I have conducted an experiment to directly determine the distance/
force centripedal force relationship. However, instead of employing
the usual ball on a string methodology where you swing a ball on a
string and measure the force on the string, I have used a "non-
contact" force of magnetism to counter for centripedal force. This
arrangement is significantly different than ball on a string
measurements and the goal was to determine if there was any difference
in these situations. The non-contact force is much more representative
of the situation present in the orbital mechanics of the Earth and
moon since the moon is not attached to the Earth by a string. It is
held by a non-contact attractive force more closely related to the
kind of force you get with magnetism.
See this unique and clever experiment using only household items/
camcorder and legos to accurately measure the centripedal force by
watching this 7 minute youtube video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-RjE1thRrE
The surprising result was that the centripedal force formula appeared
to be wrong for a non-contact force. The force appears to be directly
linear with r as opposed to the expected sqrt(r). This is an
extremely preliminary result since I have only performed the
experiment a few times and the data really isn't good enough to show a
definitive difference between r and sqrt(r). There is actually very
little difference between the two for small r. So much more work needs
to be done to make any firm conclusions, but I thought I would share
my early results as a unique method of measuring the centripedal
force and the possibility that the centripedal force relationship
might be different for non-contact forces like gravity. It may be
possible that if the centripedal force formula changes, then the
gravity formula may be forced to changed as well in order to preserve
the known relationship between orbital velocity and radius. Just how
that works ... who knows, but it is a possibility.
A linear relationship would generally mean that everything orbits at
the same velocity no matter how far from the center. We see exactly
this behavior in the rotational curves for the other galaxy where the
velocity appears to flatten out. We currently attribute this to dark
matter, but what if it is due to our lack of understanding of how the
centripedal force relationship works for non-contact forces?
-fhucentripedal
dedanoe - 16 Jun 2008 13:54 GMT
On Jun 16, 8:02 am, frankli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I have conducted an experiment to directly determine the distance/
> force centripedal force relationship. However, instead of employing
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> -fhucentripedal
even without reading i know your findings are wrong. in my leverian
physics there are only forces as potential distances and equailibrium
distances as potential antiforce. weight carrying force shifts and
displaces thus causing spin. in a neutral lever it is System (F'=Fcos-
Dsin and D'=Fsin+Dcos). to destroy your attempt completely just try to
answer what prevents the Moon from gravitational free fall on Earth
when the x-axis is from Earth towards Moon and y-axis is normal to it
i.e. the coordinate system spins just like the Moon-Earth system does?
Have a nice day!!
whya do i have to answer million times to same problems?
Cwatters - 16 Jun 2008 20:11 GMT
>I have conducted an experiment to directly determine the distance/
> force centripedal force relationship. However, instead of employing
> the usual ball on a string methodology where you swing a ball on a
> string and measure the force on the string, I have used a "non-
> contact" force of magnetism to counter for centripedal force.
Unfortunately your experiment appears to measure the "contact centripedal
force" NOT the "non-contact centripedal force" (your definitions). This is
because you vary the length of the spinning lego arm NOT the distance
between ball and magnet.
franklinhu@yahoo.com - 28 Jun 2008 17:04 GMT
I repeated the experiment and I improved it by increasing the distance
range I could test by mounting the test weights on a yardstick instead
of legos. This allowed be to have a radius range from 1 to 16 which
was far greater than the 1 to 10 I used before. I also was able to
better control the speed by using a screw C clamp to control the
speed.
The result ??? Drumroll please .......
The results to appear to be consistent with the expected sqrt(r)
relationship for the centripedal force formula. The key is that for a
range of 1 to 10, it is still very difficult to see the differences
between sqrt(r) and linear r formulas, but beyond r=10, the
differences become quite apparent and are undenyable, so it is
important to conduct this type of experiment where your range has to
go beyond a radius of 10.
Now this wasn't the result I was hoping for since I was seeking some
new possible physics with this experiment, but for those who follow my
posts, this should show you that I follow up my hypothesis with
experiments and I have the integrity to report results which go
against those hypothesis. Gravity will have to be solved in some other
way.....
Quentin Grady - 01 Jul 2008 09:18 GMT
>I repeated the experiment and I improved it by increasing the distance
>range I could test by mounting the test weights on a yardstick instead
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>against those hypothesis. Gravity will have to be solved in some other
>way.....
Congratulations on your approach to the scientific method. Not many
people do their own science experiments these days, most people
preferring to deal with theoretical discussions.
I especially liked the fact that you accepted as reasonable that the
F = mv^2/r was working the way others have thought it should when
you'd hoped for something different.
Best wishes,

Signature
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
dedanoe - 02 Jul 2008 04:24 GMT
> >I repeated the experiment and I improved it by increasing the distance
> >range I could test by mounting the test weights on a yardstick instead
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
you are all buch of fagets. f.ck off will you?