absorptions of energetic gravitons. I would hope that people try to find ways to cool down the input fuel vapor so that they can use closed cycle GEET reactors, as much as possible. This would be (1) to insure that oxygen is not being rotationally broken down within the GEET reactors, and (2) to reduce total gases going out into the atmosphere. I think that closed cycle GEET reactors would be much better for the environment than burning fossil fuels. I suspect that the GEET reactors should work best in a horizontal orientation or attitude, since they depend upon the Bessler principle. I suspect that they should work least well in a vertical orientation or attitude. If a GEET reactor is too powerful say with respect to the fuel that it is using, I suppose that it is possible to orient it at closer to a vertical attitude so that it not be so powerful. If using water as part of the fuel for the GEET reactor, I am currently thinking that the oxygen would tend not be broken down, as O16 does not have a nuclear magnetic moment. There is a nuclear magnetic moment in O17 of -1.8937 nuclear magnetons (as shown on p. B-249 of the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 52nd Edition 1971-1972). Only .037% of oxygen is O17. Still, one might want to use a reduced capability GEET reactor to insure that O17 is not rotationally ripped apart. It might not be easily ripped apart since its nuclear magnetic moment has the opposite sign of that of the proton. I suspect that the vortex rotation for O17 would be opposite that for the prevailing H1, so we should tend to not destroy O17. The proton (meaning the nucleus of ordinary hydrogen) is rotationally stable. It is stable despite its having a large nuclear magnetic moment of +2.79278 nuclear magnetons (p. B-247), as it is the fundamental stable nucleus. It is not even rotationally ripped apart within the uppermost atmosphere of the sun that forms the solar corona. The isotope H2 (deuterium) has a nuclear magnetic moment of +.85742 nuclear magnetons (p. B-247) but it might not survive being rotated so rapidly. We might consider switching from using GEET reactors to closed cycle Papp engines when they become available, as it might not be wise to break down nuclear isotopes with nuclear magnetic moments (if we have not demonstrated that we can easily reverse the process). We might want to avoid using large-massive molecules for fuels for the GEET reactors, as rotating the molecules could cause nuclei within to rotate (even if they do not have a nuclear magnetic moment) and it wouldn't seem wise to rotationally break up such nuclei (if we have not demonstrated that we can easily restore them). Ordinary water is a small molecule and O16 doesn't have a nuclear magnetic moment so it should be OK to use for GEET reactor fuel, but we might want to avoid GEET reactors that are "too powerful" with respect to breaking down nuclei, except possibly where there may be a definite need to do so, as is the case with radioactivity. Rotation Reducing Radioactivity. Besides their usual or well known means of providing chemical fuel (or increasing fuel use efficiencies) for running some engines in an environmental friendly manner, the GEET reactors should also be useful in reducing radioactivity of materials that can be made into a gaseous vapor for input into appropriately designed GEET reactors. Rapidly rotating nuclear ground states of radioactive materials have their nuclear ground states deformed and so are transformed more readily (by greatly enhanced decay rates) into radioactively neutral materials. If there is a desire to do so, robots can be set to collect and separate out radioactively dangerous materials in areas that have received large amounts of radioactive contamination. It could be a long and expensive process to collect the radioactive materials. The obtained materials can be turned into a gaseous vapor, put into a GEET reactor, and turned into safe or radioactively-neutral materials. In such a way, places like the site of the Chernobyl nuclear accident might be cleaned up in principle. People could set robot teams to work to just collect and neutralize the long-lifetime radioactive materials. If one has already collected long-lifetime radioactive materials, one could neutralize them using GEET reactors. This could easily solve the perplexing problem of what to do with dangerous long-lifetime nuclear wastes. We should not bury them somewhere. We should just neutralize them radioactively (using GEET reactors), especially the longest lifetime radioactive materials. Quickly completely breaking up many large nuclei (within atoms) into protons (forming the nuclei for ordinary hydrogen) in powerful GEET reactors is a simple example of the reduction of radioactivity. Within such GEET reactors the free neutrons do not take 15 minutes to decay into a proton and an electron. Rather the reaction for the decay of rapidly rotating neutrons may be considered (by experimentation) to be almost instantaneous. The evidence is that a large flux of neutrons does not come from such powerful GEET reactors, though there is much evidence for significant nuclear transformations having taken place (with many protons being converted to neutrons). It would be wrong to assume that the decay rates or half lifes of radioactive materials are a constant, independent of rotation rate. Those decay rates depend upon the nuclear deformations associated with how rapidly the nuclei are being rotated. Skeptics with vested self-interests might cry out that such things are impossible according to the "laws" of physics or persuade others by humor not to believe the much evidence. The skeptics need to seriously consider the much evidence. Papp Engines. The Papp engines used the Bessler principle to produce large amounts of rotational kinetic energy from induced rapidly rotating nuclear ground states. The Papp engines ran very cool, because they created internal rotational states of matter rather than translational states of matter. There was no need for a cooling system and Papp didn't use one. Papp is pronounced "pop" according to the usual European vowel convention. Papp built and demonstrated on many occasions various engines. Like Bessler, Papp was continually battling or confronting a great wall of disbelief, especially on the part of so called "scientifically knowledgeable" people. The Papp patents (#3680431, #3670494, and #4428193) somewhat describe portions of his engines but they left out important details. Hydrogen Essential for Power Production. The Papp patents neglected to explain that ordinary hydrogen is a necessary ingredient for the reusable "fuel" mixture for the Papp engines. Papp's stated noble gas fuel mixture was approximately 36% helium, approximately 26% neon, approximately 17% argon, approximately 13% krypton, and approximately 8% xenon by volume. This fuel mixture formula may be found in patent #4428193 and also may be found on p. 28 of "Infinite Energy" Issue #51. The fuel mixture may be corrected by the addition of diatomic hydrogen, by somewhat keeping constant a rough ratio, 1.5 (or 1.4 or 1.3 or 1.6), of the number of lighter nuclei to the number of next more massive nuclei. This would give a revised formula of roughly 21.3% hydrogen, 28.3% helium, 20.5% neon, 13.4% argon, 10.2% krypton, and 6.3% xenon by volume. The last digit (in the tenths place) is not at all significant but I included it so that the corrected volumes would sum to 100%. The diatomic hydrogen molecule contains two hydrogen nuclei, which is why the percentage for hydrogen is not double the value that we might think it should be. Once the plasma is formed by the spark(s), all the hydrogen nuclei may potentially be available for power production. Other gas mixture formulas may be found according to using as a constant the ratio of the number of those lighter nuclei to the number of next more massive nuclei. The most important thing in the fuel mixture formula is that ordinary hydrogen is needed for proper power production. If we get the somewhat more massive nuclei in the gas mixture to rotate, they can provide much energy by the Bessler principle, but there is a danger of those nuclei being ripped apart rotationally (by acquiring too much energy) if they are somehow not sufficiently rotationally moderated. That problem of nuclei being ripped apart also occurred within the GEET reactors, but the solution in both cases is to not make the devices too powerful. Rotational Moderation Needed. The Papp patents neglected to directly explain that rotational moderation was needed to avoid too much power being produced. The next most important thing in the fuel mixture formulas (and their surroundings) is that there must be enough surrounding nuclei of large enough mass so that they can be rotationally-moderating. Those surrounding materials need to be chemically inert so that the materials continue to be available for later rotational moderation. The chemically inert massive walls of the spark chamber can somewhat serve as rotational moderation but as they are often distant from the rotating nuclei, there needs to be massive nuclei nearby for rotational moderation. The capability of the rotational moderation (by the more massive nuclei) is dependent upon the induced power used to get the hydrogen nuclei to rotate. A large nucleus can't help much with rotational cooling if it has already acquired too much rotation by its moderation and then begins to acquire larger angular speed about a horizontal axis because of the Bessler principle. Angular Acceleration of Nuclei. Without consideration of the additional angular acceleration, a nucleus may receive an angular acceleration proportional to the ratio of its received torque to its moment of inertia. The torque applied by a spark is proportional to its nuclear magnetic moment. The nucleus of the ordinary hydrogen atom (a proton) is the nucleus with the largest ratio of nuclear magnetic moment to moment of inertia. The proton has a large nuclear magnetic moment of +2.79278 nuclear magnetons (see p. B-247 of the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 52nd Edition 1971-1972). The moment of inertia of a solid sphere about an axis through its center is (2/5) times its mass times the square of the sphere's radius. Among all nuclei, the mass of the proton is the smallest. Among all nuclei, the radius of the proton is the smallest. Thus, among all nuclei, the moment of inertia of the proton is very much the smallest. Rapidly changing magnetic fields in sudden high frequency sparks from electrode pairs can cause many nuclei of hydrogen to rapidly rotate about an axis going through its center. The Papp patent #4428193 indicates frequencies from approximately 27,000 MHz to approximately 40,000 MHz. For those nuclei acquiring rapid rotations about horizontal axes, much more rotational kinetic energy is then obtained by the Bessler principle. The Bessler principle causes rapidly rotating nuclear ground states of hydrogen to especially rotate even more rapidly about horizontal axes. Energy to Photons. Energy is removed from rapidly rotating nuclear ground states by various forms of friction. Photons bouncing off of rapidly rotating ground states become photons with more energy and momentum. Electrons can especially acquire energy by interacting with rapidly rotating nuclear ground states and so either produce photons or interact with photons to convey away energy and momentum. Rapidly rotating protons, having nuclear magnetic moments, may also produce electromagnetic radiation (though not much when the rotation is purely about the nuclear magnetic moment axis). Reflectivity to Enhance Momentum Transfer. I think that the Papp patents neglected to explain that the inside surfaces of the spark chamber need to be reflective with respect to the new or increased energy photons. For a photon heading directly at the surface of the piston, making the inside surface of the piston in a spark chamber of a Papp engine reflective would nearly double the linear momentum that could be obtained from each photon striking the surface (compared to the photon purely being absorbed by the piston, where it would increase the momentum of the piston by only one times the momentum of the photon). The reflecting photon itself loses no energy if it is reflected from a stationary piston or surface. Making all the inside surfaces of a spark chamber in a Papp engine more reflective could cause each photon to repeatedly provide double amounts of photon momentum to the piston (by multiple reflections off the other surfaces). This is somewhat in analogy to there being large numbers of light source images, when an original light source is placed between opposing highly reflective mirrors. When one stands in a lighted room between parallel large mirrors on opposite walls, one can see multiple images of one's self. Each of the image sources is greatly multiplied. It would be extremely bright inside a container containing just a light source if all the inside surfaces of the container were highly reflective. In the frame of a moving piston wall, there is no loss of photon energy by reflection. In the frame of Papp engine there is a slight loss of photon energy by it reflecting off an outward moving piston wall. A large number of reflections of a photon off an outward moving piston gradually degrades the energy and momentum of the photon. Upon each reflection from an outward moving piston, (in the frame of the piston) it fully delivers to the piston twice its surface normal component of its current momentum. By the photons reflecting on the surfaces, they would not be absorbed (so not to increase the temperature of the walls) and this would help the Papp engine to run very cool. The reflectivity of the surfaces would need to be chosen so as to preserve the largest total momenta available. Photons Delivered Momenta. The approximate total momentum delivered to the piston by reflected photons is twice the sum of the normal components of the momenta of all the photons striking the piston. For a given momentum, P = (mass of piston)(V2-V1), delivered to the piston by a photon, this increases the kinetic energy of the piston by PV where V is the average of the velocities of the piston before and after the photon delivers momentum. It is PV since PV = (mass of piston)(V2-V1)(V2+V1)/2 = (mass of piston)(V2*V2 - V1*V1)/2 is the change of the piston kinetic energy, where V2 is the velocity of the piston after the photon delivers momentum to it and V1 is the velocity of the piston before the photon delivers momentum to it. The maximum kinetic energy is transferred to the piston when the piston is moving outward at the greatest average speed. I think that Papp made reference to a well timed spark and if so, I think that is basically what he meant. If the piston were connected to a rotating shaft/cylinder, it might also be the most effective time to deliver such a torque (via momentum transfer) when the piston is moving close to its maximum outward speed. The photon momentum transfer would continue, as long as there is momentum to be obtained from the photons and as long as the rapidly rotating nuclear ground states (obtaining energy from the two-part gravitons) are increasing the energy/momentum of available photons. The maximum kinetic energy is most reduced in the piston when a photon delivers outward momentum, P, to the piston at the time when the average velocity, V, corresponds to the maximum inward speed. In other words, that is a time that a photon reflection off the piston would be most destructive of the piston's kinetic energy. It would not even be wise to have photons from any warming coil bouncing around at or before that time. In other words, it might be advantageous to turn off any warming coil well prior to the piston moving inward at the maximum inward speed, especially if those photons are being reflected off the interior surfaces. Use Warming Coils. Papp did mention that there should be warming coils (see p. 23 of "Infinite Energy" Issue # 51). I think one of the reasons for doing that might be so that there could be more photons available for having their energy/momenta increased (after the high frequency spark, just prior to the time of maximum outward piston speed). As the engine runs very cool, there might otherwise be insufficient photons available. The proper tradeoffs can be experimentally determined. The bulk of the photon momenta needs to be delivered closest to the times of largest outward speed. There might not be so many effective photons available with the spark chamber becoming very cold after photon energy is removed. No Combustion. The Papp patents did correctly imply that the power did not come from combustion, but they incorrectly identified where the power was actually coming from. It is possible that Papp either did not fully understand the Bessler principle or he (like Bessler) was keeping his knowledge to himself. No oxygen is used within a Papp spark-chamber expansion cavity so that there is no energy produced from single-use combustion reactions. The Papp engine repeatedly produces its large power from two-part graviton "reactions". Greater rotational kinetic energy is delivered by the two-part gravitons, as the rotational internal angular speeds of the nuclei increase. Vast fluxes of energetic two-part gravitons are available. Each graviton absorbed is used only once, but the almost chemically inert gas mixture can be used over and over. Hydrogen is not completely chemically inert as a pair of them can chemically combine to form the diatomic hydrogen molecules. The diatomic hydrogen molecules are ripped apart by an energy expenditure (as a plasma is formed) but the energy is returned later when the diatomic hydrogen molecules are reformed. Such minor chemical reactions are a net zero energy gain. Total energy is neither gained nor lost by those somewhat insignificant chemical reactions. Rotational Moderation. Noble gases are mainly used for rotational moderation so that the rotating ground states in the Papp engine graviton reactions are not rotationally dangerous. The noble gases are both chemically inert and rotationally stable (with respect to their nuclear ground states). The noble gases tend to be both chemically stable closed shells and nuclear stable closed shells. It is assumed that high frequency sparks that are used are not so powerful (relative to the rotational moderation) that the noble gases rotate so rapidly that the nuclei will be rotationally ripped apart (by acquisition of excessively large amounts of rotational energy by the Bessler principle). There was no need to exchange gas in such a two stroke engine, as there was no chemical combustion in the "fuel" mixture. The "fuel" mixture could be reused by being nearly hermetically sealed (only needing to be replenished at a very slow rate, according to the rate that it leaks away). The piston can acquire power from photon pressure (with each chamber expansion). Frustrations from Skeptics. Papp may have been greatly frustrated or angry by having his demonstration interfered with (without permission) and crudely, publicly labeled as a hoax. Papp may thus have contributed to the explosion in one of his engines on 18 November 1968 when he turned up power on a variac before the cord was plugged back in. See pp. 40, 42, 43, 46 of "Infinite Energy" Issue #51. Well designed Papp engines should be safe to use because of rotational moderation with respect to the input power, as long as one does not try to make them explode. In similar comparison, Bessler became so angry or frustrated with others that he smashed his wheel on many occasions. Papp/Stirling Engine. It might be obvious that one could combine a two stroke Papp engine with some ideas from a two stroke Stirling engine. For an example of an alpha type Stirling engine, see the moving illustration at "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine". The site shows still and moving illustrations for alpha and beta type Stirling engines. The site explains how the gamma type Stirling engine is a beta type Stirling engine with separate cylinders. If a Stirling engine can operate efficiently using little temperature difference, then a combined Stirling and Papp engine might be able to operate well: with internal sparks to provide very high nuclear ground state rotational temperature differences in each spark chamber, without the need for heat exchangers, without the need for external heating, without the need for external cooling, without the need for heat regenerators, and with a massive flywheel/shaft rotating about a horizontal axis to obtain continual power from a steady flux of energetic gravitons. There would need to be enough gas volume in each spark chamber at the time of the spark so that there could be enough highly rotating nuclear ground states picking up more rotational kinetic energy from the two-part gravitons. The spark(s) could be timed to provide much power. The spark(s) could be timed a little before the piston is going away most rapidly so that it could produce useful torque to the rotating massive flywheel/shaft (rotating about a horizontal axis). The main photon burst would be long "gone" prior to the piston beginning to return. Photons reflecting off a returning piston would be destructive of kinetic energy of the piston. One wouldn't need to have the pistons at 90 degrees of orientation with respect to each other, as in the alpha type Stirling engine. The pistons could have the same orientation like the beta or gamma type of Stirling engine, if the connection "points" on the flywheel shaft were changed to 90 degrees out of phase with respect to each other (as is the case with the beta and gamma types of Stirling engines). Both pistons could be powerful. To keep the working Papp engine gas mixture from leaking away as quickly, it might be best to completely enclose the other or "open" atmosphere ends of the pistons to surround the flywheel/shaft. The gas mixture could then only leak out into the actual atmosphere where the flywheel shaft comes out of the engine to deliver power. If that is done, then the gap between each piston and the piston's walls would not need to be so small, as there would be an extra gas buffer to reduce the possibility of the gas leaking away. The gas leakage out the power shaft might be further decreased by keeping the gas pressure around the flywheel/shaft near atmospheric pressure, which could be done by completely opening gas access between opposite sides of the pistons. Light/Heat Flash Power. The power for such a combined engine would then not need to come from gas pressure differences, but rather could come from both the momenta of light/heat "flash" photons in the spark chambers and from the massive rotating flywheel/shaft. Both sources of continual power would be coming from the Bessler principle. There could even be power coming from the two-part gravitons if multiple counter-rotating flywheels/shafts were used to keep the total angular momentum near zero. Photon Recovery. One might put corner reflectors just beyond a continually open gas entrance/exit from the pistons so that many of the photons would not be lost, but would be reflected directly back into the chamber. No Combustion in Combined Engine. The two stroke combined Papp and Stirling engine would not run off combustion, so it would be neither an internal combustion engine nor an external combustion engine. The engine would get its power from a great flow of energetic two-part gravitons. Energy from Large Angular Speeds. The Papp engine would never have large energy productive times, if there were only a large forced-friction redistribution of internal-angular-speed or "helpful working wealth". It is the newly created large angular speeds that provide by the Bessler principle the great energy prosperity for the Papp engine. Attempts at equalizing the rotational kinetic energies and angular momenta, remove the largest angular speeds, which removal greatly curtails the most energy productive portions. Consistently producing new energy by means of injected large angular speed working "capital" is neither a depleting gamble nor a zero sum energy game (unless perhaps some of the capital is zero-energy-sum wasted on idle wealth of large-angular-speeds, internally-rotating around vertical axes). The other extreme of too much power being generated can lead to dangerous-out-of-control situations. There must be a practical-workable situation striking a proper balance between large power production and imposed over-confined safety. Papp made it work. In that single case where one of Papp's engines exploded, there is the strong suggestion that Papp in great anger or embarrassment may have intended the explosion to happen to demonstrate its real power to people who greatly disbelieved him or aggressively opposed his demonstration. See "Infinite Energy", 2003, Volume 9, Issue #51, pp. 43, 45-46. Avoid Engine Friction. If a Papp engine were designed to well distribute the rotational kinetic energy, by using very large amounts of internal friction, then such a system would have little chance of actually working. A forced taking from the rich to give to the poor would destroy the most energy productive portions of the Papp engine. Friction could be greatly increased by for example replacing the closed cycle of essentially chemically non-interacting gas by a closed cycle of a chemically interacting liquid. A spark would not be effective. It is not recommended that one take that approach, as it would be an exercise in futility. We seem to glorify Robin Hood's taking from the rich to give to the poor, possibly because the rich (in a worse fashion than gambling by choice) were taking from the poor by forced taxes to give to the rich. As far as the Papp engine is concerned, a complete forced redistribution of angular speed wealth is the wrong approach. If one wants to kill the goose that lays the golden egg, that is the way to go about it. Redistribution of the internal angular speed wealth by friction will greatly curtail the amazing energy productivity. It is quite interesting how the hydrogen nuclei or protons can somehow handle the great internal angular speed without destroying themselves. The greatly unconstrained angular speed rich protons in the Papp engine can provide much energy in great abundance, by the Bessler principle. The helium nuclei within large bounds can handle much angular speed without being rotationally ripped apart. Think of the usual cold fusion nuclear reaction 2H + 2H -> 4He, in which a highly-rotating deformed nuclear-ground-state of helium can decay down to a normal helium nuclear-ground-state. As it does this it would increase photon energies by interaction during the process. Other noble gases can also handle or tolerate somewhat large amounts of angular speed (without destroying themselves) while contributing to energy production, through the Bessler principle. Kinetic Energy Production Rationale. I don't want to imply that only the mass particles with the largest angular speed (each internally rotating about their own horizontal axis) contribute to energy production in the Papp engine. Even the mass particles with the smallest (or poorest) angular speed (internally rotating about their own horizontal axis) contribute to energy production by the Bessler principle. It is just that the largest angular speeds dominate the energy production. I probably should explain these comments with a little algebra. I was trying hard to avoid such approximate calculations, but my comments become a little more clear with some classical mechanical-like calculations. Anyone who doesn't want to see the calculations could take my comments as they are and just skip the next paragraph. Kinetic Energy Production Approximate Calculations. The rotational kinetic energy of a fundamental mass pair 2f (composed of two opposite fundamental charges) might be taken to be approximately Iww/2 where I is the moment of inertia and w is the internal angular speed. If the mass of a fundamental charge is f and the radius of the center of each fundamental charge particle about the horizontal axis between the centers of the charge particles is l, then I = 2(j + fll) is grossly underestimated as I = 2fll (by assuming that all the mass of a fundamental particle is located at its center). The moment of inertia j of a fundamental mass about an axis through its center is here just underestimated as 0. If a fundamental charge were a solid of radius L then j would be 2fLL/5 but I will just currently ignore the situation by grossly underestimating j to be 0 since I don't know if it is a uniformly solid sphere and I don't know its radius L. I will just ignore the situation by using an L of zero. We need not assume that l remains a pure constant, but we proceed with the calculations anyway. The rotational kinetic energy is Iww/2 = 2fllww/2 = fllww = f(lw)(lw). Let w = w0 + at, where w0 is the initial angular speed, a is an approximate angular acceleration, and t is the time. Let F be an approximate assumed downward "force" on a fundamental mass particle. This "force" F would be purely dependent upon the availability of suitable gravitons and so would be a continuous approximation of a greatly discontinuous situation. Then the approximate torque on the charge pair (about the axis through its center) might be something like a representative example of lF(sinT2 - sinT1) = Ia = a2fll. Thus, lw = lw0 + lat = lw0 + tla = lw0 + tllF(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2fll) = lw0 + tF(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2f). The rotational kinetic energy would be Iww/2 = f(lw)(lw) = f(lw0 + tF(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2f))(lw0 + tF(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2f)). A similar but simpler calculation for translational kinetic energy for a mass of 2f falling down would be 2fss/2 = fss = f(s0 + t2F/(2f))(s0 + t2F/(2f)) = f(s0 + tF/f)(s0 + tF/f), where s is the downward speed, s0 is the initial downward speed, and 2F/(2f) = F/f is the downward acceleration estimate. Those formulas are continuous estimations or approximations of the actual discrete situations. There are no actual continuous forces nor torques. There are no actual continuous accelerations nor angular accelerations. Electric Field Production Versus Angular Speed. If each fundamental charge could rotate about its center, then the electric field production might change. I don't know whether or not each fundamental charge can rotate about its center. If a fundamental charge could rotate, it might alter both the rate at which electric fields come out of it and the rate at which electric fields are absorbed by it. Maybe modeling/simulating the situation and comparing the results with our predictions would provide some otherwise unaccounted discrepancies between simulations and observations. I will currently assume that a fundamental charge can't rotate about itself or at least until the evidence suggests otherwise. The only way that I can currently imagine a charge rotating about itself would be if it were caused by an offset between a fundamental charge and the electric field that it absorbs. I don't know whether or not an offset of an absorbed electric field creates a torque on a fundamental charge. Whether or not a fundamental charge can rotate about itself, the charge should be able to rotate about another charge with radius (l) of the rotation about their center of mass. Power Production Increase With Radius. This l (or the radius of the center of each fundamental charge "particle" or rather "sphere" from an axis, as it rotates around the axis) might be able to increase, as the angular speed of the fundamental charge pair increases. As there may be less overlap in the fundamental opposite charge spheres (rotating about each other), it is possible for there to be larger mutual attractive "forces" by the other charge attractively absorbing more electric fields as l increases. The increase in l (as angular speed increases) should greatly help in rotational power production by the Bessler principle, as there might be more time between attractive absorptions of the two parts of the typical graviton and the higher elevation charge might tend to travel through a greater angle before it absorbs the remainder of the graviton. The increased power production is dependent upon there being sufficiently available numbers of gravitons with the appropriate geometries. With large l (associated with larger angular speed of the charge pair) there might be less overlap in the fundamental opposite charges and fewer gravitons produced, so that the gravitating mass of the two opposite charges might be less. Power Production Comparison. Using the prior approximate calculations, there is an interesting comparison between the delivery of rotational kinetic energy to a rotating fundamental mass pair { namely Iww/2 = f(lw)(lw) = f(lw0 + tF(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2f))(lw0 + tF(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2f)) } and the delivery of translational kinetic energy to a falling fundamental mass pair { namely 2fss/2 = fss = f(s0 + tF/f)(s0 + tF/f) }. Both receive energy from the two part gravitons. The power transferred to the falling mass by gravity greatly depends upon the initial linear speed downward. Little translational kinetic energy would be initially delivered to a mass with very little downward falling speed. Very little rotational kinetic energy would be initially delivered to a mass with very little angular speed about a horizontal axis. In the comparison, low friction for rotation about a horizontal axis somewhat corresponds to low friction for downward translation. Initial rotational or angular speed about a horizontal axis somewhat corresponds to initial translational speed down. With F being an approximate assumed downward "force" blow on a fundamental charge of mass f, the "acceleration" blow ratio, F/f, regarding acquisition of kinetic energy from falling is greater in magnitude, |F/f|, than an approximate ratio magnitude, |F(sinT2 - sinT1)/(2f)|, from rotations, but the value from rotations can be somewhat sustained until it balances out with friction. If the friction is large, it can balance out near zero angular speed. If l is increased as angular speed is increased, kinetic energy can be greatly enhanced from rotations in a manner (through lw0) that has no correspondence with the acquisition of kinetic energy due to falling down. In that crude analysis, I grossly ignored the j estimate of 2fLL/5 or the moment of inertia of each fundamental charge about an axis through its center. The rotational kinetic energy estimates might be increased, if they were included in the calculations. Someone would need to include them. Translational Kinetic Energy Bounds. Seemingly kinetic energy obtained would not be limited in time, if the speeds are not limited. For translation downward, friction causes a near zeroing of acquired kinetic energy by running into things sooner or later. Also for translation downward, there is a problem of eventually "running out" of effective gravitating mass, even if the falling mass unrealistically somehow manages to avoid bumping into things, as it passes inside shells of the mass. Rotational Kinetic Energy Bounds. The energy obtained from rotation about a horizontal axis would not be limited, if friction were zero (which in practice is not attained). For rotations about horizontal axes, friction causes limitations, but somewhat low friction is possible in principle, and the Bessler principle never "runs out" of gravitating mass, as it can often stay at approximately the same position relative to the center of a gravitating mass. Rate of Acceleration. For translation downward, the rate of acceleration is the approximate familiar formula g = GM/(rr), though the effective gravitating mass, M, would decrease if the gravitational mass, m, being accelerated somehow goes inside portions of the gravitating mass, M. For rotations about horizontal axes, the angular acceleration is zero for zero angular speed but though small can just keep increasing as angular speed increases (in the presence of small enough friction). Translational Kinetic Energy Production and Absorption. For translations downward, large or small downward speed is not practical for energy production, as it may be repeated only once (and friction may absorb a portion of that energy). If the mass were somehow provided kinetic energy so that it could be moved to higher elevation, its kinetic energy or outward speed would be lost by gravitons being attractively absorbed (and kinetic energy of the mass being destroyed in the absorption process). Rotational Kinetic Energy Production and Drain. For rotations about horizontal axes, large or small angular speeds can under some circumstances be practical and repeatable for energy production. Large angular speeds can repeatably produce large amounts of rotational kinetic power, if friction is small enough. Even a small consistent angular speed can consistently produce small amounts of rotational kinetic power, if friction is small enough and the rotating mass is large enough, relative to its energy drain by friction. Global Prosperity. As these devices begin to be used more, they should begin to promote a period of global economic prosperity. Our world would otherwise be heading toward calamity by over dependence on burning fuels and in particular fossil fuels. It would be unreasonable to prolong the switch away from burning fossil fuels, when much better solutions begin to appear. The burning of fossil fuels would be wasteful and potentially harmful to our environment. It would be wise to begin to make an orderly transition away from the burning of fuels, as superior solutions are implemented. We should be optimistic for our future by our using devices predicated upon the Bessler principle for the benefit of the world. Friction Diminishes Power Productivity. Especially removing energy from states with largest rotational kinetic energy greatly degrades the total productivity by the Bessler principle. One solution with respect to producing much total power by the Bessler principle is to have the lowest friction for all rotating ground states. This would produce much power by the Bessler principle. Greater friction means lower angular speed and thus more power starvation. By local friction-like interactions, nuclear ground states tend to come into rotational equilibrium with the wheels within which they are located. Competing Explanations? If others can explain how the GEET reactors, the Papp engines, the solar corona, cold fusion, etc. work without invoking the Bessler principle, then those explanations have not been well promoted so far. I have given simple explanations for those things by invoking the Bessler principle. The Bessler principle is essentially a single simple common mechanism or explanation for all those things and many other things, without having to resort to separate or disconnected physical mechanisms to explain them. With GEET reactors we can break up nuclei into nonradioactive forms. With cold fusion we can combine nuclei, without resorting to large translational speeds. "Cold" Fusion. The seminal reference for "cold" fusion was Fleischmann, M., Pons, S., and Hawkins, M. 1989. "Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium", Journal of electroanalytical chemistry, 261, 2A, April, 301-308; 1989. Errata, 263, 1, May, 187-188. Large numbers of further papers followed, including Park, A. E. 1993. "Some Thoughts on a Simple Mechanism for the 2H + 2H -> 4He Cold Fusion Reaction", Fusion Technology, American Nuclear Society, 24, 3, November, 319-323. I spoke with Martin Fleischmann and he apparently understood the idea that very large amounts of internal angular momentum in each nucleus would change the reaction outputs. I figure that in the presence of a horizontal magnetic field at the surface of an immersed cylindrical cathode (due to current going up through the vertical cathode), the Bessler principle with enough pressure, temperature, and translation position stability, can cause nuclear ground states of deuterium to rotate rapidly about horizontal axes. They could then combine (in pairs of rotating nuclear ground states as they also mutually rotate about each other) using Coulomb shielding caused by electrons thrown between the rotating pair and form a very highly rotating nuclear ground state of helium-four. Such highly rotating nuclear ground states would give off much observed heat (as they decay their rotation) and in the process form many observed helium-four nuclei. Photons and electrons colliding with the rotating system could carry away energy. Heat and helium four were found to be produced by such reactions. Instabilities could cause other nuclear reaction products, as have been observed. Some old devices can be made somewhat more new by using them with more understanding of how they work. Some Energy-Saving Safe Driving Tips. Even if we do not yet have regenerative braking in our vehicles, we might sometimes keep our wheels turning a little more in our vehicles. These are some common sense ideas, but with slightly newer thinking applied to them. Unless time is quite crucial, we don't need to approach a known stop at a large speed requiring us to suddenly brake (and send all our rotational and translational kinetic energy to thermal energy, and losing power sources available from the Bessler principle). By not accelerating just prior to approaching a stop sign, we can allow more of our translational kinetic energy, rotational kinetic energy, and power coming from the Bessler principle to carry us to the stop sign. We don't need to accelerate when we see brake lights ahead (but rather be prepared to stop if need be). I in such cases like to keep a foot poised just above the brake so that I can quickly and safely respond if I need to. By planning ahead, we can allow normal friction to slow our vehicle down, without our needing to brake as much. With little traffic we can sometimes not need to come to a complete stop at a red traffic light before the traffic light changes. Early braking may seem somewhat energy wasteful. If we can estimate when the traffic will open up, some early braking can sometimes in a safe manner help preserve both some translational kinetic energy and rotational kinetic energy and thus preserve some power available from the Bessler principle. When we take off from a stop we need not press the pedal to the metal but give the two-part gravitons a chance to assist in contributing a larger share to the rotational kinetic energy. If we keep our tires fully inflated as President Obama suggested, we will not only tend to have less wasteful friction in them as we drive, but there will be slightly more rotational mass in the tires that can pick up rotational kinetic energy from the two-part gravitons. When the air atoms/molecules/nuclear ground states (that are rotating about internal horizontal axes within the tires) collide with the inside walls of the tires, they will be useful as they transfer some of their rotational kinetic energy and internal angular momentum to the tires. For our safety, we should try to drive with smooth flow without "turbulence", following at a reasonably large distance/time, so as to increase our safety and energy saving options, with more time to respond to changing situations. Microwave Ovens. One common partially new Bessler principle device that we might want to avoid is the overuse of microwave ovens. If we must use them, we should use them at very low power settings. We should avoid creating more rapidly rotating nuclear ground states that can take away from proper food value, by locally there being too large a concentration of energy. The rotational temperatures can sometimes be very large, though the translational temperatures may not be so large. The analysis of the motion of the gyroscopic exercise tool currently described on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroscopic_exercise_tool seems to be partial, if it leaves out the Bessler principle in the explanation of its operation (when it increases its angular speed by applied torques as it often rotates rapidly about somewhat horizontal axes). Greater rotational kinetic energy is obtained from the two-part gravitons according to the Bessler principle. Many gravitons come from within the earth that are not "vertical" according to a plumb bob. Hot Soup. When we blow on hot soup to cool it off, we should understand that not only are we blowing on the soup to enhance the removal of the molecules with the largest translational speeds, but we are also increasing the exposure of nuclei in the soup (that have somewhat larger angular speeds) to some nuclei in our breath that have somewhat smaller rotational angular speeds. Nuclear ground states will not pick up as much energy from two part gravitons, if they do not have as much angular speed about horizontal axes. Since the Bessler principle is a fundamental overlooked mechanical principle, there are many other devices/situations (old and new) that depend upon it. The new Bessler principle devices (that I made mention of) should not be taken to be a full list. -- Mass Related to Gravitons -- Mass Perpetually Radiates Gravitons. The mass from even a "dead" or exploded star continues to perpetually radiate or produce energy-changing attractive gravitons, even if the exploded mass were to go down inside a black hole. Thus, planets, stars, and even black holes all serve highly useful purposes of continually producing very large intensities of continual graviton radiation, all of which energetic gravitons will eventually be somehow used in eternity. Neutral charge mass collected in a very large compact body may not produce as many gravitons as widely separated neutral charge bodies of the same total mass, because of there being more absorption of many of gravitons within the large originating body. The Newtonian "force" of gravity on a body of gravitational mass m from a body of gravitating mass M is GmM/(rr). Gravitating Mass Less Than Inertial Mass. For a very massive body, its gravitating mass (M) is less than its inertial mass, because of absorption of many of the gravitons produced within the gravitating mass (M) body on their way out of that gravitating mass (M) body. The internally produced graviton flux would not be conserved within that gravitating body. It is reasonable that any gravitating mass larger than a fundamental opposite charge pair (by at least a fundamental opposite charge pair) would be less than its inertial mass, since it would be possible for one of the fundamental opposite charge pairs to produce a graviton that is absorbed by another fundamental opposite charge pair in the mass. Gravitational Mass Less Than Inertial Mass. A very large gravitational mass (m) would be less than its inertial mass because of the absorption of many externally produced gravitons (absorbed within the gravitational body so that those absorbed gravitons never get to the far side of the gravitational mass m body), and thus these non-existent entities can no longer have any further "pull". The masses on the far side of the gravitational body would be less effective, because the graviton flux is not conserved, as it passes through the gravitational mass. Only for the unabsorbed gravitons, would gravitons be conserved. Only for the unabsorbed gravitons, would gravitational "intensity" be reduced by the square of the distance from the gravitating mass. It is reasonable that any gravitational mass larger than a fundamental opposite charge pair (by at least a fundamental opposite charge pair) would be less than its inertial mass, since it would be possible for one of the fundamental opposite charge pairs to absorb a graviton that would have later been absorbed by another fundamental opposite charge pair in the mass. Newton was concerned about geometric subtleties of gravitational mass when he wrote "Whither a plate flat ways or edg ways is heaviest." This what I see on p. 14 of Collins' 1997 book. I think that the correct response to Newton's consideration is that the plate is generally very slightly heavier flat-wise because edge-wise it absorbs more gravitons from below which are no longer available to be absorbed by the matter at the top of the plate placed on its edge. I don't think that we can currently measure that effect (that Newton was addressing) but there are other related things that we can measure. That page shown in Collins' book shows various other things that Newton considered, but which I will not go into now. Newtonian Formula Approximation. The force of gravity being GmM/(rr) is a very useful continuous approximation of the discrete situation. It should apply to neutral masses that are not too massive and for which there are no other masses directly between the two bodies, that could absorb gravitons. Graviton Absorption. The URL http://scienceforums.com/topic/3402-atomic-clocks-not-stable/ indicates that "atomic clocks were out of sync during solar eclipses". It made reference to the URL of http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/1999/ast06aug99_1/ . That reference mentions gravity anomalies (which sometimes appear and sometimes don't appear), but I don't think that there is much of a puzzle, when one realizes that gravitons from the sun can be absorbed during total solar eclipses. That reference wrote, "In 1954, Maurice Allais reported that a Foucault pendulum exhibited peculiar movements at the time of a solar eclipse." I don't think that there was an actual change in the rate of plane precession (assuming the absorption changes are not too sudden), though I think there appeared to be an anomalous plane change followed by the apparent change undoing itself. I will try to explain this below. The URL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allais_effect also mentions "a claimed anomalous precession of the plane of oscillation of a pendulum during a solar eclipse". Foucault Pendulums. Normally one should follow/observe the motion of a Foucault pendulum from just one ground-end angular-limit to correctly note the precession of the pendulum with respect to the earth. One should not count the number of times that either end precesses by a particular angle (as that would double the actual precession rate). With that basic understanding, consider the following situation. Precession Mismeasurement Possibility. If (1) one were to measure from one ground-end angular-limit with respect to the normal center of the pendulum swing, if (2) the amplitude were to decrease (which normally happens with such pendulums), and if (3) a very long Foucault pendulum were used, then a rotation of the swing plane (for example about a horizontal axis through the pivot point during a total solar eclipse) could incorrectly manifest itself as a large apparent precession rotation (about the old vertical axis) of the plane of amplitude swing, as the eclipse progresses to totality. As the eclipse goes away from totality, the swing plane would rotate back about a horizontal axis through the pivot point, thus the large apparent precession anomaly would apparently reverse the plane rotation (about the old vertical axis). I am guessing that this sort of thing happened during the 30 June 1954 solar eclipse when an anomalous 13.5 degrees was measured by Maurice Allais. If the plane of Allais' pendulum swing would have happened to contain the sun and the moon at the time of the total solar eclipse, I don't think that there would have been much of an apparent angle observed. Since he saw a large apparent rotation (and later it unrotated), I doubt that the plane of the pendulum motion included the sun/moon during that total solar eclipse. I suspect what he saw was because the moon's absorbed many gravitons that came from the sun. The effects should be largest within the greatest or most shaded graviton shadow. His pendulum was disturbed as it entered and left the strong graviton shadow. I think he observed a rotation in the plane within which the Foucault pendulum was swinging. The plane change occurred when the total eclipse graviton shadow came to the place where his pendulum was located and the plane of rotation was restored when the total eclipse passed by. The disruption can be simply explained by a reduction of gravity from the sun within a total solar eclipse. The total direction and magnitude of local gravity changed, because of the eclipsing of many of the gravitons that had been coming from the sun. Some observers of Foucault pendulums during total solar eclipses have seen large plane changes and other observers have not observed such plane changes. Notice that one would not expect to see much of an angular change in the plane of the motion of the Foucault pendulum, if the plane of the swing of the pendulum happened to nearly contain the sun. One might expect the center of the pendulum to change (assuming that the sun was not directly above), but that may not have been measured (as it might have required that both the ends of the motion of the pendulum to have been measured). An initially stationary long-line plumb bob might provide a simpler method to measure that. I suggest that people do these measurements during a total solar eclipse, unless the sun is directly above, in which case one would not expect to see any change in stationary plumb bob angle. Videos could be taken of such stationary long length plumb bobs during a total solar eclipse. If the sun were directly above a Foucault pendulum during a total solar eclipse, one would expect fewer gravitons to pull up on the pendulum so gravity downward would be effectively stronger, so as to increase the pendulum's frequency. A formula for a simple pendulum with a particular length is 2(pi)frequency = sqrt(gravity/length). See pp. 153, 156 of "Essentials of Physics" (1971) by Borowitz and Beiser. If one wants to see the largest possible rotation of the plane of the Foucault pendulum (about a horizontal axis), one might want to choose a plane of motion furthest from the sun (or moon) at the time of the total eclipse. Simple Explanation. There should be nothing very difficult about this theory. School children should be able to understand the basics of it. We can imagine a Foucault pendulum at the north pole. It could be a heavy weight supported by say a long sturdy wire from a high pivot point. Before we pull sideways on the weight in some direction to cause it to swing in nearly a fixed plane, the pivot point to weight direction points directly "down" according to the total pull of gravity from the earth, from the sun, and from the moon. If the moon crosses in front of the sun during a total solar eclipse, this would block many of the rays of gravity coming from the sun, as they would be stopped within the moon. The weight would move to a new location (denoting a measured new "down") during the eclipse due to a reduction or partial shadowing of rays of gravity from the sun. The weight would return to nearly its original location of "down" after the eclipse. If before the eclipse, we had previously pulled the weight (to one side) to define a particular plane in which it swings, then that plane being almost fixed would slowly rotate with respect to the earth (ignoring any rotation of the north pole ice cap). Even without shadowing of gravitons, the plane of the swing of a Foucault pendulum (swinging at the north pole) would not be perfectly fixed because of gravitons coming from the sun and the moon, as those change their locations with respect to the north pole. When the total eclipse begins to shadow gravitons from the sun, the center of the swing would change to the new location of the weight, because of the reduction of gravity from the sun. When the total eclipse ends, the center of the swing would return to nearly its original location. There would have been a rotation of the plane (about a nearly horizontal line through the pivot point) during the eclipse, unless the sun happened to be in that plane. Videos of Foucault pendulums during the entire total solar eclipsing could be taken from above. The videos should show the exact time and a marked direction of true north. One should be able to run simulations of the behavior (assuming models for the attenuation of gravity from the sun) before the eclipsing to see if particular data might be of interest. Then simulations can be run after the eclipsing to see if the correct gravity attenuation models can be obtained to properly account for the motion of the pendulum. Here is a URL to an abstract of a 29 February 2000 paper about measurements suggesting gravity shielding during total solar eclipse (http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v62/i4/e041101). The attenuation of gravity from the sun by the moon during a total solar eclipse can be measured by Foucault pendulum deviations. The attenuation factor could be the reduced gravitational force from the sun (needed to explain the deviation) divided by the unshadowed gravitational force from the sun. I suspect that the attenuation measurements might not in some cases be accurate enough to show a dependence of the attenuation on the relative apparent size of the moon with respect to the apparent size of the sun. The apparent size of the moon relative to the apparent size of the sun can change slightly from one eclipse to the next. There may be a slight deviation of the motion of the moon because of the reduction of gravity from the sun by the earth during a lunar eclipse. Motion calculations of the moon may be made more accurate by including these fine details. People should begin to form gravity attenuation models which corrections should be used in other calculations, such as the correction of the motion of graviton eclipsed bodies. Death of Einstein's Gravitation Theory. I am wondering if Einstein wrote his friend Besso in 1954, after he heard of Allais' Foucault pendulum observations during a total solar eclipse on 30 June 1954. The observations should have provided clear evidence of the death of his theory of gravity. If Einstein heard of those pendulum observations first, it would be no wonder that Einstein wrote such strong words in his letter to Besso. See his words below. The observations would have provided clear evidence that any supposed geometry of curved spacetime was highly discontinuous by means of it being shadowed by other masses. Since there would be no rational reason for a discontinuity of spacetime geometry at such a shadow, this would mean that it was an incorrect theory. I suppose that Einstein was aware of those observations by the end of 1954. Gravity shadowing strongly suggests that rays of gravitons are actually being intercepted. I suppose that Einstein clearly understood that the data meant the death knell for his theory of gravity. Solar Clock Anomalies. I wanted to comment on anomalies possible for solar clocks associated with absorption of some gravitons within the earth and within the moon associated with hyperfine structure, but my qualitative analysis is not complete. Others will need to complete the more subtle analysis, that is not as direct or straight forward as the eclipsing of Foucault pendulums. Graviton Absorption. Here might be a more subtle way of increasing one's understanding of what is going on with respect to graviton absorption. At night, under a full moon, more gravitons arrive on the earth's surface in a unit time from the moon than at night with a new moon (assuming one corrects by the square of the ratio of distances from the moon). With the new moon there are somewhat more of those gravitons from the moon that are absorbed within the earth. The gravitons from a full moon don't need to travel through the earth to get to the night-time surface of the earth. One might want to consider anomalies of atomic clocks with respect to sun and moon conditions keeping the Bessler principle in mind. In ordering events from the most gravitons traveling up or down vertically to the least numbers of gravitons traveling up or down vertically we might roughly have: noon with new moon (no solar eclipsing), noon with full moon, midnight with full moon, and midnight with new moon. Time, latitude and season would also contribute to graviton directions. Hyperfine structure (especially in the presence of a magnetic field) could depend on such things as the nuclear magnetic moment and spin. Having more gravitons traveling up or down vertically (at the location of the atomic clock) might cause a slightly increased nuclear magnetic moment and maybe even an increased spin (intrinsic angular momentum). The increased nuclear magnetic moment might be according to the Bessler principle causing a larger angular speed of the nuclear ground state, if there are more gravitons in the vertical direction. Maybe even quantized spin could also slightly increase (if within spin there is some actual rotation of mass composed of some fundamental opposite charges) because of more gravitons in the vertical direction according to the Bessler principle. There should be changes according to time, latitude, season, phase of the moon, and solar eclipses (shadowing gravitons coming from the sun). -- Limitations of Prior Physical "Laws" -- Approximate Electromagnetic Equations. The Hertz field equations may be more accurate than the linearized Maxwell equations. The differential Hertz field equations are basically the linearized differential Maxwell field equations after replacing the partial derivatives with respect to time by total time derivatives. Still, the Hertz field equations are not correct, if the equations are incorrectly based on continua rather than correctly based on discrete things such as discrete electric field packets traveling through space. Also the Hertz field equations are not correct unless the equations show that the electric fields pointing in a single direction can be absorbed/shadowed. Gauss' law with respect to electric fields is incorrect. See discussion below. The electric fields of one type can even be absorbed by neutral matter. I think that the magnetic fields are an artificial construct of convenience associated with the propagation of electric field packets from moving fundamental charges. Galilean Invariance of Hertz Equations. The more accurate (but-still-approximate) Hertz field equations are Galilean invariant. See the "Hertzian Electromagnetism" Chapter 4 of "Heretical Verities: Mathematical Themes in Physical Description" (1986) by Thomas E. Phipps. See his discussion of covering theory. Possible Nature of Discrete Electric Field. We might assume the idea that magnetic fields are an artifact of convenience. We might also assume that transverse electric fields are another artifact of convenience. Starlight photons could just be a timed collection of discrete parallel or anti-parallel electric fields traveling together. I suspect we could consider a discrete electric field as a ripple along a ray like a wave in space (traveling at the speed of light) of a series of fundamental charges (all of the same charge type) temporarily appearing and then disappearing. The ripple begins and ends with a fundamental charge. This might suggest that fundamental opposite charges of matter can temporarily appear then disappear in starlight (and so if close enough be subject to being pulled down by gravitons). Gauss' Law Approximation. Even assuming the continuous approximation of the electromagnetics, Gauss' law could still not be correctly applied to charge sources of electric field intensities. The fields are not conserved as they radiate away from the charge sources. Like gravity, only the unabsorbed electric fields are conserved, as they radiate away into space. The electric fields can be absorbed by fundamental charges within neutral matter. Especially because of absorptions by neutral matter, the electric fields do not decrease inversely with the square of the distance. With enough matter surrounding a charge, a measurement of the surviving electric field outside the neutral matter containing the charge would provide an underestimation by Gauss' law of the net charge within. With not much absorbing neutral matter, it would be a very good approximation, since most of neutral matter is empty space, which empty space would not absorb electric fields. Gauss' law remains an excellent approximation in many cases. Standard Thermodynamics Invalid. The "laws" of standard thermodynamics have much practical usefulness but they each have their limitations because of discrete E fields and the Bessler principle. With the coming of quantum gravitons, there would be great restrictions on the validity of the standard thermodynamic laws. Though there are many other examples, for brevity the solar corona will be used as a primary example of the zeroth through third laws of thermodynamics failing to a large extent. Zeroth Law. The zeroth "law" of thermodynamics denotes that two systems exposed to each other for a long period of time (and isolated from other systems) will come to equilibrium with each other. This equilibrium concept is thus associated with a concept (common to both systems) called temperature. Though temperature is often a useful concept, there may not be a single temperature equating translational kinetic thermal equilibrium and rotational kinetic thermal equilibrium, within the very same total system (even if the systems are exposed to each other for a very long time). An example of this failure of the zeroth "law" of thermodynamics is evident in the solar corona. The two systems, though co-located for a long time, never come to thermal equilibrium with each other, because extra rotational power is externally being supplied continually by energetic two-part gravitons. There would be a large temperature of at least one million degrees Kelvin associated with some of the highly rotating nuclear ground states in the solar corona, since they cause such large energy photons. There would be a relatively small temperature associated with the small translational kinetic energies of the hydrogen atoms in the solar corona. There is a huge difference in these two temperatures that remains over great amounts of time. The one million degrees Kelvin temperature does not come from long association with the colder 6000 degrees Kelvin solar photosphere. The one million degrees Kelvin temperature does not come from long association with the colder 3 degrees Kelvin background of space. The million degrees Kelvin temperature comes from a violation of the zeroth law of thermodynamics, which violation is because of the Bessler principle. One could just say that the concept of thermal equilibrium (associated with a single temperature) is not a completely valid concept given the Bessler principle. The Bessler principle depends upon two-part gravitons. The two-part gravitons go everywhere, so there are no truly isolated systems that are allowed to come to equilibrium. A wall built to absorb incoming gravitons, would itself emit gravitons. If the wall were thick enough to absorb all incoming gravitons, it would itself emit very large numbers of gravitons. First Law. The first "law" of thermodynamics denotes that energy is conserved in an isolated system. Regarding the first "law" of thermodynamics, there is no conservation of energy (heat or otherwise), as no system can be isolated from the energetic two E-field-part gravitons. The nonconservation of energy could also be analyzed using discrete E fields. Charges emitting or absorbing energy-changing E fields should simply convey the idea of energy not being conserved in an isolated system. An isolated charge emits vast numbers of E fields which will change the kinetic energy of external charges when the E fields are eventually absorbed. Any isolated charge will have its kinetic energy change when it absorbs an E field from somewhere very far away. Practically the Bessler principle is a measurable example of the non-conservation of energy, because extra rotational power can be externally supplied continually (though not continuously) by energetic two-part gravitons. As an example, energy is not conserved in the solar corona, as energy is being produced within the solar corona. If one includes energy-changing attractive gravitons within the energy conservation equation, then there is sometimes a lose of energy as gravitons are absorbed in the solar corona. Only part of the energy of those absorbed energetic gravitons is converted into rotational kinetic energy during the absorption processes within the solar corona. There are many hydrogen atoms or nuclei having components of velocity away from the sun that lose part of those components of velocity by absorption of energy-changing gravitons, and so stay nearby within the "pull" of the sun. Kinetic energy of those atoms or nuclei is not conserved as they absorb energy-changing gravitons. We can not associate a particular energy with a graviton, as what happens with respect to energy depends upon the particular circumstances. Thus, the idea of conservation of energy can not be salvaged by incorporating energetic gravitons. If E fields and gravitons are excluded from consideration, this might allow conservation of energy to be salvaged, but the price paid by such exclusion is that it would not be applicable anywhere since gravitons go everywhere. No system can be isolated from energetic gravitons. With cases of failure of the zeroth and first laws of thermodynamics, the other laws of thermodynamics also fail. Second Law. A particular Clausius statement of the second "law" of thermodynamics is that there can't be a process which has a net result of heat flowing from a cold body to a hot body. The Bessler principle violates the Clausius statement. Because of external gravitons being absorbed (that can't be kept away by isolation of a system), a cold or low-angular-speed rotating nuclear-ground-state is transformed into a hot or large-angular-speed rotating nuclear-ground-state. Not only was all the energy transformed completely from a cold system to a hot system, extra energy was produced in the process because of the gravitons. The cold system ceases to exist and a new hot system is produced. That violation was for a single system. I will try to show the violation for entire systems. A Bessler wheel used by Bessler was rotationally cold as it had only a slight rotational kinetic energy. The wheel acquired rotational kinetic energy from the two-part gravitons, until it became rotationally hot. If we exclude consideration of the gravitons, then we observe that the cold system ceased to exist and an entire new hot system was obtained in its place. Any modern day Bessler wheel would also be another example of a violation of the Clausius statement. Consider coins rotating in space and the McKinley low friction demonstration as modern day examples of Bessler wheels. Another entire system example could come from the solar corona. If we exclude gravitons from consideration, we see that an extremely high temperature solar corona is completely surrounded by low temperature surroundings. The solar corona is continually giving off energy to its surroundings but energy for it is mysteriously being supplied from somewhere. If we ignore the energy being supplied by the two-part gravitons, then we are left with the conclusion that energy is somehow going from a cold system and to the hot system, thus violating the Clausius statement of the second law of thermodynamics. Many incorrectly consider the gravitational "field" to be energy conservative. Gravity is not a field and the two-part gravitons are not energy conservative. Trying to save the Clausius statement by including the energy of the gravitons might lead to the source of the gravitons being of extremely high temperature, which would not be consistent with experimental results. It is simpler to let the Clausius statement die a peaceful death. The second "law" of thermodynamics is often applied to energetically isolated systems. Because no system can be isolated from energy-changing attractive gravitons, energetic gravitons can convey extra energy into such systems rotationally. I will discuss some more details regarding the solar corona being an example of the violation of the second "law" of thermodynamics. Low "temperature" photons or electrons interact with low translational speed nuclear ground states in the edges of the solar corona and produce more energetic photons, as if the energy came out of nowhere. The arrow of time would on the surface appear to be going in the wrong direction since large energy (high temperature) photons are coming away from the outer edges of the sun's atmosphere which has low temperature surroundings. One million degrees Kelvin photons are emerging from the solar corona. The solar corona is surrounded on the inside by the sun's photosphere which is at a much lower temperature of about 6000 degrees Kelvin. The solar corona is surrounded on the outside mostly by the very low temperature 3 degrees Kelvin background temperature of space. How are these things possible? The photons or electrons interact with highly rotating nuclear ground states that have attained large angular speed from energetic two-part gravitons because of the Bessler principle. The Bessler principle (along with the inability to isolate systems from energy-changing attractive gravitons) suggests a fundamental flaw in the second law of thermodynamics. Since the second law of thermodynamics is not valid in many relevant cosmological applications (for example how stars actually work), the universe will never proceed to a heat death, assuming that the creations/works of God continue. Third Law. A statement of the third "law" of thermodynamics is that when a system approaches a temperature of absolute zero, then the system increases in its orderness. Regarding the third "law" of thermodynamics, as temperature associated with kinetic energy for translational motion goes to zero from above, if nuclei in atoms are isolated so that they don't interfere with each other and are free to rotate about horizontal axes (that is don't apply a vertical magnetic field), then they need not approach a particular amount of orderliness, since they could pick up rotational energy from gravitons according to the Bessler principle. The solar corona is a prime example of a violation of the third law of thermodynamics. Despite the "coldness" associated with an imposed temperature "approaching" absolute zero (with small translation kinetic energy relative to their neighbors), isolated atoms in the presence of gravitons can become very rapidly-rotating large-rotational-kinetic-energy ground states with many state variations possible. The atoms that are the very coldest with respect to the least translational kinetic energy (or the atoms most closely approaching absolute zero with respect to translations) are the most isolated and the most likely to acquire continually increasing rotational kinetic energy because of the Bessler principle operating with little interference. The coldest atoms are the least likely to interfere with each other but it is they that paradoxically acquire the largest rotations about horizontal axes of their nuclear ground states from gravitons. Not only does the third "law" of thermodynamics fail in these situations, they are extreme failures. The systems become extremely unordered, as highly rotating nuclear ground states are attained and large energy photons are produced, as entities (electrons or photons) eventually interact with the rotationally greatly-energetic nuclear ground states. Because of the magnetic moment of the nucleus of hydrogen, such rapidly rotating nuclear ground states may also give off radiation. Approximate Newtonian Laws of Motion. Here are some general comments regarding gravity that cause the Newtonian laws of motion to be approximations that are sometimes not correct. Though the three laws of motion are often useful, (1) they generally ignore the idea that the graviton "force" is actually composed of two-part internal-condition-dependent time-separated discrete blows that are dependent upon the particular gravitons that happen to be coming their way and (2) they generally tend to ignore the idea that bodies can't truly be separated/isolated from the influence of particular gravitons coming from far away (and so can't be precisely considered without specific knowledge of them). One might consider these to be unimportant details, as we often do not notice these problems in practice. Here are some other comments that limit the appropriateness of each of Newton's three laws of motion. Newton's First Law of Motion. "Every body continues in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it." See those words of Newton on p. 190 of "Basic Physics" 1968 by Kenneth W. Ford. The notion of just a "force" may be quite an oversimplification. This law is approximately correct, as long as it is understood that the forces are more correctly discrete blows in time associated with the absorption of discrete E fields that are dependent upon particular circumstances. Some circumstances can be the availability of particular discrete E fields directly encountering fundamental charges. The blows can be blocked or shadowed in their progress by the timely presence of other intervening masses or charges. Other parts of the same body can serve as intervening masses or charges. Very slight deviations in the motion of an object can not be accounted for by discrete gravitons or E fields that are not exactly known (with respect to an exactly known body that the blows may act upon). If the geometry and dynamics are not just right, the gravitons or E fields can pass through the body without any effective interaction. A greater source of knowledge would be needed in understanding these situations. With conditions of total knowledge about the geometry, dynamics, gravitons, and E fields the first law of motion might be recovered. Newton's Second Law of Motion. The second law of motion may be stated, "When a particle is acted on by a resultant force, it will be accelerated in the direction of the force with an acceleration proportional to the magnitude of the force." See p. 47 of "Essentials of Physics" 1971 by Sidney Borowitz and Arthur Beiser. The second law of motion could be summarized as force = (mass)(acceleration). My comments with respect to Newton's first law carry over to Newton's second law. The forces are better described as discrete blows. The forces are not continuous instantaneous entities, though they are often modeled as such for convenience and expediency. They are more appropriately blows, which depend upon particular fine interaction geometry or dynamic details. The blows can be blocked by other masses or charges. The finest variations in the motion of a object can not be properly accounted for by gravitons or E fields, without the discrete field-entities being known in exact detail (and without knowing the exact details of the "particles" that they might act upon). The idea of a particle (purely acted upon by a single force) is an incorrect assumption, if the smallest particle of neutral matter actually has two separate mass parts that can be separately acted upon. The internal motion of the neutral particle would not be modeled by such a crude analysis. If the smallest particles of neutral matter are not considered to be particles (but rather the particles are the fundamental charges within), then this would somewhat allow the second law of motion to be recovered, but exact knowledge of the incoming blows on the individual fundamental charges and the interaction between the fundamental charges would be required. Currently, such exact knowledge is typically not available. We might somewhat increase in our understanding of such details by modeling where possible the fine interaction details and parameters, so that we may compare simulations with experimental results. The proportionality constant, called mass in Newton's second law of motion, would not be a pure constant if it increases according the energy added to it. Energy could be added to it for example by energetic gravitons. The mass would not just be proportional to the number of fundamental charges within. The mass increase might be governed by the formula (total energy) = (inertial mass)cc, where c represents the speed of light. The formula is not dependent upon Einstein's special theory of relativity. There are various derivations found on the Internet (for example within mcc_comments20080223.txt). The derivation might be modified to show an increase in mass of a fundamental charge according to the center of the fundamental charge traveling at a greater speed than zero. Many of the "observed" lengths of light within the moving sphere would be longer. I have not done that derivation. Maybe someone will work on it, if it has not already been done. Newton's Third Law of Motion. "To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction; or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts." See those words of Newton on p. 229 of "Basic Physics" 1968 by Kenneth W. Ford. Ford then goes on to quote in modern terminology, "For every force in nature there is always an equal and opposite force; or the mutual forces of two bodies upon each other are always equal in magnitude and opposite in direction." It is probably wise that Newton used the word "action" rather than "force". The absorption of E fields are not continuous forces but rather timed blows. Still the third law is an approximation. For example, it ignores: the time of delivery of blows, the shadowing of blows, and the particular absorption geometry/dynamics. The "forces" need not be exactly equal and opposite (only approximately so). The blows from one body can be blocked by other masses or charges that are in between the two bodies. The blows from one body can be blocked by the dynamic motion of the other. As an example of this timed self shadowing, the blows arriving at one body may come when the body is edge on rather than with full exposure. Newton may have considered a static version of such consideration when he wrote, "Whither a plate flat ways or edg ways is heaviest." This is again what I see on p. 14 of Collins' 1997 book. Angular Momentum Nonconservation. Angular momentum need not be conserved in a rotating nuclear ground state because of internal torques supplied to it with the Bessler principle. The internal torques allow internal angular momentum to change. Linear Momentum Nonconservation. Linear momentum need not be conserved. As somewhat an example of this, a special Papp engine preferentially and continually emitting some of its photons in one direction could have a form of photon propulsion. Simpler and better examples of the non-conservation of linear momentum would be: a charge out in space absorbing an electric field and some neutral matter out in space absorbing a graviton. I don't think that conservation of linear momentum can be salvaged as a law by only applying a negative momentum to a graviton. One couldn't assign a momentum (positive or negative) to an electric field unless it is known what would be the sign of the charge that will absorb it. In the absence of that knowledge, I don't think that the conservation of linear momentum law can be repaired. Mass-Energy Nonconservation. There are other examples associated with violations of some of the so called thermodynamic and conservation laws of physics. If energy is not conserved, there should be no surprise that mass-energy is not conserved. An important violation of the conservation of mass plus energy so-called "law" will now be considered. -- New Mass from Energetic Gravitons -- Matter Formation from Infinite Dirac Sea. Gravity pulls "down" on starlight (and sometimes even other gravitons). This would be done by energetic gravitons pulling down on opposite fundamental charges within starlight (with the fundamental charges possibly temporarily available from the Dirac sea). This could provide some energy to the previously temporary charges so that they would remain. I think that this is a simpler explanation for the formation of new matter in space than worm-hole theories forming matter. Energy for formation of the new prematter composed of opposite fundamental charges would be delivered from energy present in the two-part gravitons. The prematter (see D&C 131:7-8) in space could then be organized into stable protons and electrons. The protons and electrons would form hydrogen atoms or rather new ordinary matter. I suspect that it is by choice that the very fine fundamental matter is organized into hydrogen rather than antihydrogen, even though I also suspect that the same fine fundamental building blocks could be oppositely organized into antihydrogen. See John 1:3 and Isaiah 50:3 or 2 Nephi 7:3 or D&C 133:69. Having very little rotation, the new matter would account for the very cold 3 degrees Kelvin background temperature of space. The new matter would absorb gravitons from nearly random directions, so this would tend to prevent the acquisition of large internal angular speeds. Universe Growing/Expanding. Collections of vast amounts of newly organized matter could later be rotated (see Genesis 1:1; Abraham 4:1; Moses 2:1; D&C 45:1) with possibly some assistance from the Bessler principle to form new galaxies made up of many new massive stars. I think it would be difficult for the Bessler principle alone to account for the many new rotational asymmetries of the new galactic masses. The energetic gravitons causing the formation of vast amounts of new, dark matter would suggest that the universe is continually growing in mass (if we are not counting any dormant-invisible infinity of mass-charges present within the Dirac sea). The universe would be continually increasing in its "local" expansion because of photon pressure or rather photon propulsion. Photons deliver momentum to the things that absorb (or sometimes reflect) them. Very far out in space (between galaxies), gravitons come from nearly all directions. That is why it is the photon propulsion that dominates in the expansion of the galaxies (over the graviton attractions). We can't see vast numbers of star systems far beyond the dark matter, because the radiation is reflectively blocked or absorbed by the vast amounts of dark matter accumulating out in space. I suspect that the dark matter is mainly hydrogen. The starlight energy mainly goes toward kinetic energy of expansion. It seems reasonable that the expansion would just continue. What is described is consistent with what is actually observed. There is continued expansion. There is a vast amount of dark matter observed to be out there. Stars by much stability should last much longer than if they received their power purely from hot fusion. It is the hot fusion that decreases their age. The continually growing and expanding universe is much different than many have imagined, without consideration of the effects of energetic two-part gravitons. Mass Offspring. Even the continual mass in the "worthless", "lifeless" litter (that we may pick up and organize here on earth) upon waiting long enough time (even if processed into different forms), will directly contribute (by means of it producing a glorious-continual never-ending supply of energetic gravitons) to the production of new mass any number of times the mass of that previously collected litter. The mass of that previously seemingly worthless litter thus has an additional importance of being "ancestor" to infinite mass direct "offspring" in eternity. Any amount of those direct "offspring" masses would eventually have even newer masses any number of multiples of those "offspring" masses with this process continuing forever. Charge Parentage. It seems reasonable that each fundamental charge usually has a type of "parentage" (with a birthplace within light) from two opposite fundamental charges (that provided the E fields that became the graviton that provided energy for that fundamental charge and an opposite charge to be permanently retained or extracted from the Dirac sea). It is possible for strong electromagnetic fields and energetic matter to bring forth matter and anti-matter from the Dirac sea in an energy exchange process. Ignoring the more complicated sudden modes of group-mass production (which might be hiding the parentages) in favor of the typical matter creation out in space, the usual continual charge parentage propagates backward in time into the infinite past by powers of twos. Though unlikely, some individual ancestral charge "parent" on the "family tree" could be the same as another ancestral charge "parent" elsewhere on the "charge family tree". Many of the parent charges produced their gravitons in ever more ancient and distant realms far beyond. In any solid angle direction, there would be an infinite number of currently existing galaxies of stars and worlds (Moses 1:4,33,37; D&C 76:112; Ephesians 3:21; Isaiah 45:17-18). There is no boundary to the Dirac sea. There is no need to worry about coming to the end of the Dirac sea and "falling" off the "edge". Falling off the end of the ocean would be more likely. Charge Descendants. We could assume that a particular fundamental charge is not annihilated (by very rare anti-matter of opposite charge and organization). This means that the fundamental charge is not sent back to the Dirac sea (to await another opportunity to come forth). Then, that individual fundamental charge would be a parent charge to a increasing number of direct "children" charges, with that process continuing to eventually even greater numbers of "grandchildren" charges, etc. Those numbers go to infinity with increasing time. Likely charge descendants only come by way of opposite charge "parents". An E field from one type of charge could pass through a photon, but I suspect that it would not produce an opposite charge by attractively pulling down on it, because I suspect that fundamental charge production needs to be a quantum process meaning that neutral mass production is an all or nothing sort of process. Likely charges are only produced in opposite charge pairs (which are very close to each other), which would keep total charge created in balance. Net charge might be conserved. That may be one of the few remaining "laws" of ordinary physics that somewhat survives the onslaught of the graviton (if we don't look too closely to the closely at the charges being produced). With the removal of lower physical laws, this should in no way suggest that there do not exist higher physical laws. One needs to carefully continue to study and do the experimental tests therein to learn of higher physical laws and derive benefit from them. See D&C 130:20-21 and D&C 132:5,21,32. Living Universe. The matter production speaks of increasing numbers of galaxies of stars and worlds without end, as time progresses in an ever-expanding, mass-locally-increasing universe. Possibly the mass in the universe would not be locally increasing, if we include the already infinite charge matter waiting to come forth from the infinite Dirac sea. The mass in the universe would not be increasing, if we consider that there is the already infinite charge matter to start with. Twice an infinite amount of mass is still infinite. The charge matter progeny of this earth would in eternity include portions of infinite new worlds like this one. Because this universe moves, expands, and reproduces itself in varying forms ad infinitum, it should properly be considered to be living eternally. What we see/view until there appears blackness of "space" is like a single cell in a growing infinite living universe, expanding in all directions. From each "cell", very large numbers of new living cells will arise in due time with this process continuing forever. Universe Connected. The universe is likely connected at least by quantum connections at a very fine level. As it was extended in growth by quantum photon and quantum graviton connections, it may reasonably be somehow quantum connected. Infinities Past/Future. The past is truly prelude to the future. We can often better understand the future by carefully studying the past. As we carefully study the past, we don't need to repeat the mistakes made previously. The new matter of the future is not created out of nothing. It is a very repeatable sort of process. Also, if we begin to understand the infinities of the future, we can begin to understand some of the infinities of the past. We don't need to be lulled into believing in a single big bang theory of our universe, but I suppose we can believe what we want to. I think that the big bang idea came about because of evidence of expansion without proper explanation for the background of space being black. Now we understand that there actually is a vast amount of dark matter out in space (in agreement with the steady state theory). If we previously understood that the vast amount of matter out there is newly created matter and that the new matter forms a black background of space, then I think that there may not have been any attempt to replace the steady state theory with the big bang theory. See "COSMOLOGY", Ci:858 "The World Book Encyclopedia" 1983. The steady state theory needs to be augmented with the proper explanation of how that new matter comes into being. The explanation would likely involve the idea that energetic two-part gravitons pull down on temporary opposite fundamental charges in starlight, so as to create new matter and the process slightly bending "downward" the starlight. Many of us were held back in our thinking by our constrained notions of energy. Reason would seem to now go along with the old (previously rejected/suppressed) idea that the universe is actually infinite in all directions (and infinite in mass). If we hypothetically proceed along a line (ray) in any particular direction, we would encounter an infinite number of stars. We would also encounter an infinite amount of radiation-absorbing dark-matter along the path. -- Physics Based on Discrete Entities -- Physics Not Based on Continua. We need to reconsider some fundamental flawed assumptions in physics brought to light by experimental results. Einstein in 1954 wrote to his friend Besso, "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e. continuous structures. In that case nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics." See "Infinite Energy" #87 p. 21 (2009) "The Eclipse Data of 1919: The Greatest Hoax in 20th Century Science" by Richard Moody, Jr. (slmrea@aol.com), which gave reference of Pais, A. 1982. "Subtle is the Lord. . .The Science and Life of Albert Einstein", Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 467. The idea that physics could be based on discrete-fine quantum entities rather than on continuous structures would seem to be in agreement with Einstein's statement. Einstein was prepared to completely give up on continuity as the basis of physics. I think that Bessler figured out what was basically going on with respect to gravity. Newton was trying hard to figure out Bessler's wheel's behavior with respect to gravity. Newton wrote, "Whither ye rays of gravity may bee stopped by refecting or refracting ym, if so a per petuall motion may bee made one of these two ways". That is what I see on p. 14 of Collins' 1997 book. In that statement, Newton got as far as figuring out that a perpetual motion device using gravity could either be based upon gravity rays being reflected or refracted, but he was apparently slightly off the mark. At least to Newton's credit, he considered that gravity might be made up of discontinuous rays, but he apparently didn't consider them stopping by a two-part attractive absorption process often with slight time delays between the two absorption parts. Einstein may have figured out much more than he wrote. I can't imagine him writing such a broad-based statement, unless he had thought much about the subject. Einstein was privately coming to the very same idea that Newton had apparently previously considered (that gravity might be based on discrete rays). To Einstein's credit, he was apparently considering it possible that physics must properly be based on discontinuous entities and not upon continuous structures. Bessler surely understood that gravity had two discrete attractive blow parts, as for example he wrote, "Eine Umbosz crieget viele Stoszt" (on p. 226) or as John Collins in 1997 showed the translation (on p. 225), "An anvil receives many blows." Each graviton has twice as many attractive blow parts as we might otherwise expect an attractive discrete graviton to have. As one pats the dog (having hair) which dog Bessler refers to, there are manifestations that strongly suggest opposite very fine attractive parts within matter. Bessler wanted us to ask many keen questions of his little book. As we ask and answer those many keen questions, we are (1) first led to his principle and (2) then led to how he built his wheel (or rather bearing). Here is another example suggesting Bessler knew pretty much what was going on with gravity. Again refer to the bell ringer playing the nine bells with two hammers from below on p. 195 of Collins' 1997 book (but this time use it for evidence regarding Bessler's knowledge of his principle instead of evidence for how he constructed his Orffyrean roller bearing). Timing of the two separate hammer blows struck from below is musically important to playing the separate frequency/tone portions of the roughly horizontal instrument composed of circular bells. I think that he is in part suggesting that timing (of the two-part downward hammer blows of the graviton) is important for increasing the circular rotational frequencies of masses separately rotating about horizontal axes within matter. Notice that the angles of the two offset hammers are different, suggesting that the torques are different so that there can be a net torque due to the two separately timed blows. There are many more examples which people can figure out, if they especially ponder his little book. The Bessler wheels were incorrectly labeled. Because of that false labeling, the world (including some top scientists) effectively ignored or rejected the Bessler wheels in the 1700s. Many scientists made erroneous assumptions about energy. What we now call physics was then misdirected from its proper course. Physics would now need to be corrected in part by discarding those well ingrained, false energy assumptions/traditions. Model Limitations. If the observed physics doesn't conform to a particular mathematical model, it is the model (or at least the region of application) that is in error. If one particular model is found to be in error, we may want to look for other models or simulations that have regions of applicability. We should model gravity using two-part graviton absorptions. We can estimate fundamental parameters regarding discrete graviton simulations and see how close the simulations match what is observed. Fundamental Parameters. Some fundamental parameters might include: magnitude of fundamental charge, mass (f) of fundamental charge, "radius" of fundamental charge (L) if it were a "solid" sphere, number of discrete electric fields emitted per unit of time by an "isolated" bare fundamental charge, effective area of absorption (meaning absorption cross-section by a bare isolated fundamental charge) for electric fields coming from a nearby opposite charge, magnitude of momentum conveyed by absorption of a single electric field, number of unpaired discrete electric fields of one type emitted per unit of time by an "isolated" non-rotating pair of fundamental opposite charges, and number of two-part gravitons emitted per unit of time by an "isolated" non-rotating pair of fundamental opposite charges. One could imagine many other parameters that depend upon particular circumstances (such as separation distance between opposite fundamental charges). I don't know the values of such parameters but any models/simulations using them need to provide results in agreement with experiments. Someone might want to search for a small set of fundamental parameters from which one can obtain by simulation other parameters, which when used are consistent with the experimental results. Modeling Shortcut. Rather than going through such an arduous and computationally intensive process of building up from such fundamentals, it might be much more fruitful and expedient in the short term to parameterize or model the main effects associated with the Bessler principle so that knowledge in one problem domain can be empirically applied to another problem domain. That way we can quickly make experimental and theoretical progress, while addressing/solving important problems of interest. While doing so, we might happen to acquire an understanding of some fundamental parameters. I suppose that the Bessler principle needs to become a standard tool in the toolkit of every scientist and engineer. The tool may be invoked when the situation warrants it. Gravity Explained. Given some understanding of electric field intensities, I have attempted to qualitatively explain gravity, the Bessler principle, and some other things that have come from them. In the process of making these explanations, I made assumptions that a proton is composed of many fundamental charges (of two types, + and -) and that the electric fields are discrete at a very fine level. The fine fundamental charges and discrete electric fields are consistent with respect to each other, both during emission and absorption of electric fields. In summary, a graviton of gravity is simply composed of discrete electric fields from opposite fundamental charges traveling precisely together, though with possible very slight three-dimensional displacement of the two electric field packets at any particular time. The 10 to 13 precise constraints on graviton formation and absorption cause the so-called "force" of gravity to be much weaker than an electrical "force" which has correspondingly only two constraints. Bessler Principle. Because of an often slight time delay in absorbing the latter electric field of a graviton, by the higher elevation fundamental charge, the motion of the second charge (between the times that the two parts of the graviton are attractively absorbed) creates a Bessler principle. Gravity Not Conservative. The two part nature of the graviton and the Bessler principle were completely overlooked during typical "proofs" that gravity is an energy conservative "force". If our model of the gravitational force is explicitly flawed, then any proof of that force being energy conservative will be flawed. In the "proofs" of gravity being energy conservative, the finite particle size of the smallest, neutral mass-particle was overlooked. One can't divide up the smallest fundamental neutral portion of matter into a smaller portion of neutral matter. So also in such "proofs", the idea that the smallest, neutral mass-particle could rotate was overlooked so that large amounts of rotational kinetic energy could be stored in such rotations. Without any competing explanations for gravity, based on simpler assumptions and consistent with experimental results, I think that the two-part graviton related explanations should be carefully considered. Message Suppressed. As this news message regarding gravity and the Bessler principle has seemingly been greatly suppressed or ignored or overlooked at every turn, for at least the last 300 years, one would fully expect it to be greatly suppressed or ignored even now. Even if it is in large part ignored now, hopefully more people will begin to inquire about the results of the tests and observations related to the Bessler principle. I am trying to put an end to many energy falsehoods that have been prevailing despite the evidence. Eventually (despite the falsehoods, that have been widely or quickly propagated), the small and simple things (see Alma 37:6 and D&C 1:19) will prevail by means of the experimental method and reason. The message is too important to mankind (with respect to energy and understanding) for the message to continue to be ignored or suppressed or overlooked without reason. Small Matter Building Blocks. The Bessler principle also offers much experimental evidence that there really are very fine building blocks of matter (see D&C 131:7). The smallest building block of neutral matter would be a pair of fundamental charges of equal mass. Each such fundamental charge would be equally opposite to the charge value of the other. The smallest building block of charged matter would be one of the two types of fundamental charges. I think we need to consider all "particles", "forces", and "fields" both inside and outside nuclei in their proper context of being built upon the most fundamental mass particles. Synthesis of Fields as Fundamental Charges. The electromagnetic and gravitational "forces" are combined into a single class type (of two electric field types). All other "forces", "fields", "particles", and "potentials" are a manifestation of the fundamental charges. There would seem to be no "forces" at all. There would only be two fundamental particle types. The two particle types or masses are very fine positive and negative charges. A proton would have a certain number of extra positive charges. An electron would have that same number of extra negative charges. Either of the fundamental charged masses continually radiate many discrete individual ripple-waves (E fields) outward upon the "sea". I suspect that the E field waves from one charge type consist of temporarily appearing fundamental mass particles of just that one type, which momentarily arise from the sea. These waves travel at the speed of light. Photons would consist of soliton (meaning single-stable-wave) compositions of many of both types of these "discrete" individual waves. Lorentz Force Synthesis. One might ask how there could be a Lorentz force on charges moving in a magnetic field, if the magnetic field is not an actual physical entity. It should be clear that there are electric field attractions and repulsions between charges. Stationary charges have concentric spherical (or circular in a plane) "fronts" with the electric fields pointing toward or away from the center charge, as with figure Fig1_PullOrPush.TIF (or Fig1_PullOrPush.JPG) with the direction depending upon the sign of the center charge. Moving charges would only have such spheres/circles about the positions that they were at when the charges previously radiated those electric fields. The spheres/circles about a moving charge would be offset so that they not be concentric and the electric field directions are with respect to where the charge had previously been when the fields were broadcast. The so-called magnetic field could seem to appear because of the distortion of the discrete electric field local "fronts" caused by the motion of charges that cause the so-called magnetic field. The more rapid the motion of those fundamental charges creating the magnetic field (motion relative to the charge having a "Lorentz force" applied to it) means that the larger would be the local distortion of the shape and electric field direction of the electric field "fronts". I think that all apparent magnetic field effects are actually caused by the interaction with electric fields coming from moving fundamental charges. There is neither any actual magnetic fields hanging out in space nor any moving magnetic fields in space. The use of magnetic fields is a matter of descriptive convenience and not a matter of any underlying physical entity. The combined effect of all the unabsorbed distorted front electric fields and the unabsorbed undistorted front electric fields provides the total Lorentz force on a charge. Electric Fields Synthesis. As related above, I think that the physical electric fields being propagated are actually propagating wave fluxuations of fundamental charge particles temporarily appearing, as such waves move at the speed of light. Potentials Synthesis. Potentials are also often used as a matter of approximate descriptive/analysis convenience. They do not correspond to any underlying physical entity. They should not be used when rotating nuclear ground states are considered, unless one invokes the Bessler principle for nonconservatively extracting rotational kinetic energy from gravity. The potentials also tend to erroneously ignore the shadowing/absorption of electric and gravitational fields. Sea. In the Lorentz force synthesis and in other cases, I assumed electric field waves propagating upon a sea. This seems to suggest the idea of an ether, which ether idea was considered to be incorrect by experiments, such as the 1887 Michelson and Morley experiment. Could we bring back the idea but in a different form so as to not disagree with prior results? Maybe we could say that light travels in vacuum at the speed of light relative to the preponderance of surrounding mass. If that were so, then in the expanding realms very far away (many times the distance away than the maximum distance of our current viewing) light could locally travel there at the speed of light relative to the preponderance of those surrounding masses, though that light speed could be greatly different than a value relative to the preponderance of our surrounding masses. We know from many experimental results that light does travel at a slower rate when it travels through more matter. It seems that the speed of light should somehow be restricted according to the amount of matter (including fundamental matter) that is present. I suspect that the creation of fundamental opposite charge pairs from opposite electric fields in photons do not gradually deplete the photon of electric fields. I think that photons just keep going as a quantum unit, despite very fine matter on special occasion being obtained from them by use of gravitons. The direction and/or frequency of the photons may change slightly because of the interaction with gravitons. It may be just as much of a miracle as a fundamental charge more obviously being a continual source of electric fields forever. I think that new fine matter is drawn out of light at a cost of gravitons. As Bessler wrote "der kausser tausset" or "The buyer buys." (pp. 225-226 of Collins's 1997 book). New matter and new rotational kinetic energy comes with a price. Gravitons pay the price. Complete Graviton Sacrifice. Out in space in the light from a star, a graviton dies a lonely death that new mass be born of it. It is a total sacrifice but the effect of it is eternal, as each new perpetual opposite fundamental charge thereafter eternally radiates. Another graviton might completely give up everything that new rotational kinetic energy may arise in a mass, under the condition that the mass had been turning about a horizontal axis. Even just a little turning helps more rotational kinetic energy to arise. Infinite Matter. There would be an infinite amount of new matter that has arisen. One might take an alternate viewpoint that new mass is not new but rather now it more obviously interacts and now it continually/perpetually radiates electric fields. Consistent with this is that there will always be an infinity of mass in the sea that has not yet come forth permanently. Space will always contain a nearly continuous supply of latent mass ready to come forth with many such temporarily coming forth, as light streaks across that supposed emptiness. As one keeps subtracting or removing a finite amount from an infinite source, the infinite source remains infinite. As the infinite matter that has arisen is added to by finite amounts, it remains infinite. God Is Omniscient. As the fundamental or finest masses (or rather spirit matter) of the universe are quantum formed, it is reasonable that they are quantum connected. One should turn to the Great Spirit (God) or the greatest Scientist for more information regarding spirit matter. God knows all things. God is omniscient. There are many references to this. Here is a partial list of scriptural references concerning the omniscience of God: Gen. 6:5; 1 Sam. 2:3; 1 Chr. 28:9; 2 Chr. 6:30 (Acts 1:24; 15:8); Job 23:10; Ps. 94:11; Isa. 66:18; Jer. 12:3; 17:10 (Rev. 2:23); Ezek. 11:5; Matt. 6:8; 9:4; 10:29; John 13:3; 16:30; Acts 15:18 (1 Ne. 9:6); 1 Cor. 3:20; Col. 2:3; Heb. 4:12; 1 Ne. 20:5; 2 Ne. 2:24; 9:20 (Morm. 8:17; D&C 127:2); Jacob 2:5; Alma 7:13; 18:18; 18:32 (D&C 6:16); 26:35,37; 39:8; 40:5; 60:10; 3 Ne. 28:6; Ether 3:25; Moro. 7:22; D&C 38:2 (130:7); 88:6 (88:41); 121:24; Moses 1:6; 1:35; 7:41; 7:67; Abr. 2:8; 3:19. -- Some Future Implications -- Progress. Bessler showed much physical evidence of his principle by his many wheels. Many people across the globe have found various anomalies, providing much recent physical evidence for the Bessler principle. The evidence appears to steadily just keep increasing. The race is on for reinventing Bessler's Orffyrean roller bearing, which roller bearing was born in bearing in the fiery fires of affliction. On 6 June 2012, it will be 300 years since Bessler's Gera wheel first turned (in open demonstration), using a pair of the Orffyrean roller bearings to provide very low friction turning of the Gera wheel. The race is also on to reinvent the Papp engine and possibly to combine it with the Stirling engine. All three devices should be combined. The new energy era (according to the Bessler principle) would have begun long ago, if either the invention of Bessler's roller bearing or the invention of Papp's engine had been able to survive. The massive rapidly rotating wheels in trains provide a manifestation of the Bessler principle. If trains do things right, they could become net fuel producers. If oil supplies are cut off, to be prepared, we should have already taken steps either to use Papp type engines or to use GEET gas in engines. For the energy security of our world and to reduce our global expenditures, we need to continue taking gradual voluntary steps away from using fossil fuels. As a world, we must stop rejecting or ignoring the large amounts of empirical evidence for the Bessler principle, energetic gravitons, the Papp engines, the GEET reactors, rotating nuclear ground states, Bessler's marvelous low-friction mechanical roller-bearing, and many other things, if we want to make great scientific, technological, educational, environmental, social, and economic progress. If the wheel is fundamental to our civilization, we can neither continue to deny nor continue to ignore a fundamental friction-masked mechanical-property of the wheel without inherent lose. We as a world must not continue to overlook the largest observed heat energy sources in this solar system. We can not continue to overlook or ignore the clean "green" energy sources coming from plentiful energetic two-part gravitons. The rotating nuclear ground states pick up more angular speed when little friction is present. We can make progress when there is little or no contention. If people choose contention, they are choosing not to progress. That is not to say that one should not contend for the right or for doing things right. Doing Things Right. Our future continual power depends explicitly upon our doing things right. We are all related and we should be kind to even our most distant relatives. With love in our hearts, there is no need for there to be any poor among us. We all should charitably give (not by constraint) but by our own free will and choice, to our less fortunate relatives, to help them to help themselves. We should treat our relatives the way that we would want them and God to treat us. I am trying to freely share some of the information that God has freely given me. As we turn to God, serve God, and serve those around us, sooner or later he will shed forth great prosperity upon us. If with helpful hands and help from God (as we reduce friction and contention), we can expect much hope and great optimism because of the Bessler principle. This world has an opportunity to greatly prosper and improve, by making wise use of available evidence/understanding regarding energetic gravitons and simple rotations, to turn the turner. Economic Growth. There should be a world-wide long period of sustained economic growth after the new energy era becomes well established. There should be much prosperity. I think that the new energy era has begun with the use of the GEET reactors. With greater use of the GEET reactors, energy prices should begin to fall. We should in principle be able to convert many old automobiles and many other devices over to using less expensive alternative fuels (such as combinations of gasoline and water vapor) by means of GEET reactors. Toward Closed Cycle Engines. For convenience and efficiency, the GEET reactors and GEET gas combustion engines should migrate where possible toward closed fuel-gas cycles (often using Tesla turbines to extract more energy from the exhaust and to cool down the exhaust vapor for reuse). For efficiency, we should go toward the explicitly closed-cycle Papp engines. As we go toward closed cycles extracting rotational kinetic energy from two-part gravitons (using rotations of nuclear-ground-states about horizontal axes), we will be using a power source on the earth somewhat like the power source available in the photosphere of the sun. Disaster Preparedness. During environmental disasters, it would be preferable to have readily available energy sources from nearly closed cycle engines, that are not dependent upon such things as: external fuel shipments, supplies of gas through pipelines, batteries (that run down), and electrical power lines (bringing in power from distant sources). We should reduce dependency upon distant power plants/sources (whether coal/oil burning, fission-nuclear, solar, geothermal, or wind) so that we can be well prepared power-wise in the event of natural disasters. Even the local sunlight can be blocked by volcanic clouds so we should not depend upon solar power during such disasters. I built myself a solar oven, but it would be useless if there is enough volcanic activity. We need local-reliable power production. Bessler provided a purely mechanical solution to the problem in 1712. The world rejected his wheel-solution by not buying his wheel and by putting him on trial for his actions. We must first reinvent his Orffyrean roller bearing, if we want to regain that wheel-solution of his. His wheel was a particular simple type of a closed cycle engine. Until we attain any of the various types of closed cycle engines, we should take interim steps. Practical Interim Steps. Until we have developed either explicitly closed-cycle Papp engines or engines using closed cycle GEET gases, we should take some practical interim steps. There will be some people who have observed or are aware of successful conversions of engines using open cycle GEET reactors, which engines can then run off mixtures of fossil fuels and water. I suggest that such people take steps to convert a vehicle to using GEET gas using an open cycle and to share their success with their friends. If many of those who want to be prepared for the future convert an engine to using GEET gas, then this will: give such people more energy security, reduce their long-term expenses, help them prepare for emergencies, help the environment, and reduce prices of fossil fuels (by there being less demand for such fossil fuels). The environment is helped as we burn reduced amounts of fossil fuels by burning more water molecules that are first rotationally broken up by energetic two-part gravitons. New Inventions. New inventions or reinventions will fuel economic prosperity. As the Papp engines are currently being reinvented, this reinvention should help the energy prices to drop further. They will have a multitude of uses and implications. The pistons in Papp engines should last longer than pistons in other engines, if there is less rubbing on the walls (as a tight seal is not required). With the very low friction Orffyrean roller bearing on the path of being reinvented, its reinvention should help energy prices to drop even more. That first invention might chiastically be reinvented last. With very low friction bearings, energy production can be increased, while reducing wear and tear on devices. Many old devices can have their bearings replaced and last much longer. With lower friction, less energy is required to run many devices. With lower friction for rotations about horizontal axes, more energy is produced by the Bessler principle. The price per unit for many items should decrease, as the new energy era becomes more established. Uses of Low Cost Energy. The low cost energy can be used for many purposes. Water from the oceans can be purified and brought inland. Marginal land can become productive for growing things. The Sahara Desert can be made more productive. Other deserts including the Gobi Desert can blossom. North Africa can be reforested, but now with many orchards. Jungle regions can be preserved and expanded. We should be careful stewards of our surroundings. Previous sources of fossil fuels should instead be used as materials for production. There can be new sources of organic materials grown and synthesized. There should be all sorts of building and transportation projects. Raw materials can be produced inexpensively. They can be made into products without polluting our environment. Production of Raw Elements. Inexpensive energy can make possible the production of many raw elements. Precious metal prices should decrease when energy costs plummet either because reduced energy costs reduce the normal costs of producing precious metals or because automated processes should arise for almost completely sorting elements or because modern-day nuclear alchemy will provide ways to produce such precious metals, through the interactions of rotating nuclear ground states. Everything else being equal, all products that are dependent upon energy costs should decrease in production price, as energy costs plummet. Cooperation Without Forcing. Some people may learn that they will obtain much more by willing cooperation than by using force with contention. With cooperation, the hungry can now be fed and the naked can be clothed. With cooperation, we all can be rich. Possibly available energy is not limited in eternity. Possibly available wealth is similarly not limited in eternity. Those who have previously received help can in turn progress further by anxiously either helping their relatives to help themselves or doing for their relatives those things that they can not do for themselves. The energetic two-part gravitons should help the energy-slaves to peacefully be free from energy bondage, as things are done in wisdom. Alden E. Park, MS in Physics - 19 March 2011 922 West Franklin Avenue Ridgecrest, CA 93555-5110 AldenEugenePark@gmail.com LA4Park@iwvisp.com http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/ Also, see a paragraph entitled, "Gravity and the Living Universe", within my 24 October 2010 entries for "About Me", within the profile listed for Alden gravity or Alden universe (on Mormon.org). ---------- Index This is a partial index, as it depends upon one doing electronic word searching, with or without matching case. It is a list of some words/phrases that may be of interest to search on. absorbed graviton absorption acceleration algebra Allais ancestor angular momentum angular momentum nonconservation angular speed angular velocity animal, anomalies antihydrogen anti-matter Apologia apology application Archimedean arcsine asymmetric atom atomic clock attenuation attraction, attractive axis axle background battle bearing contact angle bearing formation bearing geometry bell Bessler Bessler principle Bessler wheel Besso Bible big bang big bang theory blow bondage burn burning cell central roller charge charge descendants charge matter charge pair charge parentage chiasmus chiastic children choice cliff cloth cobalt coin cold fusion Collins combustion confinement conflict constrained constraint containing cylinder contention continua continual continually continuous structures cooperation cosmology corona cost criminals CSX cylinder cylindrical dark matter decay decay rates decode descendant desert deviation device Dirac sea direction disaster disclose discrete discrete electric fields discrete entities distract domain dragon dynamics E field earth eclipse economic edit Edition education efficiency Einstein electric field electrical electromagnetic electron element elevation encoded enemy energetic graviton energy energy era energy-changing environment equilibrium era eternity exercise experiment explode explosion explosive balls faith Feynman field field intensity fire first law flail flash flywheel force formation formation constraints fossil Foucault pendulum freight friction fuel full moon fundamental fundamental charge fundamental mass fundamental matter fusion galaxies Galileo gas Gauss GEET, geetinternational GEET reactor, Gera, German glorious power God gravitating mass gravitation gravitational constant gravitational mass graviton graviton absorption graviton direction graviton formation gravity ground state growth gunpowder gyroscopic hammer heat heat death Hebraic poetry helium help Hertz Hesse-Kassel horizontal horizontal component hot fusion hydrogen ice cap ignore induced inertia inertial mass infinite infinities intermediate rollers Internet invent invention isolate joy obedience Jupiter Karl Kassel kinetic energy latitude law leakage level lifetime light linear momentum linear momentum nonconservation linear speed little book living universe, lobe lobe hole low friction lunar eclipse lubrication Maschinen Tractate magic magnetic magnetons Mars masked mass mass-energy nonconservation mass offspring mass power mathematician matter, matter charge Maxwell McKinley mechanical Meissner-Ochsenfeld mercury metal microwave miles per gallon miracle mirrors mobile modeling models moderation molecule moment of inertia moon motion music negative neutral neutron new energy new energy age new energy era new energy movement new mass new matter Newton north nuclear nuclear ground state nuclear magnetic moment nucleus offset offspring opposite Orffyre, Orffyrean lobe Orffyrean roller bearing ORFFYREUM, Orffyreus oxygen packet Pantone Papp Papp-Stirling parent Park particle patent pattern pattern replication pendulum perpetual motion phase photon photosphere physics piston planet plant plumb poetry pole positive potential power precess precise prematter prepare preponderance price principles proof propulsion prosperity proton pull push quality, quantize quantum absorbed quantum connection quantum formed radiate radiation radioactive radioactivity railroad Ranque-Hilsch reflect relative reinvention repulsion repulsive research rest resurrection reveal rhyming rich ripple robot roller roller bearing rotating rotating neutron rotating proton rotational rotational kinetic energy rotational moderation rotational power acquisition sacrifice safety Sahara salt saltpeter, Saturn scientific scientist season second law security shackles shadow shaft simulating simulations slaves smash snowflake solar corona solar eclipse soliton space spacetime spark speed sphere spin star starlight state steady state theory steel Stirling sulphur sun sunspots superconducting superfluid suppress symbol symmetry temperature Tesla test TheGEETGuys theory thermodynamics time timing third law tornado train transition translational translational kinetic energy turbine turn turner two part two-part two-part graviton understanding universe universe connected universe growing unquantized up upper blow delay vapor vegetable vertical water wave weak weight wheel world worm-hole yin-yang zero zeroth law ---------- Some Notation a = angular acceleration BCC = blind carbon copy c = speed of light CA = California CC = carbon copy d = radius of an intermediate roller 2d = radius of central roller 4d = interior radius of containing cylinder D&C = Doctrine and Covenants etc. = et cetera E = electric or electric "field" intensity F = downward "force" on a fundamental mass particle f = mass of a fundamental charge G = gravitational constant GEET = Global Environmental Energy Technology H = hydrogen He = helium I = moment of inertia j = moment of inertia of a fundamental mass about an axis through its center l = radius of the charge particle about a horizontal axis L = radius of fundamental charge lbs = pounds m = gravitational mass min = minutes M = gravitating mass MHz = megahertz = 1,000,000 Hertz MS = Master of Science p. = page pp. = pages P = momentum delivered to the piston by a photon r = distance between masses s = downward speed s0 = initial downward speed sqrt = square root t = time URL = Uniform Resource Locator V = average of the velocities before and after w = angular speed w0 = initial angular speed ---------- Use Back on browser to return to Main or go to http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/ (after exiting, if in "View source" mode).