Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 05:04:37 From: Space Digest maintainer Reply-To: Space-request@isu.isunet.edu Subject: Space Digest V15 #445 To: Space Digest Readers Precedence: bulk Space Digest Sat, 21 Nov 92 Volume 15 : Issue 445 Today's Topics: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY For Spacecraft shuttle computers SSTO Viability (was: Shuttle replacement) Town Meeting Welcome to the Space Digest!! Please send your messages to "space@isu.isunet.edu", and (un)subscription requests of the form "Subscribe Space " to one of these addresses: listserv@uga (BITNET), rice::boyle (SPAN/NSInet), utadnx::utspan::rice::boyle (THENET), or space-REQUEST@isu.isunet.edu (Internet). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 01:50:02 EST From: John Roberts Subject: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY For Spacecraft -From: mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu -Newsgroups: sci.space -Subject: FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY For Spacecraft -Date: 17 Nov 92 22:44:40 GMT -Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire - The technology described in the article copied below could be used to -power spacecraft, space colonies, etc.: - FREE-ENERGY TECHNOLOGY - by Robert E. McElwaine, Physicist - Ninety to a hundred years ago, everybody "knew" that a - heavier-than-air machine could not possibly fly. It would - violate the "laws" of physics. All of the "experts" and - "authorities" said so. There's a difference between violating established "laws" of physics and extending the established base of engineering knowledge. (Though even some distinguished authorities may tend to forget the distinction.) - Today, orthodox physicists and other "scientists" are - saying similar things against several kinds of 'Free Energy' - Technologies, using negative terms such as "pseudo-science" - and "perpetual motion", and citing so-called "laws" which - assert that "energy cannot be created or destroyed" ("1st law - of thermodynamics") and "there is always a decrease in useful - energy" ("2nd law of thermodynamics"). The physicists do not - know how to do certain things, so they ARROGANTLY declare - that those things cannot be done. Such PRINCIPLES OF - IMPOTENCE are COMMON in orthodox modern "science" and help to - cover up INCONSISTENCIES and CONTRADICTIONS in orthodox - modern theories. Isn't it strange that of the inventors who claim that most of the established principles of physics are wrong, and come up with wildly unconventional theories of their own, so many of them boast of having "little formal education", and do not even possess the mathematical tools to understand that which they dispute? - Free Energy Inventions are devices which can tap a - seemingly UNLIMITED supply of energy from the universe, with- - OUT burning any kind of fuel, making them the PERFECT - SOLUTION to the world-wide energy crisis and its associated - pollution, degradation, and depletion of the environment. - For example, at least three U.S. patents (#3,811,058, - #3,879,622, and #4,151,431) have so far been awarded for - motors that run EXCLUSIVELY on permanent MAGNETS, seemingly - tapping into energy circulating through the earth's magnetic - field. The first two require a feedback network in order to - be self-running. The third one, (as described in detail in - "Science & Mechanics" magazine, Spring 1980), requires - critical sizes, shapes, orientations, and spacings of - magnets, but NO feedback. I believe I actually read that issue. The fellow had set up a linear configuration of magnets, and caused another magnet to move from one end of the array to the other. (No surprise there - that's well within the realm of established physics.) The article went on to say that all he had to do was buy a few more magnets, and he would have enough to curve the track into a circle, so it would run forever! (At which point I burst out laughing - I invented the all-permanent-magnet motor when I was seven or eight years old, and it took me only about half an hour of experimenting with magnets and pieces of steel to figure out why it wouldn't work. I consider it pitiful that grown men are working on this, and spending years at it.) I've *never* seen an article of this type followed up by another article stating that "he's got it working now, and it's running beautifully" - any subsequent articles are about *somebody else's* great invention that's "nearly completed". - A second type of free-energy device, such as the 'Gray - Motor' (U.S. Patent #3,890,548), the 'Tesla Coil', and the - unpatented motor of inventor Joseph Newman, taps ELECTRO- - MAGNETIC energy by INDUCTION from 'EARTH RESONANCE' (about 12 - cycles per second plus harmonics). They typically have a - 'SPARK GAP' in the circuit which serves to SYNCHRONIZE the - energy in the coils with the energy being tapped. It is - important that the total 'inductance' and 'capacitance' of - the Device combine to 'RESONATE' at the same frequency as - 'EARTH RESONANCE' in order to maximize the power output. Tesla was interested in using the Tesla coil as a power *transmitter*, but the power came from a conventional AC power plant (which he also invented, by the way). The Newman machine is a battery-powered motor-generator, of which the motor portion has been complimented as a clever and unique design. The generator portion puts out narrow, intense spikes of voltage and current, which a typical power meter would read as a considerably greater power level than what is actually produced. The researchers who investigated the machine (and who had access to more precise instruments) stated the opinion that given this peculiar property of the machine, it was plausible that the inventor was sincere in his belief that the machine was putting out more power than it took in. - Robert E. McElwaine - B.S., Physics, UW-EC I don't think we can say that there will never be discoveries of amazing and unconventional energy sources, but in general the current crop of "fringe" researchers sure don't seem very well equipped to do so. I'm also sending this to Robert McElwaine via email, since I have been unable to find any evidence that he even bothers to read sci.space after dumping his posts here. All opinions are my own. John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 02:15:52 EST From: John Roberts Subject: shuttle computers -From: borden@sol.UVic.CA (Ross Borden) -Subject: shuttle computers -Date: 20 Nov 92 20:42:27 GMT -Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA -Do the GPC's have hard drives? I'm virtually certain they don't. Hard disks *are* used in personal computers on the Shuttle (after all, they're mighty convenient), but they don't have anywhere near 5000 hours MTBF under the conditions in the Shuttle. (As I said before, one hard drive on a personal computer seized up on the last flight.) -If so, how do they guard against -shock, vibration, etc? -| rborden@ra.uvic.ca | I would guess that they're powered down during launch and landing. (There could well be military disk drives that would have a better chance to work under those conditions, but even those would be likely to reduce the reliability of the GPCs if used in them.) John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 04:40:26 GMT From: Hugh Emberson Subject: SSTO Viability (was: Shuttle replacement) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space >>>>> On Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:11:16 GMT, ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) said: Edward> In <1992Nov19.150400.24961@iti.org> aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) writes: >We need to do other things as well. There was an article on this in >a recent issue of Design News and the British newspaper The Guardian >is also working on an article. Anyone know which issue of design news that was? Edward> Timing is critical. I know that McDAC isn't spending a lot of money Edward> on advertising and PR, but I hope they're ready with a good press Edward> kit to hand out at the first launch. Space groups supporting SSTO Edward> should have their own press kits ready also. My mother tells me that a TV show we get here (NZ) called "Beyond 2000" (its Austrailian, but I believe that lots of countries get it) had a segment on DC-{X,Y,1} a couple of weeks ago. I missed it :-(. Anyway the segment was enough to get my mother excited enough to rave about it to me. This leads me to believe that it could have quite an public appeal if it was sold to the public properly. Hugh ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 03:49:59 EST From: John Roberts Subject: Town Meeting I just saw the midnight NASA Select replay of the Indianapolis Town Meeting. I thought it was very interesting - many important issues were brought up. Administrator Goldin covered much of the same ground in his introductory speech as he did in the previous Town Meetings, but not in exactly the same words, which I thought showed some consideration for the television audience. The meeting went very well, at least until some maniac (didn't quite catch the name - Huggins, or some such) totally disrupted the proceedings by asking some tough questions on DCX and other subjects. :-) :-) I'd better let Bill comment on the reply. (If he wants, I can extract a transcript of the question and the answer.) John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ End of Space Digest Volume 15 : Issue 445 ------------------------------