Seykota maintains a website in which **he apparently denies
the validity of the Bernoulli principle** and other
well-established laws of physics. Seykota refers to his
theory as *the theory of radial momentum*.

Seykota's account of his "theory" **appears to be too vague**
to admit criticism. For example, he claims that for
spherical expansion, *pressure is inversely proportional
to the square of the radius*. But according to mainstream
physics, this statement is incomplete, since we are not told
what is expanding (ideal gas?) into what (vacuum?), nor
whether the pressure is varying spatially as well as varying
over time, and if so, where he is trying to evaluate the
pressure.

Seykota's theory was listed on **
www.crankdot.net
.
**

**Reactions to these Reactions **

The serious reader can see that I am not denying the validity of Bernoulli's Principle at all. I am, rather, blowing the whistle on its mis-application and claiming that these mis-applications are pure and simple bad physics.

I also develop a rigorous simulation model that explains the operation and pressure and density profiles of various devices, including the Levitator. In particular, my model explains the cavitation ring and the relationship of bulk modulus to lift. No other model that I know of even comes close. Indeed, popular explanations rely on simplifying Navier-Stokes with a incorrect assumption of incompressibility. Lift, in my view is largely a density phenomena, so compression and de-compression are essential components. These essential components happen to rule out using Bernoulli's Principle.

One form Bernoulli's Principle has PV + Mv²/ 2 = k1. This is a straightforward energy balance equation. Pressure times Volume plus one half the Mass times the square of the velocity is a constant. The thermal energy (PV) plus the kinetic energy (Mv²/ 2) is always constant. You can store energy by inflating an automobile tire to a high pressure. You can store energy as a mass of moving gas. You can convert these forms back and forth and the total energy stays constant (except for conversion losses). Beautiful.

Another form of Bernoulli's Principle obtains by dividing both sides by volume (V). Then we get

the infamous P = k/V - dv^{2}/2.
Pressure equals a constant minus half the density times the
square of the velocity. The problem with this form, is
that we cannot use it unless density is constant and neither
can we go around willy-nilly dividing things by volume
unless we define what we mean by volume. In the case
of radially expanding gas, density is no longer constant and
volume is ambiguous. So we have an equation that no
longer fits the conditions of expanding gas.

The equation that does fit the situation, Navier-Stokes without the incompressibility simplification, is just way too complex to solve. I manage to get around this by applying numerical analysis. I use Euler's method of incremental solution of a system of Integral equations. My solution for the Levitator is consistent with experimental observation in a number of substantial ways. It predicts the pressure gradients, the cavitation ring and the bulk modulus effect. It also predicts an inverse lift-separation effect which I also measure experimentally. No other solutions that I know even come close to explaining all these experimental observations.

Academics who don't go to this
extent, and take the easy (and wrong) route and continue to
apply the derivation of Bernoulli's Principle where it does
not belong, are committing Bernoulli Abuse. They take an
equation that does not apply to varying density phenomena [ P = k/V - dv^{2}/2
] and jump to the silly conclusion that since Pressure is on
one side and the negative square of velocity is on the other
side, that Pressure always goes down as the square of
velocity. This is patently ridiculous. It allows
for bizarre conclusions like there is a velocity beyond
which you get negative pressure. It predicts that
people speeding along in a train must be experiencing low
pressure in their cabins relative to us. It also
predicts that, relative to them, we must be experiencing low
pressure. These are a few of the most egregious form
of Bernoulli abuse.

Unfortunately, these are not the only examples. Mis-applications to airplane wings are right up there. Most people don't really grasp the standard fast-air, slow-air curvy wing theory of wing lift. No wonder. It's wrong.

With this site, I invite you to examine my arguments, in great mathematical detail, and to challenge the abusers to come clean and admit their misapplications do not hold water, gas or much real science.

I invite you to join with me in the crusade to Stop Bernoulli Abuse and to put the pressure where it belongs - on the abusers.

I'm Ed Seykota and I approve this message.