The statement has been made, that a gravitation wheel (G-Wheel) as described in article3 is "heavier than at rest" as long as its rotation is being accelerated. Its "weight" is lower, when its rotation is being decelerated as described.  

These effects, if true, can probably be used in spacecraft-  control. Following ideas and considerations thus are up for discussion: 

Figure-3.1 may display a spacecraft positioned in geostationary orbit. There may be a G-Wheel running on board as sketched below:

The carrier- (fly-) wheel of this G-Wheel (Figure-3/2) rotates in shown direction with a rotational speed of say several thousand revs/min. A central (sun-) wheel drives the planet wheels with eccentric masses in such a way, that the center of mass of the G-Wheel is always above the main axis of rotation. The eccentric masses, in this way, are continuously being "lifted" against sun's gravitation, as in Figure-5/2 article3.

Sun's gravitation is pulling on the spacecraft and the eccentric masses with a force (F) of about 6 Milli-Newton. A power-input (P) of 0.1 Watt then is required for "lifting" one kg of eccentric mass with a "lifting speed" of about 17 m/s against sun's gravitation. Total energy input (W) over an operating period of say three hours then sums up to 1000 Ws (1000 J). That energy produces an acceleration of the G-Wheel on one hand, on the other hand a force (F), pushing the spacecrafit in direction toward the sun.

The before calculated amount of energy is very small. There is the obvious consideration, that friction losses within the G-Wheel may spoil the described effect. However, it might be possible to balance friction losses by means of an auxiliary drive. This auxiliary drive would keep the rotational speed of the G-Wheel within predetermined range, a flywheel on same axis, rotating in opposite direction, would take up reaction forces.  

   

The shown G-Wheel in geostationary orbit may now be programmed in that way, that its eccentric masses are being lifted against earth's gravitation (Figure-3/3).

Earth's gravitation is pulling on the spacecraft and the eccentric masses with a force (F) of about 0.23 Newton. With this a power input (P) of  about 4 Watt is required for "lifting" one kg of eccentric mass with a "lifting speed" of 17 m/s against earth's gravitation. This obviously is already considerably more than before, and the G-wheel can be kept running for long periods. Total energy input (W) then adds up to some 345.000 J (Ws) over an operating period of 24 hours (one revolution). That energy again produces an acceleration of the G-Wheel on one hand and on the other hand a force (F) pushing the spacecraft in direction toward earth.

Gravity is of course much stronger closer to earth. The described G-Wheel,  running in a spacecraft in near-earth orbit (e.g. in ISS), may need a power input (P) of up to 150 Watt for "lifting" one kg of eccentric mass with the mentioned "lifting speed" against earth's gravitation. With this an effective pushing force toward earth might be produced in steering and controlling of spacecraft.

The before presented calculation refers to an acceleration of the G-Wheel, requiring a power input and producing a force (F) toward earth. An orbit-contraction is being achieved with this.  Of more economic interest probably will be a reversed operation: Deceleration of the G-Wheel in described manner (article3), leading to a widening of orbit (as in case of earth-moon). In that case there is no power input, but power is being drawn from the G-Wheel as from a flywheel. At same time a force is being produced away from earth. Experiments may show, to what extent this will be practical and possible.

Are the outlined ideas and rough calculations basically correct or not? If not, where is the fundamental flaw in my proposal? Finding an answer to these questions is the purpose of this discussion. All comments leading to such an answer are welcome.


F. Heeke;  Homepage 2-2010

Back to article3