Hey everyone, I've been wondering how everyone's projects are coming along, so it's only fair to share my own progress with you. So, the PIE 6 and 7 have been my primary focus. The PIE 6 was only built to test the QBD (Quantified Backlash Drive) coupler, and was intended to be cannibalized when testing was done. The motors and electronics were removed and repurposed to create the newest version, the PIE 7. I now wish I had left the 6 in-tact for testing other ideas but that's the way it goes. The PIE 7 is virtually ready for the electricals to be installed, but I am really thinking the increased radius could be a problem, it may not want to come to speed properly. This got me thinking about the weights (masses) and the rectangular shape I made them. Rectangular weights were tried a long while back with relatively poor results, so I am considering rebuilding the way they are connected to the planet gear so they can be mounted 90 degrees from their current positioning. Work continues on my end, how about yours?

So I have a question for everyone. Have you experimented with the inertia of different shapes, with the same mass and moving straight lines (not curved)? Did you see a significant difference? Someone once said flat was better than square or spherical, can anyone shed some first hand knowledge light on that? I'd really like to hear your thoughts or hear about your experiences with shaped masses.

In the early days of space commercialization, Arthur Dula was recognized as the world's foremost authority on space law. (Of which there are now many). I talked to Art on the phone back in the '80's, in his alternative capacity as a patent attorney. He told me: "The test of an Inertia Prime Mover is that it will deflect a pendulum". This term 'pendulum' has been subjected to a significant amount of misconception and misunderstanding. Various builders on YouTube have demonstrated their devices with a so-called "pendulum test". Usually, the device is suspended on a tether, hanging straight down at the bottom, with the expectation that the 'plumb bob' will be pulled out to the side a little ways and stay there. Invariably, the device's momentum will add to its thrust, causing it to swing out further than its thrust alone would take it. This movement is directly in line with gravity's reverse acceleration. So, as the 'thruster' settles back to its effective deflection angle, this reverse movement couples with gravity, which changes its operation. (Just as a drawing on a piece of paper will change when the paper is moved). The result is that, even with a unidirectional thrust impulse, the suspension line still moves back past the straight down position. At this point, a laser spot, or some background reference line, is added, to convince the observers that the tether vibrates further on one side than the other. This test is neither convincing nor conclusive. Fundamentally, a plumb bob is NOT a pendulum. A pendulum is something which swings back and forth, while a plumb bob just hangs there. (An unsteady line will hang straight and plumb if it is bobbed up and down a few times; hence the name). To understand the true Pendulum Test, we must consider what happens the instant the pendulum reaches the highest point in its swing. (Or anywhere up to that point). Here, gravity is acting to move the swinging mass back towards the bottom. However, gravity has no sideways effect whatsoever on a mass which isn't at the bottom. Therefore, any amount of unidirectional thrust applied perpendicular to the swinging direction will change the pendulum's swing angle. If the applied thrust is not unidirectional, or missing altogether, the pendulum's swing will not be "deflected", remaining in its normal plane of movement.

I want to welcome Don Ballerini (@don-ballarini-5653) to the Workshop. Don, feel free to explore the workshop. You are freeto let us know what you are interested in. If you feel comfortable doing so you can also let us know what you have worked on, or what you still are working on building now.