The Radiometer Composite Force Test

L. Thompson

I call the radiometer force a composite force as it includes the deceleration of the rarefied gas molecules to give the net acceleration of the vanes.  

The test objective is to show the internal force could be directed outward to also cause rotation.

The test objective is to show the internal force could also be directed outward to also cause rotation. Demonstrating this possibility would further confirm the nature of this "composite" force. I feel further confirmation could open discussion to asking: could a composite type force be taking place in nature?

This test is to be outside of a vacuum chamber and under a full external atmosphere.  

The closed apparatus could be 12 cm length by 6 cm diameter. The fins or surface generating area could be say 10X  and have two light sources or 20X times the potential of a toy radiometer.

In the radiometer the radiometer vanes could meet with more back resistance. In the test the expended gas molecules would tend to rotate with the apparatus.

The apparatus would have attached internal surfaces on a scaffold, leaving space for slip effects from the carbon blacked sides to the reflective sides. The enclosing glass would be of a higher strength.

(In my original "playing around" in 2010 with  the radiometer force, I found aluminum foil with carbon black on one side also worked.)

The positioning and size of the fixed internal surfaces is up to experimentation to set the angles and the spacing of the surfaces so slip effects do not self cancel when the rarefied gas molecules slip around the edges to the opposite side (as this may result in less pressure differential).

The testing could use a 50 cm thread attached to the apparatus from an upper, external support. I note the radiometer vanes wobble on the needle pivot.  For better balance and for additional power,  opposing light sources could be applied on each side of the apparatus. Also observe if any deflection in the supporting thread occurs when one of the opposing light sources would be turned off.  Thread deflection would tend to indicate both centrifugal and directional movement.

(Note: in my original 2010 testing I also observed directional movement as a carbon black aluminum surface "pushed" into a lower pressure area.)

The intensity of the light source could be similar to that necessary to cause the rotation of the radiometer vanes, say 1000 rpm. With higher light intensities the apparatus could even reverse rotation when turning off the focused light (the refrigeration effect).

Excess heating would be expelled as radiant energy. The vanes, though, would run cooler when undergoing acceleration. (In my original testing, with stronger focused light, partial carbonization of the radiometer vane material occurred when the vanes were not allowed to rotate.)

If the above test does not develop sufficient internal force then redesign the apparatus as follows. The apparatus is set on a low friction needle. The upper support could be a low friction bearing to help balance the apparatus on the lower pivot needle (first balance the apparatus as best possible).

Because the total weight could be too large, the initial friction could be too large, and/or external atmospheric drag too large, externally "kick start" the apparatus to  a measured RPM. Then with the focused light now turned off, time the ceasing of the rotation.

Starting with the same measured RPM and with the focused light now kept on, time again for rotation to cease. I anticipate a positive contribution from the internal force would increase the rotation time.

Positive testing results could focus on the radiometer as a total process. The testing could then also ask: what is the process which "puts in place" the net force?

Upon confirmation, I could address why the net force could have a higher efficiency at the level at which it takes place.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer   I am a novice in my study of the radiometer force. May 26, 2016, lance@pon.net