Scientist use this fact ever time they launch a
shuttle into space. This balance between
gravity and CF maintains these orbits, and it
applies to all objects moving in circular paths.

Since Cook's device has proven that this theory
works, and the more others learn about it, he
is getting comments concerning Newton's
Laws. Someone said, "The device itself defies
the laws of science originally set down by
Isaac Newton. It can create an action without
a reaction. Power in a single direction, once a
scientific impossibility, is now a reality."

This is not true; it is the understanding of the
law that is wrong. Newtons law for equal and
opposite reaction still applies, but to forces and
mass. Normally in regards to mass, when
applying a force to an object energy is
imparted to that object and motion occurs. For
motion to occur Inertia must be over come,
inertia being the resistance to motion caused
by gravity and friction. That is why as we all
know you get an opposite reaction. If I push
my hand against something to move it, Inertia
causes the opposite reaction against my hand.

Here on earth the force of gravity is always
acting on mass to give it weight, this combined
with the friction of the surroundings is what
Newton termed as Inertia. Inertia its self is not
a force, it is the resistance to motion, and is a
victor quantity between the force of gravity,
and the resistance of friction. In space there is
no Inertia since there is no resistance, there is
how ever always gravity it may lesson the
further bodies separate, but it is still there.

In regards to force, Its Said, "For 360 degrees
of spin, the net result had to be forces in
equilibrium which could only create bounded
It began in my brain 63 years ago!
Last revision 10/06/2014
This is true only with 360 degrees of spin. When
the mechanism produces CF over only 180
degrees or less, that force is trying to pull the
CIP in that one direction. The force of gravity
and friction is resisting that pull, in a direction
along the ground, and it takes an equal and
opposite pull to over come that inertia.
Therefore, you have no conflict with Newtons

In a direction way from the ground there is
gravity and the air friction resisting that pull.
Here the force of gravity is the strong factor not
the air, until it is moving fast enough. The
Centrifugal Force need be only equal to the pull
of gravity, or the weight of the CIP. It will then
rise by the buoyancy of the air, and the spin of
the earth.

Some one once said that laws are made to be
broken. Man has for hundreds of years learned
from his predecessor, by passing on from each
generation to the next theories, which become
laws when it appears that the principles are
sound. This holds until someone improves upon
them or proves they are wrong. If we are to
believe a new concept that seems to contradict
presently accepted laws, we must assume that
the old law is either wrong, or misunderstood in
its concept.

If the CIP Engine appears to circumventing the
Law of Angular Momentum, it follows that either
the Law is wrong, misinterpreted or you are
misunderstanding what you are seeing.

In reading over The Law of Angular Momentum
again, I did not see any reference to CF. I did
see one reference else where that stated,
"Angular momentum (Centrifugal Force)"
inferring they were the same thing, which I
strongly disagree too.
Copyright 2007 by Gordon K. Glatz
Page 4