Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Mechanical free energy devices => mechanic => Topic started by: George1 on July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM

Title: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM
IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

This seems to me a great technology revolution! As if these guys are extremely gifted engineers! Please look at the two links below:

https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf

https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf

The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.

Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.

The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.

Alternatively, you can run a search in Google for the phrase "HOW BARON MUNCHAUSEN CAN LIFT HIMSELF INTO THE AIR BY PULLING HIMSELF UP BY HIS OWN HAIR" (with capital letters).

You can contact the inventors at randdgroup34@gmail.com.

And most important, in order to understand the text and the related Figs.1-6, you have to be an expert in the field of theoretical and applied mechanics

My friends and I are extremely curious about the opinions of the colleagues, who are members of the world community, related to reactionless propulsion systems, alternative sources of energy and other non-standard technology problems.

What do you think about the experiment described in the links above? As if everything seems to be perfect? As if this is really a reactionless propulsion system and/or a perpetual motion machine?

Besides these guys suggest another technology revolution. Their  second technology breakthrough increases drastically the distance travelled by a standard electric car on a single charge. And what do you think about this electric technology? 

Eagerly looking forward to your answer.

Best regards

George Sen
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 26, 2018, 11:42:09 AM
I do not see any comments. No one here is interested in reactionless drive?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: aether22 on August 28, 2018, 07:55:40 AM
I do not see any comments. No one here is interested in reactionless drive?


It's more a case of "wait, so I have to read a bunch of low contrast handwriting and math that might go over my head, and the only alternative is some meaningless cryptic images that by themselves explain nothing"...




Also, if you break the conservation of momentum, then you break the conservation of energy either way.


Also, finally, most attempts to violate mathematical laws with math fall flat, they are mistakes, errors.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: telecom on August 28, 2018, 11:02:46 PM
have you actually tried the experiment?
Generally speaking, mv of the reaction is a vector, and if the direction is changed on the opposite, i.e. not against the original force, but with it, the reaction can be made to
double the original force.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 01, 2018, 03:15:29 PM
Please look at the two PDF links.
1) Everything is explained clear enough and the text and the drawings are also clear enough.
2) No, there are no experiments at all. It's only a theoretical research. If somebody in this forum has time and good will, then he/she could carry out the experiment. You can also consider everything as a part of the entertaiment industry. Simply have fun and be happy! 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 08, 2018, 11:27:51 AM
Dear colleagues,
Let me tell you about two more things.
1) Precise mathematical calculations (including intergrals) unambiguously show the correctness of the conception described in the two PDF links  https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf and  https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf. Baron Munchausen can lift himself into the air by pulling himself up by his own hair for sure! The calculations however take too much space (20 pages) and that's why they are not given here. But anybody, who is interested in, can do the math.
2) There are special computer programs (since 1990s) which entirely and fully imitate real mechanical (as well as electrical, chemical and other) processes. There are numerous clips in YouTube which totally and fully imitate the real mechanical processes which occur in the internal combustion engines (ICE) for example. The clips are animations which show clearly vectors (as time varying directions and magnitudes) of linear and angular velocities and of forces and torques related (a) to the rotating crankshaft, (b) to the reciprocally moving pistons and (c) to the cylinders. AND PLEASE NOTE -- there is an option which allows imitating of the real mechanical processes in ICE with and without friction, that is, friction can vary from zero to any value(magnitude) bigger than zero.
So if there are enthusiasts (enthusiasm is one of the basic requirements of any great deed) in this forum who are well educated in computer sciences, then they could adapt the above mentioned programs to the Baron Munchausen's reactionless drive conception and show all of us in this forum the related adaptations.
---------------------------------
And let me repeat again -- nobody forces you into accepting of the Baron Munchausen's conception for a reactionless drive. Please consider the two PDF links as a part of the entertainment industry. Simply have fun and be happy!
Best regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 15, 2018, 11:22:42 AM
And two more arguments related to Baron Munchausen's reactionless drive which are not related to higher mathematics.
1) Firstly, please look again at Figs. 1,2,2A and 3 in link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf and at the related text in link  https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf. Please assume that the inside walls of the straight-line black pipes are quite rough and covered with abrasive paper. The two blue balls slide inside the straight-line black pipes s-segments. Let us assume that the resisting force of friction is 1N. (The weight of an average apple is around 1N.)
Secondly, please look again at Figs. 4,5,5A and 6 in link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf and at the related text in link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf. Please assume that friction inside the zig-zag channels is 100000 times smaller than 1N (which is perfectly possible by using modern technologies), that is, the resisting force of friction is now 0.00001N. Therefore friction can be assumed negligible -- it is much smaller than the weight of a mosquito! And the related experimental error is 0.001%, that is, the experimental error can be also neglected as the acceptable margin of experimental error is 1% at most.
How to explain the Baron Munchausen's reactionless drive in a simpler and more understandable way?
2) Now we are preparing a presentation (text and drawings) of another approach which allows replacing of friction (Figs. 1,2,2A and 3) with another technology unit. The blue ball slides with negligible friction inside the straight-line black pipe and at a certain moment pushes sideways an oblique piston which on its behalf slides in a straight-line channel. This channel (a) is perpendicular to the black straight-line pipe and (b) is firmly attached to the black straight-line pipe. There is a spring of suitable stiffness inside this additional channel. The blue ball slides inside the black straight-line pipe and pushes the oblique piston, which on its behalf presses the spring. After some period of time the piston is totally pushed out of the black straight-line pipe and is locked in its ultimate position; the spring is maximally pressed and the related velocities are the same as in Fig. 3. If friction is assumed negligible, then (a) no heat is generated and (b) the related energy is accumulated in the spring as a potential energy. (The spring is assumed to be ideal and I will not explain now what is an ideal spring and how it correlates with a real spring.)
-----------------------------
It seems to me that many members of this forum (excluding a few clumsy and ignorant agents of the BIG OIL) as if fear the truth.
Nevertheless simply have fun!
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: fritznien on September 15, 2018, 03:26:03 PM
hard to read.TLDRwhat is the point.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 22, 2018, 10:36:44 AM
To fritznien.
1) The experimental error caused by friction in a real experiment can be reduced to 0.001% (modern technologies allow this) while the acceptable margin of experimental error is 1-2% at most and 5% as a standard.   
2) Friction can be replaced by oblique pistons which are pushed aside by the moving blue balls. Pistons press high-quality springs that accumulate potential energy and do not practically generate heat.
Note. Yet please read the text which you evaluate as TLRD. 
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 06, 2018, 11:25:20 AM
Don't fear the truth! And the truth is that BARON MUNCHAUSEN CAN LIFT HIMSELF INTO THE AIR BY PULLING HIMSELF UP BY HIS OWN HAIR FOR SURE! The law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct in some cases! Any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing disturbing and tragic in this fact. Be simply braver and have fun!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 04, 2018, 11:30:14 AM
Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: F6FLT on November 04, 2018, 01:15:44 PM
...BARON MUNCHAUSEN CAN LIFT HIMSELF INTO THE AIR BY PULLING HIMSELF UP BY HIS OWN HAIR FOR SURE!
...
Does he use the same method as Peter Pan?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on November 05, 2018, 02:17:31 PM
I do not see any comments. No one here is interested in reactionless drive?
The point here is how one can pull his own hair and lift himself into the air. The hand that pulls, will pull equally in the opposite direction of the weight he want to lift. Such videos, or statements are untrue because it's a good trick, with nothing more to it.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: F6FLT on November 05, 2018, 06:01:15 PM
...The hand that pulls, will pull equally in the opposite direction of the weight he want to lift. Such videos, or statements are untrue because it's a good trick, with nothing more to it.
...

I share your opinion, Vidar.
The configuration reduces to a closed mechanical system and no new physics is assumed. A Lagrangian can therefore describe the system, which excludes any possibility of non-conservation of the momentum.
I consider this thread to be a good joke, even if it is not the April fool's day.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 11, 2018, 12:20:33 PM
To F6FLT and to Low-Q.
Are you really ignorant or you only imitate ignorance because of the money you receive from the BIG OIL and/or from similar organizations? Most likely the second one is true.   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 11, 2018, 12:23:21 PM
Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: F6FLT on November 11, 2018, 06:45:00 PM
To F6FLT and to Low-Q.
Are you really ignorant or you only imitate ignorance because of the money you receive from the BIG OIL and/or from similar organizations?
Yes I get $50.000 every month from "BIG OIL and/or from similar organizations" to animate social networks. ::)  ;D ;D ;D

Irony aside, after having learned elementary physics, you should also learn the ad hominem fallacy of "Guilt by association" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy) in order to improve your mastery of logic and rethoric and to be less insulting in the future.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 12, 2018, 04:25:42 PM
To F6FLT.
Please excuse me if I have insulted you. You are free to have your own opinion and protect it. I do not mind if you consider the above Baron Munchausen's reactionless drive as a joke. Then please have fun and be happy! It's OK! 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 12, 2018, 04:26:31 PM
Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 26, 2018, 06:26:55 PM
Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on November 30, 2018, 12:56:29 PM
To F6FLT and to Low-Q.
Are you really ignorant or you only imitate ignorance because of the money you receive from the BIG OIL and/or from similar organizations? Most likely the second one is true.
This has nothing to do with Big Oil. Oil is Big because over unity doesn't work. Claiming that Big Oil is in the way, is just a conspiracy theory that is constructed by ignorant minds.
Science is all about numbers. If the numbers doesn't add up, you have a problem that can't be solved. Easy as that.
However, in spite of this, even myself have spent lots of time trying to crack the over unity code. Sleepless nights, convinced that I have figured it out, but then the day after I realize I made a mistake in the calculations, or methods that are used to determine how things work.


Working with OU is an extremely hard task to manage fully - just because, in the end of the day, the numbers doesn't add up, EVERY TIME. Frustrating, but true.
I'm not saying that all those experiments and simulations are a waste of time. While walking that steep uphill path, you learn more and more - learning the hard way, by doing errors. You learn what mistakes you did, and then avoid those in later experiments and simulations. Unfortunatly for someone, the broken record plays the same track over and over. Makes the same mistakes over and over.
Just a fool repeats experiments that fail. You must think new every time, even if you don't have any good ideas left - then try the bad ideas untill you come up with something promising.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on November 30, 2018, 01:02:57 PM
Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
I have noe clue about these simulators, but what I assume, is that those computer models use calculus to determine the outcome.
As long that calculator correctly states that 1+1=2, I cannot guarantee that you some day will be able to simulate a mechanical system that delivers over unity.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 01, 2018, 11:45:17 AM
To Low-Q
Hi Vidar,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Well, there are three possibilities -- the described above Baron Munchausen's reactionless drive either (a) breaks only the law of conservation of linear momentum or (b) breaks only the law of conservation of mechanical energy or (c) breaks simultaneously both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
2) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum automatically leads to a comparatively simple mechanical reactionless drive machine, which (PLEASE NOTE!) has nothing to do with literally lifting yourself into the air by pulling your own hair -- only the ultimate effect would be the same 
2) You wrote that you have spent lots of time trying to crack the over unity code. In such a case let us work together and not compete. Let us find together an expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems and processes. (You and I are not experts in this field for sure.) 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on December 02, 2018, 12:41:45 AM
Well, George, I'm not actually competing. I just find such claims a little odd - the logic doesn't add quite up. By reactionless, I understand a force that does not need a reference. Say that you help a driver with his car by pushing it out of from a pile of snow. By "magic" you do not spend a calorie, but the car is still pushed away from the pile.
Then you realize that the car was hooked up on a tractor. The mistake was that you didn't noticed the tractor.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 12, 2018, 12:45:44 PM
To Low-Q.
Hi Vidar.
Thanks a lot for your reply. And here is my answer.
1) Actually I did not understand what exactly are you talking about in your last message. May be this is due to my insufficient qualification. But let us try another simple approach.
2) Assume that the black component is either fixed to the ground or its mass is much bigger than the mass of the blue component. Then after covering a certain number of zigzags the blue component will stop WITHOUT HEAT GENERATION as friction is zero (or small enough for the related experimental error to be neglected). This corresponds to the second experiment.
3) Let us now replace the black component zigzag sector with a straight-line sector which is rough enough and long enough. Then after covering a certain suitable length/part of the straight-line rough sector the blue component will also stop but this time WITH HEAT GENERATION. This corresponds to the first experiment.
4) If in items 2 and 3 the black component is either not fixed to the ground or its mass is not much bigger but comparable with the mass of the blue component, then in both cases after covering a certain number of zigzags (experiment 2) and after covering a certain length of the rough straight-line sector (experiment 1) the blue and black components will form together one united whole which will move with one and same final velocity. But in one case (corresponding to experiment 2) THERE IS NO HEAT GENERATION and in the other case (corresponding to experiment 1) THERE IS HEAT GENERATION. This enevitably leads to the conclusion that may be both the law of conseravation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously to some extent. And there is now only one step to designing and manufacturing a reactionless derive. (Let us call it for fun a "Baron Munchausen reactionless drive".)
---------------
It's simple, isn't it?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 12, 2018, 12:58:56 PM

Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 18, 2018, 09:19:13 AM
And here is one even more understandable variation of the considerations related to the links  https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf and https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf.
1) Let us assume that the mass of the black component is m and the mass of the blue component is m too. The initial velocity of the blue component is Vo and its linear momentum is mVo respectively.
2) Let us consider only the zigzag experiment 2.
3) Firstly, let us consider what would happen if the zigzag channels are rough and there is friction. And secondly, let us consider what will happen if the zigzag channels are smooth and there is no friction.
4) The question is how many zigzags have to be covered by the blue component for both the black component and the blue component to form one united whole whose mass is 2m and whose velocity is Vo/2, and whose linear momentum is exactly (2m)(Vo/2).
5) The answer is surprisingly simple -- simple formulas and calculations have to be used only.
5A) For the first case -- rough zigzag channels. The blue component has to cover 5 zigzags for both the black component and the blue component to form one united whole whose mass is 2m and whose velocity is Vo/2, and whose linear momentum is (2m)(Vo/2) respectively. In this first case HEAT IS GENERATED.
5B) For the second case -- smooth zigzag channels. The same final results with the only difference that (1) the blue component has to cover 11 zigzags and (2) HEAT IS NOT GENERATED.
6) We chose a sine wave shape of the zigzag channels. But one can use any other zigzag-shaped curve.
7) For the calculations we used the following initial data.
7A) Force of friction = 1N (initial value); force of friction gradually decreases because it depends on the normal force (normal to the sine wave curve) which also decreases while the blue component moves in relation to the black component.   
7B) Coefficient of sliding friction = 0.5 = const.; it does not change while the blue component moves in relation to the black component.
7C) Sine wave maximum amplitude = 0.2 m.
7D) Vo = 1 m/s.
7E) m = 1 kg.
------------------
How to explain the situation in a simpler manner?
IT IS EVIDENT that there is only one step from the above considerations to the designing and manufacturing of a comparatively simple  ENTIRELY mechanical reactionless drive machine.
Looking forward to the answers of all sceptics :) (who we actually consider as friends, associates and colleagues).
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 18, 2018, 09:42:25 AM
Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 26, 2018, 04:25:41 PM
1) Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
2) Any member of this forum, who is a top expert in theoretical and applied mechanics, and who is able to check the correctness of our calculations related to 5/11 zigzag experiments?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 29, 2018, 03:57:51 PM
1) Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
2) Any member of this forum, who is a top expert in theoretical and applied mechanics, and who is able to check the correctness of our calculations related to 5/11 zigzag experiments?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 02, 2019, 10:51:51 AM
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Best wishes to all members of this forum!
And I would like to ask again for support, partnership and collaboration:
1) Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
2) Any member of this forum, who is a top expert in theoretical and applied mechanics, and who is able to check the correctness of our calculations related to 5/11 zigzag experiments?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on January 02, 2019, 12:43:07 PM
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Best wishes to all members of this forum!
And I would like to ask again for support, partnership and collaboration:
1) Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?
2) Any member of this forum, who is a top expert in theoretical and applied mechanics, and who is able to check the correctness of our calculations related to 5/11 zigzag experiments?
Happy new year George!
I think your question doesn't get any response, but I have answered your question earlier - even if it wasn't exactly what you wanted.
If you want to simulate a mechanical setup, the professional way, any legit simulators out there does not allow over unity - simply because they take all physical and mathematical aspects into consideration that cannot allow a false answer to a calculation. It will, if all details about your zigzag-idea is put into the model, calculate zero output.


I have analyzed your zigzag-idea (Based on what I can uderstand frot it), but I cannot find anything in it which creates energy from nothing, or anything special, or surprizingly odd.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 06, 2019, 12:50:00 PM
Happy New Year, Vidar!
Thanks a lot for your reply. I would not agree with your opinion, but it's ok. It is normal different people to have different opinions.
-----------------------------------------
To all other colleagues and friends in this forum, who do not share Vidar's opinion.
Please consider carefully the 10 items below that can be found by Google.
1) Physics engine -- Wikipedia.
2) Physics abstraction layer (PAL).
3) Dynamechs.
4) RigidChips.
5) Dynamical simulation -- Wikipedia.
6) Open dynamics engine.
7) Japanese rigid-body simulator.
8) Rigid-body simulator.
9) Rigid-body Dynamic Simulators.
10) And many more.
Google shows that there are at least 15 high-quality simulators of physical reality which ARE BASED ON THE THREE NEWTON'S LAWS. And this means that the experimental error is reduced practically to zero.
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on January 06, 2019, 11:50:18 PM
 @George1,
 
Hi,
I'm an old timer. Been a very long time since my last post...
Nicely written paper! Very cleanly explained. Congratulations! However, I've stop reading at the very top of page 8: "The second result is that the blue T-shaped component decelerates..."
Why is it do you think it would decelerate? Would it? Why would it? I'm asking because I firmly believe it won't. In the absence of any friction (ideal case), it's the balls that accelerates instead. It will accelerate without any problem in the light of the assumption made at page 3, in the brackets: "For easier considerations further in the text you could assume that the masses of the two symmetrical couples blue rods - blue balls are equal to zero and can be neglected". Emphasis is on "are equal to zero", hence they do not require energy, nor momentum, to accelerate instantaneously.  The speed of T-shaped component will, therefore, remain constant. Having reached this point, I'm sorry to say that, imho, the rest of the paper does fall short on physics?


Waiting for your reply,

Best regards!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 07, 2019, 01:01:35 PM
But if the speed of the T-shaped component remains constant, then this will lead to a severe violation of the two basic laws. No matter how many are the zigzags the T-shaped component's speed will be always constant and the T-shaped component will never stop. Did I understand you correctly?
(In my poor opinion the best solution is the use of a high-quality rigid-body simulator of the kind that is used in NASA, Boeing, Formula 1 etc.)
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards!
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on January 07, 2019, 02:24:37 PM
Yes, that is correct. In the absence of friction and zero ball masses, the T-shaped component's speed will be always constant, regardless of zigzags. There is no violations of any laws that I am aware of.
If you'll want to consider non-zero ball masses but also the absence of friction, the speed of T-shaped component will vary as per momentum and energy conservation laws, depending on the zigzags exact geometrical configuration but, in the end, when traveling straight again, the speed will revert back to the exact initial speed, regardless of zigzags. It's just slightly more complicated to solve but in essence I think you'll find out a solution close to a kind of jerky motion and nothing else of particular relevance.
That's how I see it.I'm sorry for the bad news.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on January 07, 2019, 07:01:12 PM
@tinu
That is pretty much what I figured out too.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 08, 2019, 09:30:59 AM
To Low-Q/Vidar and tinu.
Thanks a lot for your replies. I would not agree with your arguements because of several reasons. It will take too much time and space however to explain these reasons in detail. (Part of these reasons were explained in some of my previous posts.)  Anyway you both are free to have your own opinions and protect them. It's OK. My intuition tells me however that very soon you both will change your minds and you both will join our team. If so, you are welcome.
---------------------------------
To all other colleagues and friends in this forum, who do not share present Vidar's and tinu's opinions.
Please consider carefully the 10 items below that can be found by Google.
1) Physics engine -- Wikipedia.
2) Physics abstraction layer (PAL).
3) Dynamechs.
4) RigidChips.
5) Dynamical simulation -- Wikipedia.
6) Open dynamics engine.
7) Japanese rigid-body simulator.
8) Rigid-body simulator.
9) Rigid-body Dynamic Simulators.
10) And many more.
Google shows that there are at least 15 high-quality simulators of physical reality which ARE BASED ON THE THREE NEWTON'S LAWS. And this means that the experimental error is reduced practically to zero.
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 11, 2019, 01:14:29 PM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum, who do not share present Vidar's and tinu's opinions.
Please consider carefully the links below.
1) https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_computer_simulation_software
3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PfAtth53bk
4) https://www.mathworks.com/products/simmechanics.html
5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_engine
6) And many more.
Google shows that there are at least 20 high-quality simulators of physical reality which ARE BASED ON THE THREE NEWTON'S LAWS. And this means that the experimental error is reduced practically to zero.
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 16, 2019, 03:59:18 PM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum, who do not share present Vidar's and tinu's opinions.
Please consider carefully the links below.
1) https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_computer_simulation_software
3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PfAtth53bk
4) https://www.mathworks.com/products/simmechanics.html
5) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_engine
6) And many more.
Google shows that there are at least 20 high-quality simulators of physical reality which ARE BASED ON THE THREE NEWTON'S LAWS. And this means that the experimental error is reduced practically to zero.
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 20, 2019, 10:40:47 AM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 23, 2019, 02:49:38 PM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 28, 2019, 10:14:17 AM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 01, 2019, 09:59:29 AM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 02, 2019, 01:09:32 PM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 04, 2019, 09:10:26 AM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 10, 2019, 03:14:39 PM
Any comments, opinions, recommendations, objections? Any positive and constructive criticism is welcome.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 10, 2019, 03:15:15 PM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 12, 2019, 03:18:00 PM
To all colleagues and friends in this forum.
Please consider the link below, which shows computer simulations of a great variety of real physical processes.
https://www.myphysicslab.com/index-en.html
Please help us to make a computer simulation of the mechanical systems described in the two links below.
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
Besides there is an YouTube clip which describes the same technology. The video quality of the clip is not very good however.
The clip can be found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pLeawOh3Ho.
(Please look at the beginning of this forum discussion.)
LET'S DO THE THINGS TOGETHER!
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 19, 2019, 10:29:30 AM
Any comments, opinions, recommendations, related to our reactionless drive conception?
Looking forward to your answers.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on February 20, 2019, 10:18:22 AM
Instead of repeating yourself and annoying everyone with the same messages over and over, you can build this thing, and see how it works ;)


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 21, 2019, 10:15:49 AM
To Low-Q.
---------------------
Hi Vidar,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Yes, you are right. As if I overdo the things a little. I am sorry for this.
2) Now we are working over a real experiment as well as over a computer simulation. But these two problems are not easy to be solved. Some help from any member of this forum would be always welcome.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,     
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on February 21, 2019, 11:48:30 AM

Starting with specific design on the drawing board is a good way to start. Drawings with specific details, such as size of parts, where to put them (how to assamble), what the parts are for, and what purpose they have. Choise of materials for each part.
3D drawings is easier to understand. Not many can understand 2D drawings and put those together in an imaginary 3D model, then visualize how it works.
You have some work to do, I suppose🙂


Vidar

To Low-Q.
---------------------
Hi Vidar,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Yes, you are right. As if I overdo the things a little. I am sorry for this.
2) Now we are working over a real experiment as well as over a computer simulation. But these two problems are not easy to be solved. Some help from any member of this forum would be always welcome.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,     
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 21, 2019, 03:38:53 PM
A quote from Low-Q: "Starting with specific design on the drawing board is a good way to start. Drawings with specific details, such as size of parts, where to put them (how to assamble), what the parts are for, and what purpose they have. Choise of materials for each part.
3D drawings is easier to understand. Not many can understand 2D drawings and put those together in an imaginary 3D model, then visualize how it works.
You have some work to do, I suppose🙂"
-----------------
To Low-Q.
-----------------
Hi Vidar.
Thanks a lot for your reply and for your moral support. We highly appreciate this. And yes, you are right -- we have some work to do, that's true.
And one question, if you please. I can't understand these three sentences: "3D drawings is easier to understand. Not many can understand 2D drawings and put those together in an imaginary 3D model, then visualize how it works." Would you be so polite to give us some more detailed explanations?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 22, 2019, 10:42:45 AM
To Low-Q.
-----------------
Hi Vidar.
Why 3D is easier to understand than 2D? Isn't it just on the contrary?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on February 22, 2019, 06:47:44 PM
What I meant was draw the model in 3D, such as you do in Fusion 360 or Sketchup.


If you need help with design or wether it works or not, it is important to be VERY specific. Detailed drawings in 3D is very helpful.
Because ball-pen lines, some ripples/waves, a square here and there, maybe a circle somewhere on a piece of paper, does not make sense for many. Even if the text/explanations are there, it is not always easy to follow the explanation of the drawings.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 23, 2019, 12:45:23 PM
Hi Vidar,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
Your last text is very interesting. I would need some time to formulate exactly a few questions. And what are Fusion 360 and Sketchup?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on February 23, 2019, 01:07:20 PM
Fusion 360 and Sketchup is computer software where you can modelling objects, put them together so you can sort of simulate a real model, turn it around on the computer screen so you can look at the model from any thinkable positions.
Search youtube for Fusion 360 modelling or Sketchup modelling. Then you see what purpose these softwares has🙂
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on February 23, 2019, 01:14:39 PM
Well, aside from my reply above, I have given your drawing an eyeball, and wonder about one thing.
The waveform, I assume is a hollow track, or two tracks close to each other, keeping a small rod or something on track as you move the piston back and forth.
The lines that goes in between the two vertical parallell lines, what are they supposed to do, except from bouncing up and down as you move the piston sideways?
It is somewat hard to keep track on a handwritten photographed description, in multiple pages in, a foreign language...
Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 25, 2019, 02:21:23 PM
To Low-Q/Vidar.
----------------------
Hi Vidar.
Thanks a lot for your reply.
Would you be so polite to formulate again your question(s)? I did not understand them entirely.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 25, 2019, 02:24:02 PM
To Low-Q/Vidar
------------------------------
And thanks a lot for the information related to Fusion 360 and Sketchup.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 26, 2019, 09:09:48 AM
To Low-Q/Vidar
--------------------
It's not an easy job for an unexperienced man to work with Fusion 360 and with Sketchup. It will take some time to study and learn the basic skills.
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 27, 2019, 11:43:34 AM
To Low-Q/Vidar.
---------------------
There is some progress with these programs. But it will take time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on February 27, 2019, 07:43:46 PM
Sounds great Geroge1.
These compotersimulations in 3D are powerful tools.
They do not only offer a full 3 dimension model, but you can make parts, assemble them on the computer. In this way you can easily see where you need adjustments or alternative fittings. Last, but not least, your model can be exported to a 3D printable version, and one day hold your computermodel in your hands. I do this all the time. Making parts on my 3D printer that I have made in SketchUp Make ( the free version of scetchup).


It is a steep learning curve at the beginning. I have recently got into Fusion 360, but after many years with SketchUp, I find it hard to "reset" my brain to handle Fusion 360 well.
I'll probably stick to SketchUp for now.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 01, 2019, 12:15:15 PM
To Low-Q.
-----------------
Hi Vidar.
Thank you for your reply.
1) Yes, SketchUp really seems to be more convenient. It is web-based and does not need downloading (as Fusion 360 does) which is, let's say, one of its primary advantages.
2) But as if neither SketchUp nor Fusion 360 have any options related to a possible details' motion. Or may be there are such options but being a non-expert I did not notice them? Please throw some light on this section of SketchUp and Fusion 360, if possible.
3) As I can see you are a top-expert in the field. So would you be so polite to think over the possibility to join our team and become our partner?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on March 01, 2019, 03:28:06 PM

Hi George1,


I have to think about the partnership. What does it involve? Finance, development, support, or what?
I cannot throw money after people. I can for sure help if you need some sketches, but do not expect me to be 100% dedicated to the partnership since I do have lots of other things to do - such as kids, other hobbies, a wife, a job etc.
I will not spend a second on contributions to developments of devices that obviously cannot work, such as closed looped gravity powered machines of all kinds, or electrical closed looped devices that is suposed to deliver excess energy.


I am more into magnetism, because that is a relatively wide field when you think about it. It is not directly compareable to gravity, even though the magnetic fields at any point is conservative, but it is the magnetic field gradient that looks interesting. What can we do with it? How can we displace magnetic materials, or other magnets, within a magnetic field gradient without effort? etc. This is the issues I work on right now (Actually for years without sucsess this far).


Speaking of SketchUp: It is not possible to animate functions of a model in SketchUp. To do this you need an expert level in VERY expensive and powerful computer tools.
What I do is designing a model in SketchUp, then 3D-print it as a model with parts that I put together, and test in real life. Computersimulations cannot provide proof. Most important, computersimulations use generic calculus to determine the outcome. That means you will never be able to simulate overunity on a computer.


Vidar

To Low-Q.
-----------------
Hi Vidar.
Thank you for your reply.
1) Yes, SketchUp really seems to be more convenient. It is web-based and does not need downloading (as Fusion 360 does) which is, let's say, one of its primary advantages.
2) But as if neither SketchUp nor Fusion 360 have any options related to a possible details' motion. Or may be there are such options but being a non-expert I did not notice them? Please throw some light on this section of SketchUp and Fusion 360, if possible.
3) As I can see you are a top-expert in the field. So would you be so polite to think over the possibility to join our team and become our partner?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 10, 2019, 12:14:45 PM
To Low-Q.
----------------
Hi Vidar.
Thank you for your reply.
My colleagues and I have been extremely busy for the last 7 days and because of this I could not answer your last letter.
About the partnership. Actually I have not an exact formula for this partnership. May be support and development? Or something else? Please suggest, if you like, some formula for partnership and collaboration of mutual benefit.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on March 10, 2019, 02:36:38 PM
Hi George,


I am willing to discuss projects with you. Just tell me how you prefer the communication. Open source, such as this forum, or in full secret.
Email, facebook, messenger, or what?


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 12, 2019, 09:38:57 AM
To Low-Q.
------------------
Hi Vidar
Thank you for your reply.
Well, may be some part of our correspondence could be open source and some part could be secret. You have the email address of our group. It is written in my first post. Please write to our email address, if you like, and if you have some secret projects, which you don't want to reveale to public.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on March 12, 2019, 01:49:29 PM
To Low-Q.
------------------
Hi Vidar
Thank you for your reply.
Well, may be some part of our correspondence could be open source and some part could be secret. You have the email address of our group. It is written in my first post. Please write to our email address, if you like, and if you have some secret projects, which you don't want to reveale to public.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George   
OK. Thanks. I sent you an email from my gmail account just now.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 15, 2019, 03:09:14 PM
To Low-Q.
--------------------
Hi Vidar.
Thank you for your reply. I will enter our team's email address after a while.
Best regards,
George 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 16, 2019, 11:39:18 AM
Any comments, advices, recommendations, objections?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: aurelian on March 17, 2019, 01:42:00 AM
Is there any moderator on this forum who can approve new posts?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: hdeasy on March 19, 2019, 04:04:24 PM
Why don't you pay an engineer to make up your system and test it? That's what I have done for 6 or 7 prototypes at this stage using centrifugal force to propel reaction-lessly. Some of the prototypes shattered due to vibrations but they all gave the predicted forces. I won't show them as trying to develop in a startup company. I estimate yours would cost about 500 Euros with the firm I work with.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 26, 2019, 10:45:15 AM
Why don't you pay an engineer to make up your system and test it? That's what I have done for 6 or 7 prototypes at this stage using centrifugal force to propel reaction-lessly. Some of the prototypes shattered due to vibrations but they all gave the predicted forces. I won't show them as trying to develop in a startup company. I estimate yours would cost about 500 Euros with the firm I work with.
--------------
This is a good advice. You have done 7 prototypes. Could you recommend me soe skillful engineer?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 30, 2019, 02:16:41 PM
Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 31, 2019, 05:21:08 PM
Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 08, 2019, 03:42:03 PM
Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 09, 2019, 01:35:16 PM
Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 10, 2019, 10:58:56 AM
Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 11, 2019, 12:55:06 PM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 15, 2019, 11:28:51 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 16, 2019, 11:17:02 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 19, 2019, 10:06:12 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 20, 2019, 10:07:57 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 22, 2019, 08:48:01 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 23, 2019, 10:11:04 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 24, 2019, 10:07:31 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 25, 2019, 09:10:51 AM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 26, 2019, 02:05:07 PM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 27, 2019, 12:52:25 PM
Hi everyone
1) Are there any skillful engineers/craftsmen in this forum who are ready to carry out either real or computer-simulated experiments? We are ready to pay. How much?
2) We are also ready to discuss any form of cooperation of mutual benefit. Any idea in this direction?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 30, 2019, 09:26:01 AM
It seems to me a paradox that there isn't at least one enthusiast in this forum who is ready to perform either a real or a computer-simulated experiment of the reactionless drive. I can't understand this. What happens here?
Regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 02, 2019, 09:53:55 AM
Hi everyone
Very, very sad! No inventors-enthisiasts here?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 02, 2019, 03:06:16 PM
 Maybe that's because time and money are too precious to be wasted?!
There are enough enthusiasts here but I told you already that your idea is flawed. You may perform the real experiment by yourself by placing two laser pointers at the end of a rod in such a way that their emitted photons will be your zero-mass balls. Make the zig-zag pattern out of mirrors appropriately placed so as the laser is reflected back to the central rod where is to be absorbed on a black surface. Now you can move the rod back and forth and do your observations and measurements. I suggest you use a very low-amplitude pendulum movement for the rod by suspending it with stings under vacuum and then measure it's oscillation frequency, with lasers turned on then off. But I'd rather suggest you better keep studying physics as it would be more conclusive and beneficial in the long run.
Best regards!
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 03, 2019, 09:49:40 AM
Hi tinu,
Thank you for reply.
1) First of all it's evident that there is some kind of misunderstanding here. Nobody ever mentioned about zero-mass balls. The mass of each blue ball is, let's say, 1/100 the mass of the T-shaped blue component.
2) Your laser-based idea seems to be interesting. But how will you imitate the "ball+rod united whole" back-and-forth motion by using laser beams? We cannot understand this. It seems to be incompatible with our basic concept. Please explain your point of view in detail, if possible.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
       
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: hdeasy on May 03, 2019, 10:12:16 AM
I couldn't wade through the verbose exposition - reminds me of something from Bergson or Alfred Whitehead. Can you not summarize it in 2 or 3 sentences? The springs remind one of what is a truly reaction-less system - i.e.  http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/ . (http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/)
 Nothing like it thoguh, is it? (http://www.inertialpropulsion.com/)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 04, 2019, 12:29:14 PM
Hi hdeasy,
Is there any friction between this machine and the horizontal surface?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 04, 2019, 12:31:24 PM
As if some four small wheels maintain the horizontal motion?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: hdeasy on May 04, 2019, 01:13:18 PM
Do you mean Steve's demo of his cart moving? Well some friction is there between wheels and surface but he maintains that a reaction-less force moves it forward without contact to the axle of the wheels. However, the movement is a bit jerky, which could be that he's using one way wheels. In this case the system would be reaction off the floor.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 06, 2019, 10:28:58 AM
Hi tinu,
Thank you for reply.
1) First of all it's evident that there is some kind of misunderstanding here. Nobody ever mentioned about zero-mass balls. The mass of each blue ball is, let's say, 1/100 the mass of the T-shaped blue component.
2) Your laser-based idea seems to be interesting. But how will you imitate the "ball+rod united whole" back-and-forth motion by using laser beams? We cannot understand this. It seems to be incompatible with our basic concept. Please explain your point of view in detail, if possible.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
     
Hi George1,

1. Nobody ever mentioned about zero-mass balls?!!! https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf Page 3, in the brackets: "For easier considerations further in the text you could assume that the masses of the two symmetrical couples blue rods - blue balls are equal to zero and can be neglected".  So, it seems the whole paper was written by somebody else, someone not part of 'your team', since you don't even remember what's about? I've only red it once, almost 4 months ago  and still remember what's written within while you obviously don't know it even at this time...
So, who actually wrote the paper? Please tell him/her/them, that the paper is plain wrong (starting with page 8 ) and please forward to him/her/them my previous post of January 6th.

2. You absolutely need a blue laser, since the rods and balls are blue in the concept paper you posted. Otherwise, the whole experiment might fail. In fact, I'm pretty sure it will fail. So, if you don't have a blue laser to emit blue photons acting as blue balls, you may quickly rewrite the paper according to the laser wavelength you have available, in an attempt to save the situation.  For instance, you may try red rods and red balls, if you have a red laser readily available. Yes, it seems my idea is hard to understood, isn't it? I'm glad you find it interesting, tough.
Point 2 was a joke, obviously, for those wandering. But since we're wasting time here, why not?

Best regards.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 06, 2019, 11:33:24 AM
Hi guys,
Let us focus again on the zigzag design as described in the first post of this topic.
-----------------------------------
1) What will happen if:
a) the mass of the blue component is SMALLER than the mass of the black component;
b) the mass of the blue component is EQUAL to the mass of the black component;
c) the mass of the blue component is BIGGER than the mass of the black component.
-----------------------------------
2) And one modification of the main concept.
-----------------------------------
Let us assume that the black component is fixed motionless somewhere to some obstacle and is not able to move. In this case it is evident that after entering the zigzag channel section the blue component will decelerate. What will be the value of this deceleration d and how it will depend on the number of the zigzags? After how many zigzags for example the velocity of the blue component will be 3/4 its initial velocity Vo? Or, let's say, 1/2?
-----------------------------------
And one more question. It is evident that if the blue component enters the zigzag channel section, then the black component exerts force Fc on the obstacle, which does not allow the black component's linear motion. It is evident that the direction of Fc coincides with the direction of Vo. What will be the mean value of Fc for example? Or its maximum and minimum? 
-----------------------------------
So can somebody calculate the values of the deceleration d and of the force Fc for all of us in this forum? It is evident that both d and Fc are bigger than zero ( d > 0 and Fc > 0), but it will be a nice job if some formulas are derived.
(Note. Friction is negligible and the shape of the zigzag channel could be for example an ordinary standard sinusoid. (Or any other curve, if more convenient.))
-----------------------------------
Looking forward to your answers.
-----------------------------------
George     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 07, 2019, 08:57:02 AM
Hi guys,
Some calculations and/or opinions related to our last post?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 08, 2019, 11:38:56 AM
Hi guys,
Any calculated values for Fc and/or for d?
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 08, 2019, 12:41:19 PM
 Yes, I'm working on it!
It goes quite slowly. So far I have a report but it's 800 pages long...  ::)
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 08, 2019, 01:32:28 PM
OK, we are waiting!
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 08, 2019, 01:39:53 PM
Hi tinu,
You petrify me again, my friend! As if you are a highly-qualified expert in electrochemistry as well as in theoretical and applied mechanics too! You are genius! :D
(Please don't be angry again -- I am only joking! :D)
Looking forward to your calculations related to Fc and d.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 09, 2019, 08:31:30 AM
Hi guys,
Let us focus again on the zigzag design as described in the first post of this topic.
-----------------------------------
1) What will happen if:
a) the mass of the blue component is SMALLER than the mass of the black component;
b) the mass of the blue component is EQUAL to the mass of the black component;
c) the mass of the blue component is BIGGER than the mass of the black component.
-----------------------------------
2) And one modification of the main concept.
-----------------------------------
Let us assume that the black component is fixed motionless somewhere to some obstacle and is not able to move. In this case it is evident that after entering the zigzag channel section the blue component will decelerate. What will be the value of this deceleration d and how it will depend on the number of the zigzags? After how many zigzags for example the velocity of the blue component will be 3/4 its initial velocity Vo? Or, let's say, 1/2?
-----------------------------------
And one more question. It is evident that if the blue component enters the zigzag channel section, then the black component exerts force Fc on the obstacle, which does not allow the black component's linear motion. It is evident that the direction of Fc coincides with the direction of Vo. What will be the mean value of Fc for example? Or its maximum and minimum? 
-----------------------------------
So can somebody calculate the values of the deceleration d and of the force Fc for all of us in this forum? It is evident that both d and Fc are bigger than zero ( d > 0 and Fc > 0), but it will be a nice job if some formulas are derived.
(Note. Friction is negligible and the shape of the zigzag channel could be for example an ordinary standard sinusoid. (Or any other curve, if more convenient.))
-----------------------------------
Looking forward to your answers.
-----------------------------------
George     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 09, 2019, 11:12:57 AM
Hi tinu,
Waiting for your calculations related to the zigzag system.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 10, 2019, 10:14:09 AM
Hi guys,
Please have a look again at the first post of ours in this topic. Let us make the following comparison. (We will repeat some parts of our previous posts.)
============================
1) Please have a look at Fig. 4, Fig. 5, Fig. 5A and Fig. 6.
--------------------------------------------------
1A) THERE IS NO FRICTION. (Modern technologies allow to reduce practically as much as you want the experimental error, related to friction.)
--------------------------------------------------
1B) Let us assume that the black component is fixed motionless somewhere to some obstacle and is not able to move. In this case it is evident that after entering the zigzag channel section the blue component will decelerate. And it is also evident that the deceleration d (its absolute value and its mean value) will be bigger than zero, that is, d > 0.
--------------------------------------------------
1C) It is evident that if the blue component enters the zigzag channel section, then the black component exerts force Fc on the obstacle, which does not allow the black component's linear motion. It is evident that the direction of Fc coincides with the direction of Vo. It is also evident that the force Fc (its absolute value and its mean value) is bigger than zero, that is, Fc > 0.
============================
2) Please have a look at Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 2A and Fig. 3.
--------------------------------------------------
2A) THERE IS FRICTION in the linear channel s-segment section.
--------------------------------------------------
2B) Let us assume that the black component is fixed motionless somewhere to some obstacle and is not able to move. In this case it is evident that after entering the linear channel s-segment section the blue component will decelerate. And it is also evident that the deceleration d' (its absolute value and its mean value) will be bigger than zero, that is, d' > 0.
--------------------------------------------------
2C) It is evident that if the blue component enters the linear channel s-segment section, then the black component exerts force F'c on the obstacle, which does not allow the black component's linear motion. It is evident that the direction of F'c coincides with the direction of Vo. It is also evident that the force F'c (its absolute value and its mean value) is bigger than zero, that is, F'c > 0.
============================
3) Please compare item 1 with item 2. It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0. Therefore it is evident that zigzags successfully imitate resistance, which is identical to friction, but without generating heat. And if we use this simple fact in the experiments, described in Figs. 1 - 6, then we can conclude again that:
a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct;
b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct;
c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
============================
Let us stress upon the fact that IN GENERAL both the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are absolutely true and correct. There is no doubt about this. But any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, disturbing and tragic in this fact.
--------------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George 




Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 11, 2019, 01:11:59 PM
Any comments, suggestions, opinions?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 14, 2019, 01:38:36 PM
Hi guys,
As if the theoretical conception in the first post of ours in this topic is most probably a small exception of the law of conservation of linear momentum. But please note -- I wrote "MOST PROBBALY" and NOT "SURELY". Please have a look again at item 3 of our penultimate post. Which one of its sub-items (a), (b) and (c) is correct? We hope that some colleagues here will help to clarify this question.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 14, 2019, 08:03:35 PM
... most probably a small exception of the law of conservation of linear momentum
is nowhere to be found but in your head!

...But please note -- I wrote "MOST PROBBALY" and NOT "SURELY".
Noted. Most probably, like it's been said above.

Which one of its sub-items (a), (b) and (c) is correct?
Each and every of (a), (b) and (c) is wrong, also a brilliant sample of pure gibberish.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 15, 2019, 09:26:59 AM
tinu,
Did you take your medicine this morning?
You are a pathological hater. You are a sick man. You really need a doctor. And I am absolutely sure that you are sending your posts from the psychiatry section of a hospital.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 15, 2019, 09:54:03 AM
No arguments on topic?
 
Being uneducated might be somewhat excusable but being rude is your best choice? Really, George? lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KaZDwIKYF4w
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 15, 2019, 11:42:59 AM
Hi tinu,
Ok, ok, my friend! :D I will not argue with you. You are free to have your own opinion and protect it. It's ok!
Don't worry and be happy! :D
Regards,
George
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 15, 2019, 12:04:08 PM
Hi guys,
A friend from another OU forum gives an interesting idea. He suggests the zigzag rounded curves to be replaced with sharp zigzag forms similar to saw teeth.  In this case, he says, the possible violation-of-the-two-conservation-laws effect would be as if even much greater. What do you think about his suggestion?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 15, 2019, 03:29:48 PM
Any opinions related to the saw-teeth zigzag model suggested by the colleague from a similar to ours OU website? (Please have a look at our last post.) His suggestion seems to be interesting.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM
Hi guys,
I am re-sending again our post of May 10, 2019, 10:14:09 AM. This post as if most clearly supports the validity of our basic concept.
============================
============================
Please have a look again at the first post of ours in this topic. Let us make the following comparison. (We will repeat some parts of our previous posts.)
============================
1) Please have a look at Fig. 4, Fig. 5, Fig. 5A and Fig. 6.
--------------------------------------------------
1A) THERE IS NO FRICTION. (Modern technologies allow to reduce practically as much as you want the experimental error, related to friction.)
--------------------------------------------------
1B) Let us assume that the black component is fixed motionless somewhere to some obstacle and is not able to move. In this case it is evident that after entering the zigzag channel section the blue component will decelerate. And it is also evident that the deceleration d (its absolute value and its mean value) will be bigger than zero, that is, d > 0.
--------------------------------------------------
1C) It is evident that if the blue component enters the zigzag channel section, then the black component exerts force Fc on the obstacle, which does not allow the black component's linear motion. It is evident that the direction of Fc coincides with the direction of Vo. It is also evident that the force Fc (its absolute value and its mean value) is bigger than zero, that is, Fc > 0.
============================
2) Please have a look at Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 2A and Fig. 3.
--------------------------------------------------
2A) THERE IS FRICTION in the linear channel s-segment section.
--------------------------------------------------
2B) Let us assume that the black component is fixed motionless somewhere to some obstacle and is not able to move. In this case it is evident that after entering the linear channel s-segment section the blue component will decelerate. And it is also evident that the deceleration d' (its absolute value and its mean value) will be bigger than zero, that is, d' > 0.
--------------------------------------------------
2C) It is evident that if the blue component enters the linear channel s-segment section, then the black component exerts force F'c on the obstacle, which does not allow the black component's linear motion. It is evident that the direction of F'c coincides with the direction of Vo. It is also evident that the force F'c (its absolute value and its mean value) is bigger than zero, that is, F'c > 0.
============================
3) Please compare item 1 with item 2. It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0. Therefore it is evident that zigzags successfully imitate resistance, which is identical to friction, but without generating heat. And if we use this simple fact in the experiments, described in Figs. 1 - 6, then we can conclude again that:
a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct;
b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct;
c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
============================
Let us stress upon the fact that IN GENERAL both the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are absolutely true and correct. There is no doubt about this. But any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, disturbing and tragic in this fact.
--------------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 16, 2019, 12:46:26 PM
Please stop this crap already, will you? If you can't come with experimental results better stfu!
And stop spamming us again and again with your nonsense!
Can you understand this is a public forum or you're simply retard?
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 16, 2019, 01:37:10 PM
tinu,
You did not take your medicine again this morning. I will talk to your doctor to forbid you to write in this forum and take away your computer. You are dangerous for you yourself and for the others.
May be you have to change the medicine? Because obviously the medicine you are taking is not effective enough.       
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 16, 2019, 02:00:24 PM
George,

 I see you insist with repeated ad-hominem. You won't stay long here with your insults, you little prick.
 
Tell me this: your character is abject, your education is poor, your western culture is almost non-existent and your inclination is clearly toward lying and cheating yet your English is pretty good. Add a high ego and no manners whatsoever. You must come from a former imperial colony, aren't you?
 
Anyway, I promise you: any time I'll have a spare minute, I'll sign in to smack in your face, moron!
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 16, 2019, 03:13:14 PM
tinu,
All members of this forum already see clearly that you are mad and dangerous. There is no doubt about this. How to have a dialogue with a mad person?
(I would like to appologise to all other members of this forum for my inappropriate words above. But there is no other way for communication with such people like tinu.) 
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 16, 2019, 08:43:46 PM
 George,

Haven't I just told you I'll not allow any more impunities?
Is it I was not clear enough or you're really retard?!
Wait for my reply. It will come shortly, as soon as I'll make some time to waste on you.
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: tinu on May 16, 2019, 09:11:54 PM
... we can conclude again that:
a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct;
This assertion is plain stupid. Linear momentum is always conserved. There is no exception.

...we can conclude again that:
b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct;
 
This assertion is plain stupid. In a closed system where there are no dissipative forces (as per your assumptions),  mechanical energy is always conserved. There is no exception.
 
...we can conclude again that:
c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
This assertion is DOUBLE stupid. Both mechanical energy and linear momentum are always conserved. There is no exception.

Let us stress upon the fact that IN GENERAL both the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are absolutely true and correct. There is no doubt about this. But any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, disturbing and tragic in this fact.
This assertion is the most stupid sample one can read. Laws in physics have no exceptions! A single exception, if identified, would completely invalidate the law!

So George, why don't you go educate yourself a little more before coming here to insult people? If you need links and free books for your education, I can help.
Or, if you prefer, focus you attention to other kind of rules (traffic maybe) where, of course, there can be exceptions.

Please come back only when you're sufficiently enlightened and meanwhile refrain yourself from posting absurdities!


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 17, 2019, 10:12:31 AM
tinu,
1) If you lived at the time of the three musketeers in France, then you should kill tens of people! :D (I am joking, Professor No-man -- please don't be angry again!):D 
2) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." Any objections against this last claim?

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 18, 2019, 09:36:13 AM
Hi guys,
Any comments, suggestions, opinions related to our post of May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM and to the related item 2 of our last post?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 25, 2019, 06:26:52 PM
Hi guys,
Any comments, suggestions, opinions related to our post of May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 02, 2019, 02:13:29 PM
Hi guys,
Let us resume our almost-one-year-lasting discussion.
----------------------------
1) The two supporting points of our basic concept are our two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0. Therefore it is evident that zigzags successfully imitate resistance, which is identical to friction, but without generating heat.
----------------------------
2) It follows from the previous item 1 that it is perfectly possible to design and manufacture a reactionless drive of an entirely new kind. The principle of operation of this new kind of reactionless drive (a) is described in detail in our two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM and (b) is absolutely free.
----------------------------
3) In order to work properly however the above mentioned new kind of reactionless drive needs a a reliable and effective motor system.
----------------------------
4) The modern technology trend is related to electric vehicles -- electric cars, trucks, airplanes, drones, boats, bicycles, etc.
----------------------------
5) So we are suggesting a revolutionary electric technology which increases (twice as a minimum and more than 25 times as a maximum) the distance travelled by a standard electric vehicle on a single charge. (Please have a look at our first post of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM.) Our revolutionary electric technology is cheap, safe and reliable and can be successfully used in combination with the new kind of reactionless drive as well as in combination with any type of a standard now-existing electric vehicle.
----------------------------
6) We are selling our revolutionary electric technology for 10 (ten) million dollars. Money first and only then releasing of the technology description/information accompanied by a working experimental device.
----------------------------
7) And we changed our minds. We decided to use 5 million dollars for R&D work and 5 million dollars for charity, that is, every second dollar of this 10 million dollars price will be used for charity.
----------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
 
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 09, 2019, 05:09:06 PM
Looking for a buyer of our revolutionary electric technology which is able to increase (twice as a minimum and more than 25 times as a maximum) the distance traveled by a standard electric vehicle on a single charge.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on June 14, 2019, 01:23:31 PM
https://web.archive.org/web/20071119131255/http://www.trinitymotors.net/https://web.archive.org/web/20040607160343/http://www.trinitymotors.net/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20071119131255/http://www.trinitymotors.net/https://web.archive.org/web/20040607160343/http://www.trinitymotors.net/)
An historic breaktrough ( their words ::) )

The "PowerMax"
A generator-motor~ rotoverter concept
https://web.archive.org/web/20040607173348/http://www.trinitymotors.net/pressreleases.htm (https://web.archive.org/web/20040607173348/http://www.trinitymotors.net/pressreleases.htm)"dormant windings" awaking

Similar:
http://www.geminielectricmotor.com/default.htm (http://www.geminielectricmotor.com/default.htm)"... the electricity generated by this third field could be used to recharge...... "

Both +/- calculation :100 electric units in and magnetic force out + 30 electric units for recharge


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=Tanaka+saburo&IN=&CPC=&IC= (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=Tanaka+saburo&IN=&CPC=&IC=)

From battery 20 electric units to inverter to Tanaka Saburo device makes 100 electric units to
PowerMax or Geminielectricmotor ....... and 30 electric units for battery recharge .

   SURPLUS ENERGY CYCLE


"open source" technology: for electric vehicles( land,sub-/sea,air),  heat pumps/chiller, fridges, pumps,.........

Alternatively:
PowerMax or Geminielectricmotor

and this Dr. Imris battery recharge concept, since 31.03.2019 free/ open source :

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&bcId=2&locale=en_EP&return=true&FT=D&date=20190328&CC=DE&NR=112017003611A5&KC=A5# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&bcId=2&locale=en_EP&return=true&FT=D&date=20190328&CC=DE&NR=112017003611A5&KC=A5#)
Dr. Imris generative device ~ Tanaka Saburo device

THE 1 eWATT( and less) PER KILOMETER CHALLENGE;:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20001020&CC=FR&NR=2792258A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20001020&CC=FR&NR=2792258A1&KC=A1#)
2000 Wh per 100 Kilometer

A. + 4x PowerMax / Geminielectricmotor + Saburo


B. Alternatively:

4x 500 Watt
https://www.voanews.com/silicon-valley-technology/can-better-electric-motor-save-planet (https://www.voanews.com/silicon-valley-technology/can-better-electric-motor-save-planet)
1000 Wh per 100 Kilometer

4x
https://patentauction.com/patent.php?nb=11462 (https://patentauction.com/patent.php?nb=11462or)

or Dr.Imris/ Tanaka Saburo generator/amplifier
200-100 Wh per 100 Kilometer =

                                                 1 eWATT PER KILOMETER
and optional :
https://www.interpatent.de/unsere_innovationen_strom_aus_der_federung_en.html (https://www.interpatent.de/unsere_innovationen_strom_aus_der_federung_en.html)
--------------------------------------

                           3d micro- modelling for surplus energy cycles
1. https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=JP&NR=2007028879A&KC=A# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=JP&NR=2007028879A&KC=A#)
+ PowerMax or Geminielectricmotor  or inverter/ converter
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 15, 2019, 09:41:18 AM
Hi lancaIV,
Hi dear friend,
It's a real pleasure to correspond with you! You are a great expert! (No flattering -- I really think what I am writing!) 
Please give me some time to consider carefully your last post.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 15, 2019, 10:12:41 AM
Hi guys,
1) We are selling a revolutionary electric technology for 10 (ten) million dollars. Our revolutionary electric technology increases (twice as a minimum and more than 25 times as a maximum) the distance traveled by a standard now-existing electric vehicle on a single charge. Our revolutionary electric technology is cheap, safe and reliable and is practically ready for production on a large industrial scale. There is a working prototype/experimental device.
2) In addition to our revolutionary electric technology we reveal ABSOLUTELY FREE the secret of the principle of operation of a revolutionary reactionless drive -- just like Baron Munchasen who lifted himself up by pulling his own hair. Please look at our two basic posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM.
3) The combination of the previous item 1 and item 2 would lead inevitably to an unique reactionless propulsion vehicle -- no transmissions, no propellers, no high-velocity hot gases, no high-temperature resistant materials, no high-pressure resistant materials, no sophisticated design and no sophisticated technology and NO POLLUTION(!), but only a simple electromechanical system, able to cover effectively great distances.
Looking forward to your answer.
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on June 16, 2019, 06:28:17 PM

Hi George,
I thought this was an open source forum. Selling stuff might be better elsewhere ;)
10 million dollars isn't cheap, btw, but why are you selling it?
Does it work?
Is it tested backwards, forwards, up and down, so you are sure this technology works?


I haven't looked through all the posts in this thread, but if this is some overunity stuff, you should be 110% sure it works.
Most important, when selling something wonderful, with a high price tag, you need to expose the inner workings. Let independent people examine your machine in full.


People has been fooled too many times on claimed overunity devices, nobody will buy it unless you can prove beyond doubt that it works. That means long time operation without input energy. We talk about weeks or months of continous operation, with no human interference or energy inputs of any kind.


Vidar

Hi guys,
1) We are selling a revolutionary electric technology for 10 (ten) million dollars. Our revolutionary electric technology increases (twice as a minimum and more than 25 times as a maximum) the distance traveled by a standard now-existing electric vehicle on a single charge. Our revolutionary electric technology is cheap, safe and reliable and is practically ready for production on a large industrial scale. There is a working prototype/experimental device.
2) In addition to our revolutionary electric technology we reveal ABSOLUTELY FREE the secret of the principle of operation of a revolutionary reactionless drive -- just like Baron Munchasen who lifted himself up by pulling his own hair. Please look at our two basic posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM.
3) The combination of the previous item 1 and item 2 would lead inevitably to an unique reactionless propulsion vehicle -- no transmissions, no propellers, no high-velocity hot gases, no high-temperature resistant materials, no high-pressure resistant materials, no sophisticated design and no sophisticated technology and NO POLLUTION(!), but only a simple electromechanical system, able to cover effectively great distances.
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Acca on June 21, 2019, 01:15:17 PM
Clip from Russian space station a Reaction-less puller..
 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PNclxVYBuD1BkBOaGlndyjulHc_coNvb/view (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PNclxVYBuD1BkBOaGlndyjulHc_coNvb/view)
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5RnjeTvuNk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5RnjeTvuNk)
The anti-gravity engine of Leonova <ins><ins><ins></ins></ins></ins>Speaking of a quantum engine, Vladimir Leonov does not mean the classical scheme of a photon engine, where thrust is created by annihilation of matter and antimatter. The scientist, working on new physics, creates devices that work on the basis of the elasticity of space and energy of gravitational waves. Unfortunately, the army of scientists tries not to touch upon similar topics, and continues to improve what is already hopelessly outdated. In order to clarify the necessity of transition to new principles of motion in space, it suffices to say that the specific impulse of modern carrier rockets is only twice that of the rocket of Werner von Braun. That is, the physical limit of liquid rocket engines has been reached. Nuclear engines are dangerous, and electric engines have a low thrust and are not suitable for starting from the Earth. This is why Leonov's anti-gravity engine is so important. In case of successful implementation of the project, engineering and technology are awaited by incredible transformations, which can not even be imagined. Suffice it to say that with a quantum engine, a spacecraft will reach the Moon in three and a half hours, and Mars in just two days ...Sound signals should sound immediately. The initial and final state of the system looks exactly the same, and yet we have extracted energy from the system. This is, at last, an eternal machine, which everyone dreams about? To solve this paradox, we must carefully study each of the individual operations. The laws of physics for any closed system are reversible, and therefore our approach is to locate the one that hides an irreversible operation. Obvious candidates are the process of measurement or, perhaps, the installation of a shutter or piston.


 
https://housepic.ru/en/antigravity-engine-development-russia-successfully-tested-the-antigravity-engine-of-the-lion.html (https://housepic.ru/en/antigravity-engine-development-russia-successfully-tested-the-antigravity-engine-of-the-lion.html)





 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 23, 2019, 02:45:54 PM
Hi guys,
--------------------
1) We are selling a revolutionary electric technology for 10 (ten) million dollars. Our revolutionary electric technology increases (twice as a minimum and more than 25 times as a maximum) the distance traveled by a standard now-existing electric vehicle on a single charge. Our revolutionary electric technology is cheap, safe and reliable and is practically ready for production on a large industrial scale. There is a working prototype/experimental device.
--------------------
2) In addition to our revolutionary electric technology we reveal ABSOLUTELY FREE the secret of the principle of operation of a revolutionary reactionless drive -- just like Baron Munchasen who lifted himself up by pulling his own hair. Please look at our two basic posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM.
AND VERY IMPORTANT -- THE PRINCIPLE OF OPERATION OF OUR REVOLUTIONARY REACTIONLESS DRIVE MUST BE EVALUATED ONLY BY HIGHLY QUALIFIED EXPERTS IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED MECHANICS! 
--------------------
3) The combination of the previous item 1 and item 2 would lead inevitably to an unique reactionless propulsion vehicle -- no transmissions, no propellers, no high-velocity hot gases, no high-temperature resistant materials, no high-pressure resistant materials, no sophisticated design and no sophisticated technology and NO POLLUTION(!), but only a simple electromechanical system, able to cover effectively great distances.
--------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Acca on June 23, 2019, 06:52:14 PM
You should at least show a photo of this 10 million dollar machine ...
As to why you are posting this here as this overunity forum is to reverse engineer your type of machine ?
 ...and the principle of operation.. as we don't want anything that is just another radioactive Harold Coleman power generator..


Acca...


Ps I want only 5 million for my method of accelerating time .."machine"..I have to sell it as I am old..



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Acca on June 23, 2019, 07:38:58 PM
Soo... I forgot to ask you if this technology is stolen Russian reaction-less device by Vladimir Leonov as shown in the ISS clip..  I posted the link on the previous page as Leonov just uploaded the clip two days ago on his youtube channel..  I think that this is soo..  You have to really by honest here as Russians already have the unit in gravity-less ISS and doing engineering application based experiments for the uni-directional drive..


So unless you can prove your claim with photos the Russians have patents already and disclosed this method..


However Americans are still debating if it is even possible to have uni-directional thrust with no counter reaction..


Sooo ...too bad as this is 100 times more efficient and like Robert Cook described this in his book "The death or rocketry" in the 1980's  and patent..The cat is now out of the brown paper bag.. and you are now on the sidelines..


Acca.. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 29, 2019, 10:21:37 AM
Hi Acca,
Hi Low-Q/Vidar,
Thank you for your replies.
The links you have sent to us have nothing to do with our technologies and conceptions. But these links are very interesting and we need some time to consider them carefully.
George 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 02, 2019, 09:07:07 AM
To Acca and Low-Q/Vidar.
--------------------------------
Hi guys,
1) We considered carefully the last links that have been sent. As mentioned in our last post our technologies and conceptions have nothing to do with these links, i.e., our technologies and conceptions have nothing to do with antigravity and quantum energetics. We describe only a simple mechanical system consisting of four simpe mechanical components. As for the clip, describing the Russian reactionless puller, we suspect that this is some kind of pneumatic system which uses for support the air inside the cabin and actually this is not a reactionless puller.
2) And what is your opinion about our two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM? Zigzags imitate resistance, identical to friction, but without generating heat, don't they?
Looking forward to your answer.
George     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on July 02, 2019, 10:24:59 AM
To Acca and Low-Q/Vidar.
--------------------------------
Hi guys,
1) We considered carefully the last links that have been sent. As mentioned in our last post our technologies and conceptions have nothing to do with these links, i.e., our technologies and conceptions have nothing to do with antigravity and quantum energetics. We describe only a simple mechanical system consisting of four simpe mechanical components. As for the clip, describing the Russian reactionless puller, we suspect that this is some kind of pneumatic system which uses for support the air inside the cabin and actually this is not a reactionless puller.
2) And what is your opinion about our two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM? Zigzags imitate resistance, identical to friction, but without generating heat, don't they?
Looking forward to your answer.
George     
The only force that somewhat imitate friction is a constant acceleration of mass, but then you gain kinetic energy as the velocity increase.
The "friction" you talk about does not involve any increase of kinetic energy due to mass acceleration, so therefor the friction must cause heat.


So, to answer your last question, the zigzags generate heat if you cannot recover 100% of the "friction" to do useful work.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 03, 2019, 02:30:53 PM
To Low-Q/Vidar
---------------------------
Hi Vidar,
You greatly disappoint me, my friend!
You have written: "The only force that somewhat imitate friction is a constant acceleration of mass, but then you gain kinetic energy as the velocity increase.
The "friction" you talk about does not involve any increase of kinetic energy due to mass acceleration, so therefor the friction must cause heat. So, to answer your last question, the zigzags generate heat if you cannot recover 100% of the "friction" to do useful work." There is no sense in this composition of words. This is for example something like the following sentence: " The Moon is black and it walks around the green tree." Grammatically correct, but absurd.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 03, 2019, 02:39:05 PM
To Low-Q/Vidar
---------------------------
Hi Vidar,
You greatly disappoint me, my friend!
You have written: "The only force that somewhat imitate friction is a constant acceleration of mass, but then you gain kinetic energy as the velocity increase. The "friction" you talk about does not involve any increase of kinetic energy due to mass acceleration, so therefor the friction must cause heat. So, to answer your last question, the zigzags generate heat if you cannot recover 100% of the "friction" to do useful work." There is no sense in this composition of words. This is for example something like the following sentence: " The Moon is black and it walks around the green tree." Grammatically correct, but absurd.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 03, 2019, 02:40:48 PM
I don't know why my last post has been sent two times in a row. I am not responsible for this.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on July 03, 2019, 02:48:53 PM
To Low-Q/Vidar
---------------------------
Hi Vidar,
You greatly disappoint me, my friend!
You have written: "The only force that somewhat imitate friction is a constant acceleration of mass, but then you gain kinetic energy as the velocity increase. The "friction" you talk about does not involve any increase of kinetic energy due to mass acceleration, so therefor the friction must cause heat. So, to answer your last question, the zigzags generate heat if you cannot recover 100% of the "friction" to do useful work." There is no sense in this composition of words. This is for example something like the following sentence: " The Moon is black and it walks around the green tree." Grammatically correct, but absurd.
George
Sorry for disapointing you. I hope you can provide an understandable explanation to why the zig-zag does not loose energy to heat, and why friction, per definition, doesn't create heat.
My purpose was not to disappoint you, but putting down my thoughts on the subject.
Mechanical systems follows mechanical physics. There is no workaround to avoid a physical device to violate its physical nature.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 03, 2019, 03:05:00 PM
Vidar,
1) But you haven't read at all the two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY!
2) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." Any objections against this last claim?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on July 04, 2019, 12:30:20 AM
Vidar,
1) But you haven't read at all the two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY!
2) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." Any objections against this last claim?
George
What's written is one thing. How your device work in real life is another thing.
I strongly believe it is smart to do the practice first, then figure out how it works. Anyone can write down ones ideas, claims, etc, but that does not prove anything.


For 10 million dollars, you really need to prove your claims. The one and only way to do that, is to build the thing, and exmine how it works - not only by you, but by independent people without influence of the inventor. Avoiding anything that would possibly bias the examiners work and results.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 04, 2019, 10:28:14 AM
Hi guys,
------------------------------
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
------------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George
=================
P.S. To Vidar. Firstly, (1) our reactionless drive conception and (2) our revolutionary electric technology are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Secondly, as far as I can see you have no objections against the claim of item 1. Thirdly, if you have 10 million dollars, then we could start negotiating about our electric technology. And fourthly, the reactionless drive motor could be either (a) some kind of electric technology or (b) an internal combustion engine or (c) a steam engine or (d) a steam turbine combined with some nuclear device for example, etc. (You can even integrate the reactionless drive with some bycicle-like device and use your muscle power.) And at last, you, Sven and I are viking descendants and we have to support each other and not to confront.         



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on July 05, 2019, 11:21:58 PM
.......... And at last, you, Sven and I are viking descendants and we have to support each other and not to confront.         
Supporting each other is not the same as agreeing to everything. Confrontations are something else I think - like something that happend when the vikings boarded the northern shore of Scotland and took with them the most beautiful nuns back to Norway...


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 06, 2019, 11:56:28 AM
Hi Vidar,
A) Yes, you are right about the words "support'" and "confront" -- I did not use them in the most suitable way.
===================
B) But let us get back to the essence of this discussion. I am sending again the text of one of our last posts.
===================
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
===================
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
------------------------------
Do you agree with items 1, 2 and 3?
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 14, 2019, 02:29:07 PM
Some idiots try to imitate us coppying the name of our topic. Please don't pay attention to their writings.
George 1 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 14, 2019, 02:36:43 PM
Please don't pay attention to the writings of that old cheater whose name is losiledlighting. The latter has nothing to do with us.
George 1
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on July 17, 2019, 12:32:53 AM
Hi Vidar,
A) Yes, you are right about the words "support'" and "confront" -- I did not use them in the most suitable way.
===================
B) But let us get back to the essence of this discussion. I am sending again the text of one of our last posts.
===================
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
===================
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
------------------------------
Do you agree with items 1, 2 and 3?
Looking forward to your answer.
George
I can't agree with item 1, 2 or 3 unless you have experimental results that confirms the hypothetis.
Any idea or hypothetis is often biased, meaning that the idea feels so right, one can't see the error in it.
I do not say there is an error in your hypothetis, but the possibility for an error that you will discover when you tests the hypothetis in pratice, is there.
Besides, the explanation written May 10.th, and repeated May 16.th is not refering to figures that is easily accessable from the page where the explanation is written.
That makes it time consuming to follow.


Make some precise building plans, follow the plans, and build it. Untill then, I cannot comment any further.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 18, 2019, 05:51:12 PM
Well, you are a stubborn colleague Norseman! :)
OK, let us start again. Starting again with item 1.
---------------------------
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 28, 2019, 01:54:08 PM
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 03, 2019, 02:36:06 PM
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
----------------------------
1) As far as we can see there aren't any objections against this last claim. Besides a simple experiment, which was repeated many times, confirmed the validity of Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0. We developed an entirely new and original technology able to decrease standard sliding friction hundreds (and even thousands) of times thus reducing hundreds (and even thousands) of times experimental error due to friction. (In principle modern technologies allow reducing of friction practically as much as you want thus reducing as much as you want the experimental error due to friction.)
----------------------------
2) Our general intention is to suggest to the audience an electro-mechanical reactionless drive without any pollution.The secret of the principle of operation of the mechanical component of the system has been already revealed ABSOLUTELY FREE in this topic. The electrical component of the system however is not free an we sell it for 10 (ten) million dollars.
And here is our key business proposal. It is evident that most members of this forum are creative persons of non-standard and original way of thinking. (Not a flattery, but a true real fact.) If a certain member of this forum manages to help us to sell the electrical component of the system for 10 (ten) million dollars, then he/she would immediately receive 1 (one) million dollars and an invitation to join our team of inventors (if he/she wants to join us and work with us, of course.)
----------------------------
Looking forward to your answers.
George       
   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 11, 2019, 11:55:16 AM
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." (Experimentally proved) ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
-----------------------
Many people here are simply afraid of truth. A very sad fact!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 19, 2019, 09:54:08 AM
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." (Experimentally proved) ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
-----------------------
No objections?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 25, 2019, 12:50:50 PM
Still no objections? Shall we write a new textbook of physics? :)
We need (1) brave collaborators/partners of non-standard and original way of thinking and (2) 10 million dollars for further perfection of our next inventions as performing of precise, exact and high-quality scientific experiments is an EXPENSIVE business.
Looking forward to your answer.
George1   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 01, 2019, 01:34:56 PM
Deep silence again? :)
STILL NO OBJECTIONS WITHIN A PERIOD OF MORE THAN ONE MONTH?
It is a matter of (1) a perpetual motion machine and (2) a reactionless drive simultaneously, isn't it? Where are the Nobel prize committee representatives? :)
Any candidates for buying the secret of our electric technology and/or for collaboration with us? (Our team welcomes new members of non-standard and original way of thinking.)
George1
   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 08, 2019, 01:58:22 PM
Deep silence second month and still no objections? This unambiguously shows that it is really a matter of a serious technology breakthrough! And because of this the price of our electric technology has been increased. Our electric technology costs already 20 million dollars. (Please don't worry -- we are not greedy. The greater part of the money will be used for charity.)
Looking forward to your answer.
George1 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on September 09, 2019, 10:25:12 PM
It might be a different reason to why it has been scilent for months, than you might think. The first thing that comes to mind, is that the posts here is repeated over and over, about something mechanical. Something that obeys laws of physics - as all other mechanical systems do (sorry).
You need to build this to convince yourself, and us. The outcome is however predicted already by everyone except yourself ;)


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on September 09, 2019, 11:34:19 PM
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20160727&CC=CY&NR=1113918T1&KC=T1#

                                                                26.12.2012
https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP08872337&tab=main
https://register.epo.org/application?lng=en&number=EP08872337&tab=main
It seems this machine does not obey the defined laws
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Low-Q on September 10, 2019, 02:37:19 PM
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20160727&CC=CY&NR=1113918T1&KC=T1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20160727&CC=CY&NR=1113918T1&KC=T1#)

                                                                26.12.2012
https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP08872337&tab=main (https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP08872337&tab=main)
https://register.epo.org/application?lng=en&number=EP08872337&tab=main (https://register.epo.org/application?lng=en&number=EP08872337&tab=main)
It seems this machine does not obey the defined laws
I cannot find anything in these documents that does not obey the laws of physics. Please point out where you find the OU. I cannot find it.


Vidar
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on September 10, 2019, 02:50:22 PM
[0020] ......which the efficiency is appreciable increased..... NO PERCENTAGE, NO NUMERICAL NUMBER

[0022] ...... August 2008 ...

Maerz( prototype), April( the Arestov xing-article/offer), Mai, Juni, Juli, August 2008 :

                                              Linevich Unwuchtmotor

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.xing.com%2Fcommunities%2Fposts%2Fdie-alternative-stromanlage-bei-einer-leistungsaufnahme-von-nur-25-watt-entwickelt-der-motor-eine-leistung-1001254727 (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.xing.com%2Fcommunities%2Fposts%2Fdie-alternative-stromanlage-bei-einer-leistungsaufnahme-von-nur-25-watt-entwickelt-der-motor-eine-leistung-1001254727)
Prototyp : 25 in and 400 out numbered detail and 400/25= 1600% as percentage
for given experimental construction


But based by the received commercial EP Grant this does not obey the laws. !  ;)
Probably you know: many U. S.  Patent office grants are withdrawn by the EP Patent office. !
In the U. S. probably commercial save,  in the EP estates : open source. !

U. S. Patent office grant conditions obey European Patent office grant conditioning
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 15, 2019, 11:30:41 AM
Well, I am repeating hundreds of times one and same thing.
I am repeating again!
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0."
---------------------------
ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 20, 2019, 09:37:49 AM
YOU SIMPLY FEAR THE TRUTH!
------------------------------------
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0."
---------------------------
DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 21, 2019, 12:19:51 PM
I WILL REPEAT WITH CONFIDENCE WHAT I HAVE FORMERLY AFFIRMED -- YOU SIMPLY FEAR THE TRUTH!
------------------------------------
Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0."
---------------------------
DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 29, 2019, 01:30:31 PM
Still no objections? This is because no objections can be invented. ;)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on September 29, 2019, 02:05:32 PM
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.tagesspiegel.de%2Fgesellschaft%2Fpanorama%2Fnach-milliarden-scheidung-ex-frau-von-amazon-chef-will-haelfte-ihres-vermoegens-spenden%2F24392228.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.tagesspiegel.de%2Fgesellschaft%2Fpanorama%2Fnach-milliarden-scheidung-ex-frau-von-amazon-chef-will-haelfte-ihres-vermoegens-spenden%2F24392228.html)
Give yourself the reazons/arguments that the 4th richest woman on earth should invest or donate 10 or 20 millions €/$ in your/team idea/concept.  !?
TV- invention-investment-show participation. ?
https://www.vox.de/cms/sendungen/die-hoehle-der-loewen.html (https://www.vox.de/cms/sendungen/die-hoehle-der-loewen.html)

Capital venture event participation.,worldwide ?
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-m&q=capital+venture+fair&oq=capital+venture+fair&aqs=heirloom-srp..0l5 (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-m&q=capital+venture+fair&oq=capital+venture+fair&aqs=heirloom-srp..0l5)


IENA/GENF INVENTION Exposition participation. ?
http://www.iena.de/de/home.html (http://www.iena.de/de/home.html)

http://inventions-geneva.ch/en/home/ (http://inventions-geneva.ch/en/home/)


http://www.borderlands.de/index1n.php3 (http://www.borderlands.de/index1n.php3)
http://www.transaltec.ch/facma/design.php?design=2 (http://www.transaltec.ch/facma/design.php?design=2). Adolf and Inge Schneider

X-Prize. ? Richard Branson ( Virgin group, billionaer) Prize. ?




Btw. : you have  the concept -dossier ready,  with a.  manufacturing-  b. production then - lease - selling costs and prices?

The pros/cons list related conventional in market/ in pipe( ~ R&D) competitors/ converters. ?
A functional prototype for the demonstration from your theory in practise. ?


 Capital Venture 100 visits : 99 " good bye and good luck " and only 1 " Stay, new Partner! "
Joint-venture participation Quote. ? 10%,25,1%,49,9%,50,1%,74,9%,75,1%  ?
 Win-win up to loose/loose ad-venture risk ratio
Sharing the capital quotes and capital loose risk with many partners. ? Kickstarter et cet.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 29, 2019, 02:28:39 PM
Hi lanca IV.
Thank you for your reply.
1) As if you have interesting suggestions again. Please give me some time to consider carefully the links you have posted here.
2) We tried many times to contact Richard Branson, but we always failed. Do you have any idea for how to contact this man?
Looking forward to your answer.
George 
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on September 29, 2019, 02:49:13 PM
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/komoto-fans-heat-2000sf-for-4-cents-per-hour#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/komoto-fans-heat-2000sf-for-4-cents-per-hour#/)
                        3656 $ investment pleased
                          reached : 16%  or 593 $

How great is the indiegogo audience in number. ?
How important is energy and costs savings  ?

What is the Investor and consumer real priority. ?

To see and feel him-/her-self and by others by the " ecce homo ! " - moment
PROUDNESS AND PRESTIGE
To reached the sky  !
UNFORGETABLE MOMENT  !

When the energy/electricity market becomes liberized and volative : from positive cents/KWh costs down to negative cents/KWh costs ( the producer has to pay ) what are the own competition conditions. ?
Fix costs/ open market costs

Your 10/20 millions demand divided by how many devices/KW installations   ?= basic fix cost


Richard Branson : " ... man" ? " .....   person " !
I can here play " the Punk" but I am educated by " old school"-rules and so do know the border lines.

You visiting your possible investors become observed,  your profile in the Internet dislosed ( there are professional company's/servants who do this for their clients)
crime statistic
 https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FF%25C3%25BChrungszeugnis (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FF%25C3%25BChrungszeugnis)
External and the Internal ( the second : secret area related;  estatal/industrial aso.  )

and probably ,before contract assignment : finance sector rating ( living standart / by cash or high credit)



To know the rules of the game and making " the Partner( his ambient : family, curriculum vitae)  transparent


Your device/-s : ready for UAL/TUEV approvement. ?


Why not the B. O. S. - scheme : you build - you operate-you sell,  this is today industrial common solution
Are you in financial hurry, do your team player want to see fast money return. ?

Giving an break-even-point : 1 Euro-cent/KWh electricity Generation

How far are you away from this flat/base : 1,5/2,0/.... Euro-cents
                                                                             0,75/0,5/... Euro-cent

                                     ???   Questions and answers. !?
Who shall manufacture the physical devices : are they not worth as industrial project partners. ?

                                                           A LITTLE MORE CAUTION :
Kybernetik : from Men-Machine society to Machine-Men society development, this we are

Instead " Machine" also nameable Virtuosity or https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithm (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithm)

                        "ZEITGEIST"                           COGITO ERGO DESIGN.

You probably also know that this " man" is not a Knight, not an OBE, but a SIR Richard Branson.Did he studied on an Uni?  Degree?  PROMOTION/HABILITATION/ HONORARY-DOCENT ?

What do you know about the 80' : the Virgin label,later Virgin Megastore and Virgin airline. ?Free speech and free mind and free knowledge and free interests interchange during conversation. !

THE " HINTS" in this 25 millions prize  ? ( the small written conditioning. ! Acceptable by both sides. ? )
https://www.virginearth.com/the-prize/ (https://www.virginearth.com/the-prize/)

https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britische_Jungferninseln (https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britische_Jungferninseln) here he has his private isle/island

Clearly :
Hi Richii ,you rich cool motherf****,all okay ? I have the shit, the super- dooper heavy machine !
also possible !


Be satisfied to get from his bureau/ secretary a positive comment and the invitation for more this concept clearing details  by your first trial  !

20/10 millions as lump sum or in rates/tranches per1/2 - 1 year payment ?

Business Angel/-s,this is what you need ;
or you decide for professional consultance : 1000 Euros per day( excellent professionals: 400€ per hour)
https://www.google.com/search?q=buisiness+angel&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m (https://www.google.com/search?q=buisiness+angel&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m)

RICHDOM diversification : 1 rule : never more than 10% in one investment ( excluded company owner : solely investment and liquidity source)

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.diepresse.com%2F5226461%2Fstartup-aus-oberostereich-greift-nach-us-patenten-fur-salzwasser-zellen (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.diepresse.com%2F5226461%2Fstartup-aus-oberostereich-greift-nach-us-patenten-fur-salzwasser-zellen)               
                                       2,8 Million assets value

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fenergyload.eu%2Fstromspeicher%2Fstromspeicher-energiewende-startups%2F (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fenergyload.eu%2Fstromspeicher%2Fstromspeicher-energiewende-startups%2F)
                                 from over 200 millions investment

How rich are the aquion-Investors   before the insolvency ?

How high was the aquion-share quoted before the insolvency  ?

Total investors richdom divided cash aquion- investment sum  ?
IPO : aquion investment sum/ aquion.    a. total  b free market    share quotes value
aquion total assets value after insolvency/

  For some people 20 millions are " peanuts" and
they or their foundations administrates thousands of those "nuts"

You can be perfect organized but your possible partner feels him at this moment in the wrong place and by the wrong time and give the for you wrong decision : " NO,no interest ! Good bye and good luck !"

                           FUZZY LOGIK :                   
                         you are ever wellcome in the " 99%- No, thank you ! # metoo " club

Daimler-Benz : a project was presented to the administration and received the "R&D"- budget okay. !
                           The engineers of this project were funny. !
                          the same project presented a second time to the same administration
                                                  got "R&D"- budgetting withdrawn/ rejected



                         LIFE IS FUNNY  ::) AND THE RULES SO CLEAR  8)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on September 30, 2019, 11:17:49 AM
"...When the energy / electricity market becomes liberized and volatile : ..... "
https://www.n-tv.de/politik/CDU-Spitze-will-die-EEG-Umlage-abschaffen-article21302770.html (https://www.n-tv.de/politik/CDU-Spitze-will-die-EEG-Umlage-abschaffen-article21302770.html)
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.n-tv.de%2Fpolitik%2FCDU-Spitze-will-die-EEG-Umlage-abschaffen-article21302770.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.n-tv.de%2Fpolitik%2FCDU-Spitze-will-die-EEG-Umlage-abschaffen-article21302770.html)
Flat rate : in-flat- ion/ stag-flat-ion/de-flat-ion/re-flat-ion
Working by free market conditioning or " manipulated" market prices by inflated "net rate back"- warranty by the estate !?

What happened in Spain with the electricity market and the energy investment values when the estate abolished the " net return rate" per KWh  !?
LEGAL !?  BY MACRO-ECONOMY LAWS AND ORDER ?
YES !?  EACH U. N.  ESTATE ECONOMY PRIORITY :
GENERAL EFFICIENCY RULE, german : Allgemeine Wirtschaftsgebot. ; "gebot"= DEMAND

The consequence for the energy generator producer ( wind,solar,...)  national,in Germany. !?
"HARD FACTS WARRANTY" OR "SOFT FACTS WARRANTY"  ?


Gefaehrliches Fahrwasser aehnlich https://www.google.com/search?q=silvio+gesell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m (https://www.google.com/search?q=silvio+gesell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b-m) and the WW2- prediction  :
EURO- KREDIT-COMMUNISMUS
DOLLAR-CREDIT-COMMUNISM

Science Punk or geral science anarchy by other

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-m&q=lassale+Sozialismus+haengematte&oq=&aqs= (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-m&q=lassale+Sozialismus+haengematte&oq=&aqs=)
and care caridade charity :
why do you think,George1, that YOU has ( has and not have ! 3.pers.pl.m ~ THE) the MUST to DECIDE to notplease a lower  lump sum ( or rates/ tranches)for your material and idealistic concept. ?Is the chance to give probably investors lower investment risk and later lower endconsumer lease or selling price not charity enough. ?

Are you in hurry to leave Planet EARTH/ERDE vulgo TELLUS. ?
Together ? : https://www.spacex.com/ (https://www.spacex.com/)  Co-investor : Elon Musk

Which is the actual liquid/net salary in your country/estate, statistical : from 100% , from the upper 90%/ down 90% :does 2500/5000/10000 €/$ per month/ quartal /semester not change the living standart from you and your team  ?
You work by ultimative decisions : from 10 millions to 20 millions. !
When you will demand 50 millions. ?
ARROGANZ : classical and meaning 2019 p. C.n.  ?!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(character (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(character))
  from V. I. P. s   to  T. V. I. P. s


https://patentauction.com/ (https://patentauction.com/)     how many "George1"-Characters will we refind there. ?
If there is an offer : for a 260 billion market only 500.000 US$ investment ( hints?)
how much thinks an other one with an 20 years patent validation - up calculated - market value about 600 billions $ to receive as offer : " make an offer" this inventor please. !?

Married?  What thinks your wife about you  ?Having child/-s. ?  What "WELTBILD" from you he/they would imaging/ printing on a white virgin page. ?
George1,here you are fiction,  in your day-by-day life I hope real/-ly. !
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on September 30, 2019, 02:19:59 PM


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(character (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(character))
  from V. I. P. s   to  T. V. I. P. s

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/bonhomie (https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/bonhomie) ::)
 https://www.spurensuche.info/wp-spurensuche/portfolio/madeleinedelbrel/ (https://www.spurensuche.info/wp-spurensuche/portfolio/madeleinedelbrel/)    ?
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.spurensuche.info%2Fwp-spurensuche%2Fportfolio%2Fmadeleinedelbrel%2F (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.spurensuche.info%2Fwp-spurensuche%2Fportfolio%2Fmadeleinedelbrel%2F)
Everywhere/nowhere soul-brothers and everywhere/ nowhere soul-sisters  ?  ;)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fcdkwdfz0GA

Do we - by common sense - want to become " soul-wolves" ?
https://cbs.riken.jp/en/faculty/t.fukai/ (https://cbs.riken.jp/en/faculty/t.fukai/)

https://www.heise.de/tp/autoren/?autor=Erich%20Bieramperl (https://www.heise.de/tp/autoren/?autor=Erich%20Bieramperl)

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Ftp%2Fautoren%2F%3Fautor%3DErich%2520Bieramperl (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Ftp%2Fautoren%2F%3Fautor%3DErich%2520Bieramperl)
Gesegnete Mahlzeit. !

.... Denn Dein - ist das Reich
               und.  - die Kraft
               bis.    - in alle Ewigkeit

Knowing the rules from the game : wellcome in " ENGEL-LAND" ,where " time out/off" commands

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.spiegel.de%2Fgeschichte%2Ferich-john-erfinder-der-weltzeituhr-auf-dem-berliner-alex-a-1288380.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.spiegel.de%2Fgeschichte%2Ferich-john-erfinder-der-weltzeituhr-auf-dem-berliner-alex-a-1288380.html)
Kid, when you grow up what do you want to become. ?
A GIGAJOULE-CONSUMER, LIKE ALL THE OTHERS  !
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.capital.de%2Fwirtschaft-politik%2Flaender-mit-dem-hoechsten-pro-kopf-energieverbrauch-66633%3Futm_source%3Dpocket-newtab (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.capital.de%2Fwirtschaft-politik%2Flaender-mit-dem-hoechsten-pro-kopf-energieverbrauch-66633%3Futm_source%3Dpocket-newtab)

IT found his sin of life ,like ALL the others, is it not. ? :)
The Future : 8,9,10  ?  GIGA(JOULE) Factories consuming Planet Earth

George1 , where is your Drake. ? ( Philosophical Internet- Patron?)
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.traunsteiner-tagblatt.de%2Fdas-traunsteiner-tagblatt%2Fchiemgau-blaetter%2Fchiemgau-blaetter-2019_ausgabe%2C-der-heilige-georg-als-legendaerer-drachentoeter-_chid%2C940.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.traunsteiner-tagblatt.de%2Fdas-traunsteiner-tagblatt%2Fchiemgau-blaetter%2Fchiemgau-blaetter-2019_ausgabe%2C-der-heilige-georg-als-legendaerer-drachentoeter-_chid%2C940.html)

 GEORGE1.    MEETS   1EGROEG. ?
Ca c' est seulement un(e) amusement, stay happy. !
GEORGE1: 1989 PERSPECTIVE  2049: RETROSPECTIVE
SEULEMENT UN(E)  AMUSEMENT. !
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.spiegel.de%2Fnetzwelt%2Fweb%2Fwerbegesichter-aus-dem-computer-ist-hier-noch-irgendjemand-echt-a-1289324.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fm.spiegel.de%2Fnetzwelt%2Fweb%2Fwerbegesichter-aus-dem-computer-ist-hier-noch-irgendjemand-echt-a-1289324.html)
+ #whichmindisreal
+ # whichfutureisreal
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 06, 2019, 02:40:14 PM
Hi lancaIV,
1) Thanks a lot for your last posts. You have sent again a plenty of good and interesting ideas. Please give us some time to consider carefully all materials you have posted.   
2) I do not know whether you are an expert in theoretical and applied mechanics or not. If yes, then what is your opinion about the zigzag mechanical conception of this topic? Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on October 07, 2019, 11:25:43 AM
George1,83499 members has this forum. !
Read the several members response/comments to your idea, write the pos/cons on a paper, avail by yourself 
the worth from their positive/negative critics/ judgement/ validation. !
How far/ near as help for your progress  !?
A successfull work wishing
OCWL
p.s.: I can by my mind and opinion ever be wrong. ! This is my own responsibility  !
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 13, 2019, 02:32:51 PM
To lanca IV.
----------------------
Hi lanca IV,
Thanks a lot for your reply. Thank you for your last good advice. I will follow it.
Any other good idea is welcome.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 13, 2019, 02:51:27 PM
Hi guys,
1) Although overunity.com is not a typically commercial website we would like to make a business offer. If some member of this forum "invents" a method/way/approach for selling of our electric technology as a trade secret for 20 million dollars, then he/she would immediately receive 1 million of these 20 million dollars. (Google is a typical example of a high-tech business (1) which is a not-patented trade secret and (2) which works successfully as a perfect money-making machine.)
2) Let me remind you again that our electric technology increases many times (twice as a minimum) the distance traveled by any standard now-existing electric vehicle on a single charge. Our electric technology has a successfully working prototype.
3) And here is again an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 19, 2019, 02:33:56 PM
Isn't there any highly qualified expert in theoretical and applied mechanics in this forum who has enough bravery and good will to admit unambiguously that our zigzag mechanical conception represents the principle of operation of a reactionless drive?   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 27, 2019, 01:29:18 PM
And here is again an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM? THE LATTER HAS BEEN EXPERIMENTALLY PROVED ALREADY MANY TIMES.   
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 02, 2019, 09:40:07 AM
Still no objections within a period of almost three months?! It is evident therefore that most human minds are heavily infected by some kind of mental poison which does not allow them to see and accept obvious theoretical and EXPERIMENTAL(!) facts. Very sad! :(
Am I right? 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 10, 2019, 02:49:54 PM
Here is again an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM? THE LATTER HAS BEEN EXPERIMENTALLY PROVED ALREADY MANY TIMES.   
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on November 12, 2019, 08:36:55 AM
“RD” checks out.
PM, I don’t see that but.....




Even if we simplify the situation
Take the zig-zags, or a washboard whatever
And a ‘rake’, that brushes across it in only one direction
The force of friction will have a vector
And as such, will impart motive force on the system as a whole.


Like the impact boat on crack


Need a real world example? Jerk the shake-weight only in one direction.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 17, 2019, 04:24:01 PM
Hi smOky2,
Thanks a lot for your reply. And thank you for your good words -- all members of our team (including myself) are really pathological enthusiasts! 
1) What is PM?
2) Actually I could not understand your arguments. Please give me some time to consider them carefully. (It seems to me that we are talking about different things.)
3) Meanwhile would you be so polite to consider carefully our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM and especially the following sentence: "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." Do you have any objections against this last claim? The latter has been experimentally proved many times.     
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 23, 2019, 09:43:14 AM
The principle of operation of a reactionless drive seems to be already a reality.
Please consider carefully again our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM and especially the following sentence: "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." Do you have any objections against this last claim? The latter has been experimentally proved many times.     
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 24, 2019, 02:07:22 PM
Any opinion related to our yesterday post?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 30, 2019, 08:57:25 AM
Deep silence again? :o Still no objections? This is because it is impossible to deny experimental facts.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 07, 2019, 03:12:26 PM
1) Still no objections against our zigzag mechanical concept? You simply fear the truth thus stopping the technology progress. And because of this we are increasing now the price of our electric technology, which is able to increase twice (as a minimum) the distance traveled by a standard electric vehicle on a single charge. The price of this electric technology is now 30 (thirty) million dollars. And this price will further increase if our zigzag mechanical concept (i.e. the reactionless drive) does not win public recognition.
2) We shared openly and freely two inventions of ours and these are (1) the reactionless drive, considered in this topic, and (2) the electric heater, described in the topic A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1. And still these two inventions cannot win public recognition. That is why our next several inventions will not be free.   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 08, 2019, 09:04:44 AM
George, have you constructed a zig-zag device to show us?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 10, 2019, 07:00:20 PM
Hi SmOky2,
Thank you for your last post.
Yes, we have constructed an experimental zig-zag device for the third link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf.
But there are two obstacles for showing it and these two obstacles are as follows.
1) Obstacle 1: It would take too much time (especially time!), money and human resources in order to make a high quality professional video. But this obstacle is, let's say, avoidable more or less.
2) Obstacle 2: A member of our team, who is a top expert in tribology (as well as in other technology areas, but tribology is his favorite branch of science), has invented an entirely new and an extremely effective, simple and cheap method for strong reducing of sliding friction. This method is used in the zig-zag device and if we show the zig-zag device, then we will show the new method of decreasing of sliding friction too. Our inventor however does not want to show publicly his sliding-friction-reducing method for the present. We have to obey his decision. But I promise to do my best to persuade our sliding-friction-reducing method inventor to change his mind in the nearest future. Please give me some time.
---------------------------
Meanwhile you could do by yourself the zig-zag experiment in the third link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf even on your garage floor. The experiment is extremely simple and cheap. You can use even ordinary lubricants and you only have to add some correction coefficient related to the experimental error due to friction. Besides if you manage to reduce friction enough, then the experimental error due to friction can be neglected.
---------------------------
And at last a simple elementary logic unambiguously shows that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0. Simple logic and simple math. Like 1+1=2. Practically no need of experiment.
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 14, 2019, 08:56:06 AM
Here is again an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0."
-----------------------------------
Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against this last claim?     
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 14, 2019, 10:47:46 AM
Hi George,
Thank you for responding to my question.
I do not see the “third link”
or any pictures/ diagrams of your experimental
“Zig zag” device.
I have read your repetitive arguments
And your theoretical “ideal condition” for your zig zag
But for myself, I need some sort of Visualization
To understand what you are talking about.



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 14, 2019, 11:23:37 AM
Hi smOky2.
If you consider carefully the present topic "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?"and if you follow my instructions, then you would find the related links very easy. Anyway for your convenience I gathered together the three links an put them below:
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
3) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf
The first link contains the text and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
The third link is a very important addition to the first link and to the second link.
=================================================
Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 17, 2019, 10:36:01 AM
PLEASE DO NOT FEAR THE TRUTH!
Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 19, 2019, 08:58:27 AM
George, I read this years ago
You could have at least typed this out and edited it by now....


My answer is still no.
It is neither.


You have had ample time to build one or get someone else to waste their time building one....
Either you have already done so and are propagating nonsense

Or you are too lazy to bother and try to build what you tell us to build....


Show what you claim to be your truth.
Or show what you learned while doing so....:
If you have any (theoretical) objections to that
Please feel free to share them


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 21, 2019, 03:20:01 AM
4. law of motion says: Any unbalanced mass spinning 360° with varying speed or oscillating within 180° or less converts centrifugal force into linear acceleration.

That means you can literally 'swim' in space. For example, imagine you are floating in space, you got a hammer in each hand. As you swing them in front of you horizontally in opposite directions close to 180° resultant vector is pure unidirectional acceleration, you are pulled forward just as if someone pushed you from behind.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 22, 2019, 04:54:12 AM
https://youtu.be/uMQnXig2hrg (https://youtu.be/uMQnXig2hrg)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 22, 2019, 04:50:22 PM
Make sure to turn volume low before playing this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHPna2WF_g0
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 22, 2019, 06:51:34 PM
NOT MINE video proving the 4th law as i formulated it.

Springs are not needed, only two same pendulums oscillating in opposite directions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2l3MgQKUGTw
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 22, 2019, 07:04:24 PM
YOU CAN SWIM IN SPACE
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Toolofcortex on December 22, 2019, 10:17:54 PM
So where are your designs?

You dont even know how that machine works.

Another talker who tries to act mysterious but is in fact an edgy nooblet with zero power.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 22, 2019, 10:55:50 PM
So where are your designs?

You dont even know how that machine works.

Another talker who tries to act mysterious but is in fact an edgy nooblet with zero power.

That machine like all inertial devices works by imbalance of centrifugal force.

I FORMULATED THE 4th LAW, so i do understand how any and all inertial devices work, unlike you.

Your pathetic language describes your ignorant noob self. I have no desire to boast but no matter how powerful the 4th law is, it is but a tiny part of my work in theoretical and practical developments in fields of physics, gravity, electronics etc.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Toolofcortex on December 22, 2019, 11:37:12 PM
You can barely write a proper sentence, you dont hold a candle to his excellency Newton.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 23, 2019, 12:11:40 AM
You can barely write a proper sentence, you dont hold a candle to his excellency Newton.

It's ''don't'', not ''dont'', learn to spell. English is not even my first language, yet you can only dream to ever use it in such expressive and flawless way as i do.

The law i formulated does not go against Newton's 3 laws, it stems from them, it describes the phenomena Newton did not recognize, so you fail there too.

You are an illiterate animal who somehow stumbled upon the internet, although you should be outside in the mud playing with a bone.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on December 23, 2019, 02:41:47 AM
Can I read your 4th law theory?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 23, 2019, 12:47:01 PM

Hi smOky2,
------------------------------
You strongly surprise me, my friend! What is the problem? You are not able to read a hand-written text? You are not illiterate, aren't you?
-----------------------------
I will repeat again. (As if it is most difficult to understand OBVIOUS truths.)
----------------------------
Firstly, please consider carefully the two links below:
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
----------------------------
After fully understanding the concept, described in the two links above, you have to read carefully and fully understand the concept in the third link, which is a very important addition to the first link and to the second link, and which is given below:
3) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf
----------------------------
And at last you have to answer a simple question: Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against the concept, described in the third link?
-----------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George   
   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 23, 2019, 01:23:23 PM
Can I read your 4th law theory?

I already posted it on the last page.

This i say in general, people truly can't see the forest for the trees.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 23, 2019, 01:28:45 PM
Something not directly related to the topic but priceless lecture about structure of creation and our true identity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMbeK_6ATxQ
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 27, 2019, 08:31:26 AM
To nix85.
----------------------
Hi nix85,
Thanks a lot for your last posts. Please give us some time to consider them carefully.
And thank you for your indirect support. Yes, you are absolutely right that, let's say, most "...people truly can't see the forest for the trees." AND FEAR THE TRUTH!
George

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 27, 2019, 08:39:54 AM
Hi everyone,
WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH?
Please only answer a simple question: Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against the concept, described in the third link? (Please look at our post of December 23, 2019, 12:47:01 PM.) 
Is this question so difficult?
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 27, 2019, 09:14:27 AM
To nix85.
----------------------
Hi nix85,
Thanks a lot for your last posts. Please give us some time to consider them carefully.
And thank you for your indirect support. Yes, you are absolutely right that, let's say, most "...people truly can't see the forest for the trees." AND FEAR THE TRUTH!
George

You're most welcome. Something to correlate with Bentov's model of cosmos and 49 universes making up a 'cell' of a bigger universe and so on..

In theosophy we find that 49 bubbles of consciousness of the first 'Adi' plane aggregate to produce 1 bubble of the second plane and so on by same ratio of 49 for 7 planes, one bubble of the 7th plane having 13,841,287,201 bubbles of the first plane. Table of bubbles below.

We find this same ratio of x49 encoded in the Bible and we also find in two unrelated contactee cases, Ummo and Oscar Magocsi, that speed of light between the planes increases by factor of 49. *Ummites said 50 but close enough.

A coincidence? Hardly so. Seems density of matter and speed of light increase by factor of 49 for each plane above us.

Then you got the Iargan tehnical info on cosmic carrier field, and six axis of time producing 3 spatial dimensions etc also talking about intelocking tetrahedrons as fundamental pattern by which energy flows.

Summary here > http://www.resona.nl/Denaerde/denaerde.html
Longer here > https://galactic.no/rune/iarapdx1.html
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on December 27, 2019, 11:46:37 PM
NDE story https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wjch_Qi_nio
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 29, 2019, 01:56:42 PM
Hi nix85,
Need some time to consider carefully your last post.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 29, 2019, 01:59:23 PM
Magnetic levitation (PERMANENT MAGNETS!) for the zigzag design. Practically no friction and no heat.
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 04, 2020, 09:45:20 AM
Magnetic levitation at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A and many other similar and related links.
Besides please look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-XngSTeh2Q and many other similar and related links. (It's about home-made and toy models of Maglev's train.)
Perfectly suitable for the zigzag mechanical conception. No friction and no heat.
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: sm0ky2 on January 06, 2020, 10:11:20 PM
Hi smOky2,
------------------------------
You strongly surprise me, my friend! What is the problem? You are not able to read a hand-written text? You are not illiterate, aren't you?
-----------------------------




Ehhhhhhhh....


Quote
I will repeat again. (As if it is most difficult to understand OBVIOUS truths.)
----------------------------
Firstly, please consider carefully the two links below:
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf (https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf)
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf (https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf)
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
----------------------------
After fully understanding the concept, described in the two links above, you have to read carefully and fully understand the concept in the third link, which is a very important addition to the first link and to the second link, and which is given below:
3) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf (https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf)
----------------------------
And at last you have to answer a simple question: Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against the concept, described in the third link?
-----------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George   
   


The OBVIOUS truth is that you are negating all of your variables, and presenting equations
that are not equivalent, nor are they a true representation of the physics behind your “zigzags”.


Your math doesn’t make sense.
How much of the friction is turned to heat or how much is a prolonged elastic collision is irrelevant.
You’ll get the same numbers throwing your blue contraption at a wall.
The fact that you slide a bar to press on opposite sides of the wall(s) only complicates the math
not the solution. Neither of which are included in your hand-written paper.


If you attempt a real world experiment you will find that within the proportions of known materials
and densities you cannot simply “pick and choose” a condition where your math works out.
You preempted yourself by assigning a mass proportionality between the blue and the black
If you follow that assumption and what it implies you see where your friction went.
there exist devices that utilize your zigzag interface. Not exactly as you have with the double sided
U
But the same nonetheless.


Example: a type of brakes were made in this manner, and later abandoned due to a transfer of
motion into a perpendicular reference frame, in an oscillatory motion.
This is because the “ball” has actual mass.
If it had no mass the blue part would experience no effect of the zigzag.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 11, 2020, 08:54:05 AM
Hi smOky2,
Thank you for your reply.
Well, we are talking again about different things. I would like to ask you again to focus on the target and not to consider things which are true by themselves but which are not related to the present discussion.
I will repeat again. I am writing again (especially for you!) the most important abstract of the third link. And here is this MOST IMPORTANT abstract:
"It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0."
Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against this last claim? YES OR NO?

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 11, 2020, 10:15:06 AM
Why are you discussing irrelevant things. It all comes down to a FACT that if unbalanced mass is oscillating within 180 degrees and it is curbed from going beyond 180 degrees


 >>>>>>>>> BY ACTING ON THE AXIS, NOT THE MASS ITSELF <<<<<<<<<


then AND ONLY THEN, you will get unidirectional acceleration.

For example if you are floating in space and you swing your arms in front and then stop them when they are fully stretched to each side, you are stopping them by acting on your shoulder ''axis'', and therefore, there is no backward trust, only forward acceleration due to the swing.

IN OTHER WORDS, MOMENTUM THAT WOULD BE TURNED INTO BACKWARD TRUST IF WE STOPPED THE MASS DIRECTLY FROM GOING BEYOND 180 DEGREES IS SPENT AS COUNTERTORQUE AT THE SHAFT - AXIS OF ROTATION.

To further clear it up, imagine two big pendulums on a shaft floating in space and they are pushed at great speed from position in the front where they overlapped backward in opposite directions...

Now, if you who are sitting at the shaft and therefore are also part of the system, grabbed the pendulums by your hands to stop them from going beyond 180 degrees they would impart their momentum to your hands and system would be given backward acceleration.

But if you instead created great friction that prevented the shaft from turning that momentum would be consumed at the shaft as friction and no backward momentum would be imparted to the system, leaving pure forward acceleration due to centrifugal force.

Remember Thronson, he did not use a clutch but he did act on the axis of rotation instead of decelerating the masses by acting directly on them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIt661hfr9c
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 11, 2020, 12:08:23 PM
No rocket fuel has ever been needed, simple rotation of unbalanced mass could allow 1G or more acceleration with minimal expenditure of energy.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 11, 2020, 04:41:48 PM
Travel time at 1G from here https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/840/how-fast-will-1g-get-you-there

Not assuming any time taken for orbital maneuvering, turning halfway 180° to decelerate, assuming closest distance of planets (and Luna) to the Earth, and not accounting for fuel burn (i.e. literal constant 1g acceleration):

The Moon / Luna:
Closest to Earth (Supermoon): 356,577 km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 2h 22m 12s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 3h 20m 24s

Mercury:
Closest to Earth: 77.3 million km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 1d 10h 52m 48s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 2d 1h 19m 12s

Venus:
Closest to Earth: 40 million km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 1d 1h 5m 2s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 1d 11h 28m 48s

Mars:
Closest to Earth: 65 million km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 1d 7h 58m 5s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 1d 21h 13m 1s

Jupiter:
Closest to Earth: 588 million km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 4d 0h 11m 2s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 5d 16h 2m 2s

Saturn:
Closest to Earth: 1.2 billion km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 5d 17h 25m 1s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 8d 2h 20m 24s

Uranus:
Closest to Earth: 2.57 billion km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 8d 9h 6m 0s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 11d 20h 24m 0s

Neptune:
Closest to Earth: 4.3 billion km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 10d 20h 7m 48s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 15d 7h 52m 48s

Pluto:
Closest to Earth: 4.28 billion km
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, no deceleration): 10d 19h 31m 12s
Travel time (at 9.80665 m/s2, decelerating halfway): 15d 7h 1m 12s
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 11, 2020, 04:44:46 PM
Of course craft with such primitive mechanical drive could never leave Earth's magnetic barrier which is 5 MOON DIAMETERS BEYOND OUR MOON, that would mean instant death to everyone on board, no one leaves the CHINVAT BRIDGE ALIVE without his own REF.

But for voyages to the Moon and back, piece of cake.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 15, 2020, 10:36:47 AM
https://imgur.com/gallery/yiVrX
https://imgur.com/a/dZNqj
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nuo_JHCXs0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX4Wypzv0vI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qVdQ0AhFd4
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 18, 2020, 08:44:25 AM
Hi nix85,
Thank you for your reply.
We are talking again about different things. I would like to ask you again to focus on the target and not to consider things which are true by themselves but which are not related to the present discussion.
A SIMPLE DIRECT QUESTION NEEDS A SIMPLE DIRECT ANSWER! AND YOU ALWAYS AVOID TO GIVE THIS SIMPLE DIRECT ANSWER!
But I am a man of good will and patience and I will repeat again. I am writing again (especially for you!) the most important abstract of the third link. And here is this MOST IMPORTANT abstract:
"It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0."
-------------------------
And I will modify the question a little especially for you. And here it is: "Can we choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0?" YES OR NO?
-------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George
-------------------------
P. S. Please understand very well the meanings of Fc, Fc', d and d'. Because it seems to me that you are not very familiar with these four terms.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 18, 2020, 10:30:56 AM
Hi nix85

I am not avoiding anything, subject is reactionless drive and that is exactly what i talked about.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Toolofcortex on January 18, 2020, 03:48:47 PM
These motors do not work.

The ones with a smaller eccentric orbit synched by either gear or belt.

I would know if they did.

There was a small dedicated forum to Bobby amarasingham.

https://www.magistrala.cz/freeenergy/2019/04/15/%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5-%D1%86%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%B6%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85-%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BB-%D0%B2-%D0%B3%D0%B5%D0%BD/

But with all the dodging and the final silence it was clear there was nothing to these motors.

Its an easy idea to have honestly, very visual, at first glance it seems like it could work.

But it does not interact with the universe, and creates no power.

The same reason why these reactionless drives dont work, they simly are lame with very little power and speed.

This is not how UFO's work, thus, nasa doesnt care, we can all row faster than that boat.

People claim lack of financial support all the time, the real issue is that their technology just sucks.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 18, 2020, 05:29:44 PM
These motors do not work.

Untrue, centrifugal propulsion does indeed work, i defined the basic principle in
detail anyone can test at home. Sit yourself on an office chair, swing two masses
in front of you horizontally and you will be pulled forward as if someone pushed
you from behind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUZDBRzKNKk
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Toolofcortex on January 18, 2020, 07:22:15 PM
Well I never really liked airplanes, nor UFO's. I took the plane a couple times and I dont like it.

If you had a UFO and you invited me for a ride I would probably say no.

I like to sit comfortably here on earth, and my interests are in a device that produces electricity for free forever.

Building a UFO would be cool tho, but I would not fly in it.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 25, 2020, 09:19:53 AM
Hi everyone,
Let us focus again on the target.
1) Firstly, please understand very well the meanings of Fc, Fc', d and d' described in the third link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf.
2) Secondly, please answer the following simple question: "Can we choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0?" YES OR NO? (Is it so difficult to answer such a simple question? It is like a binary code -- 0 or 1.)
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 01, 2020, 09:30:36 AM
Deep silence again? And still no answer?
1) Firstly, please understand very well the meanings of Fc, Fc', d and d' described in the third link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf.
2) Secondly, please answer the following simple question: "Can we choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0?" YES OR NO?
3) Well, I will help. The correct answer is YES. And from here if you follow the simple logical construction link 3 --> link 1 + link 2, then you can conclude that IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE ONLY either (1) the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are not correct simultaneously or (2) at least one of these two laws is not correct separately. Do you accept this simple fact? Yes or no?       
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 08, 2020, 09:42:00 AM
Still no answer within a period of two weeks? I am surprised. :)Where are this forum's experts in theoretical and applied mechanics?
So I would like to repeat again the text of our last post. Here it is. 
1) Firstly, please understand very well the meanings of Fc, Fc', d and d' described in the third link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf
2) Secondly, please answer the following simple question: "Can we choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0?" YES OR NO?
3) Well, I will help. The correct answer is YES. And from here if you follow the simple logical construction link 3 --> link 1 + link 2, then you can conclude that IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE ONLY either (1) the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are not correct simultaneously or (2) at least one of these two laws is not correct separately. Do you accept this simple fact? Yes or no?       
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 15, 2020, 09:39:21 AM
Still no objections within a period of three weeks? It's really a full surprise!:) Is this an indicator that anyone here in this forum agrees with the validity and correctness of our zigzag conception?   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 22, 2020, 09:14:18 AM
No objections within a period of one month? How to interpret this result? Everybody here in this forum agrees with the validity of our zigzag conception?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 28, 2020, 02:09:24 PM
Deep silence within a period of more than one month? Shall we consider this silence as a public recognition of the fact that it follows directly from our conception that the law of concervation of linear momentum and/or the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not valid in some special certain cases?   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 02, 2020, 06:58:35 PM
Off topic but some food for thought,


Something ultimately had the power to create the universe, if it was power to create nor destroy where you can't create or destroy then the universe would not exist.


Anybody would come to the same conclusion that something had the power to create, learned or unlearned, but science apparently is not there yet to fully understand the power to create.


This power to create i reckon is an unequal force unlike today where most people understand equal forces which does not enable over unity and over unity is power to create where it gives more out than in.


More out than in i say, because behind all of it, the universe somewhere ultimately had the power to create.


Even laws of energy as you know does not deny the fact that something had the power to create and these laws of energy as most people know state nothing will give more out than in and in defence of this in a circuit as the laws state cannot create nor destroy.

So outside of this impossible limitation, i believe there is something outside of the box of create nor destroy in a circuit, by using the force that the universe used to create it self or create whatever

If this power to create was an equal force well i let anyone who reads my post to conclude whether power to create is an equal force or not but when you think the backbone of all of it the universe, if it was equal force it doesn't make sense to me anyways.

I suggest you read this https://100777.com/spiritual/beings_having_a_physical_experience

One way or another you have to provoke zero point, what i mean is zero point is believed to have no energy in it, which i believe is not the full picture, this is a power to create force, if you provoke zero point energy will appear from it and you have to treat it as an unequal power to create force for energy to come from zero point and be quick enough to capture energy at the same time.

Has to be an open circuit otherwise your circuit will fry when provoking and capturing energy from zero point if it is a closed circuit.

You have to vibrate it and zero point will respond to you with energy unlike thinking it has none what so ever.

My 2 pence.

Dan.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 03, 2020, 04:29:43 PM
It is clear it seems actual overunity is impossible due to laws of energy but maybe,


Maybe well think of it this way, the heat pump an under unity device because of it's efficiency but has a cop greater than 1, this is because it extracts energy from environment which is heat and has oompf because of the cop greater than one and i will say that this interacts with the energy from vacuum or zero point which is where the oomph comes from.


So with the extracted heat you have to externally move this heat (in a open loop circuit manner to escape the laws of energy fully with its cut off ability which makes over unity impossible which is cop not efficiency which is closed loop circuit and its potential to self run with excess energy but does not break the laws of known energy when done in a open loop circuit manner i think) energy around out of the circuit otherwise you can't get a self running heat pump or shall i say using the extracted heat which gives it cop over 1.


Because you will hit a wall which cuts of the advantage of getting the heat pump to self run off extracted heat, but somehow externally get the heat out before it is cut off.


I say there is no limit as to how hot the heat pump will get if you run it off extracted heat which is what the heat pump outputs with cop greater than 1, but limited as to how much heat it can harvest in a way.


It definitely seems possible if you can rescue the potential of the cop before it gets destroyed or cut off advantage.


The whole idea of this is this, to get it to self run off the over cop 1 heat and reput it all back in the heat pump to re harvest this cop greater than 1 back in.


So you have to if there is a way, to externally do it, by fully getting the energy out of the circuit move it around and then put that energy back in to repeat the process.


As have said, this in a way is indeed perpetual because of the ommpf of cop greater than 1 but efficiency is lower than 100% so it is under unity but despite the efficiency it will self run on solely extracted energy and give excess energy in the process to run a load whilst sustaining it self off extracted energy.


It is possible to get it to self run if you know how to rescue the energy fully out of the circuit move it around and then put it back in the circuit which is where it extracts heat.


See it that way and yes it is like a self running solar panel and yes it does get it's power to self run from the vacuum or zero point it self.


Self running with cop greater than 1 but the efficiency is under 100%, you will say that because of the efficiency it won;t self run but no despite this, i view it like this friction but somewhere this does not prevent that because somewhere in the process there is no friction what so ever despite you knowing there is friction.


Yep easy to be confused thinking it of as a fraud due to not being crystal clear as to how it runs, because they view the efficiency and how it would work because it wouldn't unless they learn.

Compare this with everything that is over unity and you will have a better chance of achieving over unity or a self runner due to the cop (where most see it can self run and have excess energy in the process to power a load whilst sustaining the self running process along with excess energy entirely of extracted energy) but not efficiency  (where most see and understand that overunity is impossible) and i see it is indeed there can be a way to achieve if there is one.

So yea externally recueing the energy to save it's potential and then externally input the energy back in so it does not get killed off regarding the power or torque or the self running process with excess energy to power a circuit.

See it that way and it does seem possible and could or will work regarding you must you know about electronics but because i am going on about the heat pump is because to me it is unclear as to how electric circuits could extract energy from the environment like the heat pump but energy being universal and if the heat pump can do it then perhaps electronics can as well.

yep that under unity circuit can be fully be powered by harvested energy and using harvested energy to self run it with excess of power to power a load that is what i see and everyone else because of the cop being greater than 1 but everyone can see it won't work because of the efficiency and because of the efficiency this self runner gets killed of and won't self run or give cop greater than 1 which is why you have to externally rescue energy and externally put it back in again and there you go in a open looped circuit fashion i think.

Arguments about resistance in circuit or friction does not apply you do not need to do anything about it because automatically it has tha process to fully work despite everyone seeing that, maybe not everyone well not me which is what i have learned about that.

The compressor of the heat pump at the source is closed loop where it extracts heat from and the way this closed loop works kills off the ability to self run with excess energy which fully disables the self running process with excess energy but it can be done to make an open looped compressor for the heat pump enabling it to self run with excess energy running solely off extracted energy which is linked to energy from vacuum or zero point and actually gets the power from zpe or energy from vacuum yea self run by putting all of the extracted energy back into the bit where the heat pump extracts heat from, you will have a self runner with excess energy and because of the excess energy which comes from zero point or energy from vacuum where it can power loads or work which is does without a shadow of doubt and with the excess energy of over unity with cop not efficiency will get hotter and hotter with no limit as to how hot it gets as there is no limit as to how hot it gets, so with excess energy it will accelerate into oblivion done by the excess energy it self which means this has real power or torque to do work (energy extracted accelerated with excess let over energy which is over unity) or be destroyed because of how much accelerated energy you get so you have to find a way to control that which can be done.

See it that way and you know theoretically that is can be possible, or possible varying on how to overcome the problem but can work if the problem is overcome as we can all see.

This heat pump has to be designed as a fully open loop circuit but for the heat pump to make this a reality otherwise the closed loop circuit of the heat pump compressor will overload whilst cutting off the potential excess energy that you can so plainly understand and see here.

What does the laws of energy have to say about open loop circuits i mean fully open loop circuits or fully open looped heat pump compressor, it does not break them and the dream of a self runner with excess energy is much much more realistic and understood and will work as that which is self runner powering a load, and the excess energy potential gets it from zero point or energy from vacuum and the secret of zero point is that create nor destroy apply here and science does not deny that at all whatsoever about what created the universe which was caused by a unknown force which creates things which is more out than in and this is a power to create force which is plain to see because of excess energy going back to the backbone of creation it self which is zero point which is power to create and is not balanced but created the universe and is a perpetual force but will be very hard to explain if you knew about it fully.

Yep this is indeed a perpetual self runner thanks to zero point the backbone of what started it all which is the universe and if you understand energy well all i have to say it will be hard to explain why this creation force on it's own created the universe, which is power to create ok, so the way you understand energy well it is losses energy this power to create does not work simply put ok which science does not believe in ok well prehaps not every scientise.

The power to create which is zero point created the universe on its own has power to create so is a un balanced force on it's own so being unbalanced means that power to create certainly is there and will create energy which is impossible which is the dream of over unity it self which is more out than in which is power to create, because energy has to return back to it self so this power to create force right and all of its power to create returns back to it, just saying that to make you understand how hard it is to understand why it does that which it does.

Come to your own conclusion and theory as to how the universe was created and how this energy behaves, for me the self running process of heat pump along with excess energy is due to the unbalanced force of zero point which is power to create ok which you can fully understand from what you can see here.

Every scientist and science it self will agree something created the universe with varying opinion but agreeing with the fact about that for me it is power to create but science in its confusion or denial won't agree about power to create but see it this way, on it's own behind all creations which it created has the power to create and they will much more likely understand and agree fully with that because with all energy, energy returns back to it self so envision this, if this force wasted energy the universe would not exist or if there was friction or any kind of over unity and put your understanding of impossible over unity and try to think as to what created the universe and you might just buy that this force has power to create one way or another..

This power to create is the holy grail of free energy if understood fully and many methods would be understood as well, but the heat pump with excess energy demonstrates the potential of how it has the power to create the power to create is exactly that which is the excess energy done by power to create from the vaccum.

whether unkown or known known concepts of science you have been taught is the opposite of how zero point works simply put, use those conceptes and understand, understand this, this force which is zero point behind absolutly everything and that energy has to return back to where it came from and that this force created the universe.

If this force was combustion it would not have power to create, if this force was balanced and equal, it would not have the power to create, so think and ponder about that and everything you have been taught by science about energy about how the universe was created, for one energy loss means power to create is impossible just to clear things up, this force is mostly unknown as to how it behaves by mainstream science really they all believe something created the universe somewhere but this force by nature with current concepts of science is wrong about zero point because they are treating this force that is does not have power to create but it they understand that then they will be leaning on about that it does have a power creation to it which means it self generates with power to create which is unequal and gives more out than in because it is behind everything and that is how the energy returns back to it giving it the power to create, so much more less than nothing and more then everything is.

So on your own to think and conclude that every thing behind it all, all of creations universe and all and this is behind it all with energy returning back to it, what is it regarding the nature of this energy force whatever you want to call it and compare them as to what you know about energy.

What is impossible from what you know is the opposite of what i know and have said here, more like power to destroy so you get the opposite of more out than in i think which is what science is based on which is why circuits etc get hot.

The reason why zero point is called zero point i think is because nothing can be over unity ponder about that and you might agree it goes along with the wasted methods of science as well nicely in fact but is absolutely illogical to think of it this way, but the way they treat it they might just find out the perpetual power of power to destroy and their concepts will be shattered because of the perpetual nature of it.

So yea the self running heat pump fuelled by the cop 3 heat output when running and then using all of the cop 3 heat back in the heat pump, which accelerates the process to no end as to how hot it gets and while exceeding the behaviour of the energy will accelerate past self running the energy it needs to run and then if it keeps accelerating it will exceed in power.

This reusing heat is part of recycling the energy or heat which will enable exceeding of energy, the heat pump while closed loop does not kill off the heat harvesting process, if the heat harvesting process was closed loop it would not extract heat from the heat in the air, and with that, you have to make the entire design open loop which can be done, so it will enable it to recycle the heat to self run and the faster it gets it will exceed in power.

Hope that make sense, because cop of 3 should be enough to self run with extra exceeding power depending on the design on the heat pump or a heat pump turbine of whatever form of technology, i am certain this principle is possible and would work.

Exceeding of energy? self run? is this possible? yes because it has momentum of energy where torque or work can be done and i have said it will get hotter to no end by reusing the energy and the reused energy has extras momentum due to zero point energy interaction in the process and this extra momentum is the exceeding of energy and this momentum is unequal like acceleration where it get hot to no end and unequal just like zero point and unequal in power generation.

If that is not the case if it had no momentum of unequal acceleration it would not get hot to no end which is the opposite of exceeding energy.

By reusing the heat and is quite clear it encourages even more heat to be extracted even faster i'll let you to think if this is an equal force, equal force of acceleration, people who know the heat pump know it has no limit as to how hot it gets be reusing the energy outputting and then reused.

The cop factor of 3 is a unequal force though is it not? it could have left over energy after using it to self run with left over energy which is exceeding power though so i'll let you reason with all i have said here, as in does this force of left over energy have any real torque or work in it, where would the energy come from?

The exceeding power could exceed even more, it is like as if it has broken the sound barrier into the unknown, the left over power which is exceeding meaning you can power a load from it, but i do not know where the energy comes from (which sustains the exceeding power and it could be unstable volatile at same time this unstable nature of energy is the key of over unity or free energy it self (because the unstable nature i think enables the use of the fully unequal force of power to create from the vacuum somewhere)though you have been taught to make the circuit stable with what you have learned in school or university regarding electric or energy circuits like the cavity or water hammer effects this is no exception) and any case this has to be tested to be accepted as evidence, or instead of powering a load use the exceeding energy to get even more energy out of it in a unequal fashion i think by putting the left over exceeding power of momentum into the heat extraction process which accelerates the process and getting even more power out because of it and would not be equal to power in and power out, this process of using excess energy is not equal but you get way more power out due to the acceleration or bending energy or unequal force, it would quadruple it self perpetually.

The reason why the water hammer or cavity is that it is banging the energy of the vaccum zpe and the process it is like an injection of energy from the vacuum simply put and the unstable nature of it is unequal force so the unstable aspect is unequal, unequal as in perpetually unequal perpetually unstable, unstable which you have been taught to prevent fully in your circuits, but it gets killed off in a closed loop circuit but open loop would be a good idea.


Dan


 


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 04, 2020, 03:58:41 PM
Regarding the heat pump if you was to attempt this i think that the best approach is a fully open circuit that utilises parallel path technology maybe perhaps.

Yep whoever reads this all i have to say is theorize what created the universe, the power to create and the power creation force which is unknown.

If you put your current understanding while theorize it does not make sense or add up and is impossible with the way you see it but in denial or not knowing, not knowing the backbone behind everything where it outputs and then receives it back, regarding power to create and understanding energy which is like all connected or like a pack of dominoes it still does not make sense.

It would be impossible or very hard to explain and leave you speechless.

You cannot argue or discredit about what created the universe, all of mankind if they reason with, won't deny that if they have a open mind.

Even if they think if the power that created the universe does not have power to create which is what mainstream science wants to believe which does not make sense again because power to create can be idle doing nothing but the potential energy of power to create would be there or activated in a perpetual manner (which is what created the universe) and other unknown formality.

Also power to create does not convert it self fully but would somewhere, but the power to create is not a conversion force or conserving energy or converting energy which is what mainstream science and the flawed understanding of that regarding the heart of power to create.

So yea, that is my only defence of perpetual motion because a perpetual force created the universe if it wasn't the universe would not exist with reasoning they might just identify the power to create.

I am roughly am correct about that regarding the complexity of science.

Since every bit of creation has the power to create thanks to what created the universe and outputs and returns back to it in whatever state it is in, what would this force look like to you (if you can imagine or comprehend) unlike the massive problem of all forces are equal thinking which prohibit and is impossible to achieve real over unity or free energy which is what most people round the world can see like magnetic flux's and the like which is a struggle even for free energy pioneers around the globe as well as here in this forum or thread because they do not know about the power creation force and is working with partly flawed concepts and thinking that all forces are equal.

To me the creation power to create force and how i envision it, is that is accelerates to infinity getting longer in length as it accelerates instead of thinking all forces are equal though where it would not get longer in length, in a unequal fashion it quad quadruples it self instead of thinking all forces are equal.

There are things in science which also identify the process of when it accelerates it gets longer in length but it is an equal force and wastes energy where it can't recycle or enter energy in where this is totally different and alien at the same time.

What i am saying is that when it accelerates it is equal in acceleration which disables the core part of infinity, where this is opposite, it accelerates in unequal fashion and infinity is unequal, infinity is the speed of instantaneous never mind the limit of speed of light, the speed of light it self it out gunned by the power of infinity.

Infinity is instantaneous speed no matter the distance and within that thinking of it, will better comprehend as to why it goes off to infinity and power to create.

Because it is a very bendy force, it has to accelerate unequal because if it did not, infinity would not exist, if it accelerated in equal fashion it still would not make sense because of the limitations of equal forces where this is not, but if they can measure infinity that way they might come across signs that it is indeed an unequal force as to thinking it is equal.

Similar but yea this is a different breed of energy it self, it is not confined to the realms of forces being all equal in length.

If you try to measure infinity with a device that is limited to equal forces all i have to say either way, is that this energy is alien which is infinity as well as the device used to try and measure it.

speed of instantaneous is achieve with a unequal bendy force, the closer it is the slower it goes, but the further it gets the more it unevenly even further in length accelerates achieving instantaneous speed despite the distance which is the acceleration of free energy it self, sure it interacts with equal forces but yeah.

If you was at the far side of the universe or a few meters away it will be going at the speed of instant, and to achieve that infinity acceleration ultimately needs to be known fully to fully understand why this is the case.

It fits nicely as to people who talk about free energy or energy from the vacuum, knowing that this energy has those characteristics which is what i have said.

How would instantaneous speed be achieved if you was a few meters away or light years away in space it would have to be fully be unequal to reach the speed of instantaneous.

Hard to believe but i know it does go at the speed of instantaneous, if infinity speed was limit to speed of light then it would not be infinity and or have much less energy density that it does have.

Infinity has no limit as to how powerful it can be, right?

very difficult to explain but i did my best.

Dan.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 05, 2020, 10:19:54 AM
So yea the extraction process is at a loss and the entire system losses energy as well.


But if you put all of the cop 3 heat extracted back and is open loop at the extraction point otherwise this potential energy gets killed off meaning that whilst losing energy the energy from the extracted heat overcomes all loses to have energy to self run and with left over energy at same time which is excess energy where with excess energy real work can be done, so it is running fully off extracted energy and yes this is perpetual indeed with this process in a way.

Like a self running solar panel that is indeed perpetual in a way, so buy the possible perhaps perpetual in a way because of my ranting about what created the universe and power to create, it is perpetual in a way because it gets that fully from energy from the vacuum, the power creation force and interacts with it, if it doesn't get killed off so yea this method of a self runner with excess left over energy is possible as well if restrictions where not in place like a closed loop circuit.


So yea the push pull thinking does not apply with how it self runs with excess energy or thinking all forces are equal which means that the excess energy bit does not comply with forces being equal which fits nicely with my thinking about power to create or what created the universe etc,

So the whole system is a loss, and the efficiency does not get in the way if you improvise to get past the bit where this potential energy does not get killed off like a fully open circuit, so the only thing it can run from is the cop over 1 which is 3.

So start the heat pump and then works and then use the extracted energy back in again and repeat the process and because energy diminishes due to the losses it will output through those losses to be able to fully self run with left over power.

See it is indeed perpetual being proven here because if it wasn't it would not work and also the universe would not exist because of power to create.

The perpetual force to get it to self run with excess power undeniably is banging on the door but with known electric circuit methods and what to do would kill off the perpetual force from being used.

This perpetual force ultimately does exist but with the way electronic circuits are done it fully ignores this perpetual force and using a method where none of this perpetual force can be used.

So if you see it as i do about heat pump self running off extracted heat with left over excess energy so from what you can plainly see here is the character of the unequal power to create force unlike what most people can see which is all forces being equal, just to help you in a way to think outside of the box.

Regarding the equilibrium where a wave of energy or hertz as it accelerates gains amplitude but is within the equilibrium which means that the power is equal and can never achieve power to create, where as the equilibrium for power to create the equilibrium well let's just say the power to create exists outside the known limits of the equal equilibrium, some scientists theory that this could be the case where it exists outside of known limits and the limits fully prevent power to create process.

Regarding the entire understanding of the equal equilibrium right means that nothing can create or destroy ok so i believe there would be a power to create equilibrium or a power to destroy equilibrium, because well if the equilibrium was equal the universe would not exist at all and if tested there would be some evidence to say there is indeed a unequal equilibrium, ponder with this as well as taking my theory with a pinch of salt.
 
An unequal equilibrium going at the same rate as power to create so the equilibrium it self gains power and amplitude as it accelerates and perpetually increases, unlike a wave confined in a equal equilibrium where it accelerates and gains amplitude similar really but yes.

Between fully testing all equilibrium or the balanced equilibrium there would be evidence that would mean that there is a unequal equilibrium as well as other discovery's.

If the universe was created with a equal equilibrium something out of bounds that violates the limits or laws of the equal equilibrium would be detected fully and breaking all the laws of the equal equilibrium and this out of bounds means the unequal power of it all as to how the creation process works and the power creation is the holy grail of free energy.

I think zero point was detected like that, this out of bounds power means zero because it violates the equal equilibrium fully which it was tested on and is breaking all the known laws of it as well, well both complying and breaking it same time , it is the same when detecting something that goes faster than the speed of light which also was detected but sadly scientists resign over it but would have been a game changer and a winner at same time.

I already know zero point is the backbone of power to create or destroy but scientists are clued up and do not know it fully, the nature of the known zero point is bypassing the limits of the equal equilibrium, next comes is how is that so? well it is unequal power by nature breaking the equal equilibrium and if discovered further will discover the perpetual power to create or destroy in that, because zero is a wave bypassing the impossible to break equal equilibrium simply put, and is a alien different breed of energy.

As the zero point wave propagates further in a balanced equal equilibrium meaning it is not confined to all the laws of energy of the equal equilibrium but bypasses this, the wave of zero point propagates further because it is unequal power within a equal equilibrium and this is how it generates power or what created the universe and is perpetual.

The way the potential energy which causes zero point to propagate further is because it is unequal perpetual power which created and powers the universe and it is where all energy comes from because zero point is the backbone of creation and is behind every single creation and if zero point can't create it self then the universe would not exist in a equal equilibrium, so if the big bang that created the universe happened in a equal equilibrium the universe would not exist, because it can't create it self in a equal equilibrium, because the equal equilibrium is cannot create or destroy and this foundation cannot be rocked whatsoever but the nature of zero point would rock it fully with proof it bypasses the equal equilibrium.

Regarding that equal equilibrium it would both be possible and impossible as in confined in the equal equilibrium to break the laws of energy within the equal equilibrium, because the zero point propagation wave shows it won't stop expanding they have to stabilise the circuit by cutting the potential of this energy fully so it cannot well behave as it does in a perpetual nature, where if it bypasses you would not need to, the perpetual nature of it causes it to have no limit as to how much this energy expands, it is unlimited and perpetual indeed by nature and within it's ability to be unlimited they might just find the key of unlimited power and discover it's perpetual power because as it expands within the expand process a unequal perpetual force would be there.

Zero point it self will never measure equal equilibrium because it violates all known laws of physics that corresponds with the equal equilibrium but if it did this force won't be called zero point, and that is due to the perpetual nature of it.

So if scientists with their science equipment that can detect speeds that go faster than light then the same can be applied to the measurement of zero point in various factors and somewhere will pinpoint the unequalness of it which breaks the all known laws of the equal equilibrium, i would say to them that they have found a unequal perpetual power to create force which is the backbone of all creations and is the holy grail it self.

Hopefully does not get suppressed.

Either way to me regarding the self running heat pump i am on about, this is translated everywhere in the science world where devices solely run off extracted energy with cops greater than 1 but the efficiency and overall design losses energy every way but the cop greater than one overcomes all these losses all together and works as a self runner with excess left over unity energy but in a wasted manner because that is where the power torque or work can be done and can be possible to work fully.

So like a self running solar panel in everything, see it that way and it would be easy to understand and work if they can make it work but is not impossible though.

Yep running like a self running solar panel, running off cop greater than 1 which sustains and gives left over excess power to fuel a load even with all losses which don't prevent this process just a lesser cop but still over 1 when energy exits from the circuit self running as well as excess energy even with the supposed efficiency which prevents this fully but no because you need to do nothing about that as in the energy process it solves that, either with a zero point device that harvests subatomic energy in that manner or a heat pump which is what i was on about with heat, exact same principle with the self running heat pump i was talking about but with zpe subatomic interaction all of this, same principle but with electronics etc, the whole system at a loss, but the cop greater than 1 enables it to self run with a loss and with left over energy at a loss to power a load and actually work like that which is a self running solar panel with excess power in the process and yea it is indeed perpetual in a way because it gets its energy from zero point or power to create or the perpetual process.

Dan
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 06, 2020, 09:39:00 AM
The energy dissipation it self at the heart of it where it causes the circuit to get hot is ultimately not caused by a equal force where all forces are equal, but is the opposite of equal and thus causes the circuit to get hot and leads in a unbalanced unequal perpetual state going all the way down to zero point it self, and in zero point it has that perpetual power, i mean it was thought zero point had no energy but it does, and if you yank it or cause a vibration etc , it will cause energy to appear and be extracted within the vacuum it self whether balanced or not perpetual or not it will cause the vacuum to vibrate and get energy maybe getting the energy created by a perpetual power to destroy which is hot and is what zero point so where on earth would the energy come from if you cannot create or destroy and if all force being equal if it was all forces being equal you would never get energy from the vacuum whatsoever but was ultimately proven in science that energy does come from the sole power of zero point so yea meaning from a self powered perpetual state of energy where it is the back bone behind it all and returns back to it, meaning what i have said about all my rantings about power to create or power to destory, it self generates giving more out than in which is power to create or negative electric or power or the dead opposite of that is power to destory.

Every time you cause energy to be extracted from the vacuum every time you do that activates the perpetual power at the same time and due to the perpetual power it enables power to be extracted from the vacuum/zero point with whatever method, the perpetual power it self when active enables energy to be extracted from vacuum/zero point, if not then you can't extract energy from vaccum/zero point.

The perpetual power nature of it, is the catalyst or key which it self enables power to be extracted from the vacuum whether the extracted energy is equal or perpetual science with its non perpetual thinking thought it had no power which is dead opposite as to what they have found, it ultimately does have energy.

So getting energy from zero point is getting energy from the sole perpetual power of it in whatever form i.e. balanced equal force where all forces are equal or not unequal force.

It can be hot or cold, as in hot electric (unequal positive perpetual power to destroy where all circuits get hot) or cold electric (unequal negative perpetual power to create where all circuits get cold) regarding energy dissipation the momentum or potential of it is perpetual.

For one the collapsing field technique right is utilising the perpetual power process the collapsing field is unequal perpetual nature based way to get perpetual power, like in the same way you vibrate the vacuum to gain energy which is established in science and works the same way regarding the casmir effect, the only way it can self run with excess energy is the self running with excess energy heat pump i am on about regarding the cop over 1 regarding the collapsing field technique and forget the limits of efficiency it wont disable this potential to self run with losses with excess energy with losses so design it that way.

The collapsing field of course will draw energy from the environment and is indeed perpetual in a way because of the laws of energy converting or conversion which does not add in as to what created the universe and the way this converting conversion law works means that is wastes the energy in the process where as if you did not waste it will be banging on the door of negative cold electric power to create force , the collapsing field enables it to tap into the vacuum and it externally gets rescued and externally put back in to save it from the conversion/conserving law effect and this conversion or conserving law effect is different between a closed loop circuit where it cuts of the extraction ability or open where it does not cut off the extraction ability so with negative perpetual power to create cold electric the same can be applied to work fully, in a parallel fully open circuit which enables the energy extraction but then comes the problem of negative power to create force so it will enable it self to self run with excess power which can be done just like the problem of efficiency preventing it to self run with excess power which can be solved and i already know and in same way to allow negative power to enter so with power externally saved before the potential gets cut off right which will bang on negative cold electric power to create ok before it does it gets fully rescued and then externally put in again, this is all part of reusing the energy which recycles and the potential bangs on negative energy so with external energy put out then in, it harvests that energy to give it potential which it does and would exceed in power which is negative again so the circuit has to be parallel path fully open looped system so it does not get cut off, exactly the same with the self running heat pump with excess power or a self running solar panel with excess energy powered by the power to create force which created the universe and is negative cold electric power with losses every in the circuit and the losses in the entire circuit can't cut off the potential perpetual power to create energy anywhere which is cold and negative and alien at same time because the circuit is fully open and parallel at same time so it will work same with the self running heat pump with excess left over energy as a self running solar panel with a perpetual process.

So if you manage to achieve a self running solar panel with excess energy, with the whole system at a loss, like the heat pump i am on about, it is perpetual in a way and the potential this the perpetual force will be there and is an alien negative power to create energy right out of the box, so if you understand positive hot circuits it will be hard to understand the opposite equivalent of this and the electronic parts needed will be hard to get due to understanding of electronics etc which is parts designed for hot circuits not cold.

So yea regarding energy dissipation, this energy dissipation whether it is hot or cold, exists in a non equal perpetual equilibrium unlike a non perpetual equal equilibrium where every person understands so to understand better this better is wave propagation and how this force manifests, especially working out wave propagation with energy dissipation and maybe just find the key of perpetual power.

The way i see the casmir effect is it can be adapted to run solely off extracted energy with left over energy which is excess energy (and this excess energy potential is negative unlike where every circuit is hot and wastes energy)and i view the casmis effect device to be working like the same principles of the overunity meg device and it works fully like a self running solar panel with excess energy exactly like the self running heat pump i am on about and the excess energy potential is negative power electric (power to create) like the heat pump, if they ever find waves which they can to achieve this with the wave length, i mean studying the wave length of the self running heat pump with excess energy which is negative and they have to find that negative power to create energy for that to happen using the power creation process that created the universe which is fully alien negative energy.

You can clearly see the potential of the cold negative electric(power to create) force within reasoning thinking that a cop over 1 can indeed self run with excess energy so there you go, negative energy banging on the door and this is one way out of many to tap negative cold energy/electric unlike the opposite hot circuits and i believe that both hot or cold energy dissipation is incompatible with each other but take that with a pinch of salt.

Even if the potential of cold negative electric(power to create) force which is hard to understand is likely to be interpreted as some alien force and with current understanding of hot heat electrical dissipation, so the potential is undeniably there which is the cold negative electric(power to create) force and is trying to manifest in your circuit so it really does exist as that despite not manifesting could be interpreted as a unstable phenomena where the potential is polar opposite compared to a hot force when this is polar opposite cold force, the current understanding of laws of energy is not fully complete.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 06, 2020, 07:34:27 PM
I think single wire transmission is the key to tap into energy much more easy to understand.


Not much is known about single wire transmission well not to me anyways.

You could tune single wire transmission like a radio to suck in energy to whatever source of energy be it earth etc and the return i think will obviously harvest energy coming back in.

I think Tesla himself intended to use the simple physics of the single wire transmission to tap into energy sources and the process will indeed gather energy and suck it in the process.

Instead of thinking of using something else that is not single wire i think tesla did not treat it this way.

Using single wire transmission will solve a lot of problems and the dream of free energy is better accomplished this way, this single wire transmission works like an energy pump tapping into whatever source of power when it returns back to the single wire because it is open loop half in and half out.

Electrons attract electrons simple to understand with the single wire transmission and putting that energy into earth will do just that with single wire, it is like tapping into electrostatic of the earth which can power many city etc.

Or tapping into wheel work of nature via single wire transmission simple to understand.

If you apply single wire physics into everything then free energy devices will be much better understood so take that with a pinch of salt but yeah.

It would tap into the invisible electric network of the earth with invisible moving stator's and the like which is the wheel work and it in harmony with single wire transmission.

We need to know the full physics of single wire etc, because i can see that it has big potential to set us free from oil gas coal etc,

Yea big potential and very realistic free energy extraction and the like.

In the world of free energy all the designs etc, if it is not possible that it will run and exhausted every option, just apply single wire physics to it then it will be much more understandable.

Like a open ended receiver where you input energy and get energy out via single wire, and this way you have tapped into whatever energy source because energy in causes energy extraction and then outputs all of that and can self run with excess power at same time within the circuit that is, just like this self running heat pump with excess power and this does not break any known laws of energy at all really.

The limitations of electric is i think overcome with single wire physics and enables power extraction much more easy.

Dan.


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 07, 2020, 10:06:15 AM
Hi IItfdaniel1,
Hi Dan,
Thank you for your reply.
You are obviously an educated person but you have written a whole textbook, my friend! :) You really tell us many interesting facts which are true by themseves but which are not related to the present topic however. Please focus on the topic, if possible.
Looking forward to your answer.
George
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 07, 2020, 02:47:10 PM
Thank you yes, i could not help my self.

Anyways i went on about that because giving food for thought, to discover possibly how this alien energy works which is power to create and how it behaves because it isn't a well known source of potential power but is would be easy to identify what it is with simplified physics.

I might be wrong but, scientists believe zero point won't go beyond zero point, if that was the case then the getting energy from it is impossible, no? - this confirms in someway that i am correct > https://phys.org/news/2019-10-quantum-vacuum-energy.html (https://phys.org/news/2019-10-quantum-vacuum-energy.html) this energy is a different kettle of fish because zero point is sustained by positive as in positive to positive perpetual that is fully frozen as it amounts to zero and cannot self perpetuate on it's own and idle energy transfer and fully positive to positive.

What i am trying to say regarding nature of zero point, is that positive follows positive, and is fully positive with nothing negative in it what so ever, unlike conventional electric where positive follows negative.


But if it comes in contact with negative energy then it cannot utilize the negative energy whatsoever (but for it to go beyond zero however it has to interact with negative and this is the only way of doing it as in techniques of communication between positive and negative and must be explored) because the nature of the energy with this cannot be positive follows negative it ultimately does not work like that if not then science would be able to get energy but have not, even super intelligent extra terrestrial ruler of the universe will agree as to how incompatible it really is, even he would have great trouble with it as in trying to get it to work etc but then if quantum mechanics energy interchange works between the positive and negative forces then there is a possibility (incompatible because when positive collides with negative this is the only process i know of same way it causes it to go under zero)because energy does actually appear to zero point but there is no known way as to how to get energy from it, as in getting energy solely from zero point, but if they identify negative energy then they would make some progress to tackle this hard reality because the energy that appears to zero point (energy that comes and goes out of existence which comes from the negative)is coming from the negative incompatible force obviously so in some way mainstream science knows about negative energy which is power to create and its energy dissipation is cold unlike hot circuits that most of mankind uses.
 
I whole heartily do not recommend going beyond zero because the understanding of zero point or quantum mechanics, zero point is the ultimate prison for energy and i am right about that.

I with my theory i think it goes beyond zero point in the process gets energy interaction (where both negative and positive cannot collide in a way where positive and negative in electric circuits and create a anti lenz force so in that way)that way in a perpetual way when negative collides with positive it causes some interesting effects, take that with a pinch of salt but has to be tested, i believe it that zero point is positive explosive energy perhaps and the dead opposite is incompatible with it which is the negative opposite equivalent of it, and the way it gets energy regarding zero point gets it from the perpetual power to create where as zero point is power to destroy and thus incompatible but vibrates in a perpetual fashion against the negative implosive energy.

The perpetual power of zero point which is hot explosive positive power to destroy energy, cannot perpetuate on it's own (because it is a mimic of a force) and if it can't then energy from zero point is impossible and this is what science fully believed in the first place, so it has to get the perpetual power from the negative power to create force by vibrating the dormant perpetual power of zero point it against the perpetual negative power to create to get it to perpetuate and thus get energy with the inter exchange of energy between positive explode zero point and the incompatible power to create.

So when the two incompatible forces vibrate causing a perpetual effect, within the inter exchange of energy where it cancels each other in a way just to make it easier to understand out actually causes a perpetual effect so negative and positive can work like that and all other unknown methods just like that, instead of getting no energy regarding cancelling of positive and negative regarding magnets (regarding anti lenz law effect) but if you do this with zero point positive and power to create negative instead of cancelling each other out due to the nature of zero point would actually create a perpetual effect indeed well the effect ultimately would have caused something for sure unlike being completely landlocked because zero point is the ultimate prison of energy.

The energy potential of going below zero is a fully perpetual effect, if all energy being equal then well it would never go below zero.

So change of subject, regarding broken symmetry from http://www.cheniere.org/references/brokensymmetry.htm (http://www.cheniere.org/references/brokensymmetry.htm) is crucial to enable the solar panel effect but instead of the sun but receiving energy from the vacuum like the sun, and if you excite energy in this manner regarding broken symmetry it would knock on negative energy power to create potential and work like a solar panel but with that potential.

So regarding zero point (positive power to destory) and the (negative power to create) like when two forces cancel each other out regarding electronic magnets, but with this different kettle of fish where the nature of beyond zero is fully a completely unequal force that breaks the all forces being equal right in the bin ok science that treats the interaction between positive and negative right, they cannot do any energy interaction because they do not believe in perpetual power and are using the converting or conserving energy and they can't get anywhere with that regarding understanding the sole power of zero point.

Anyways,



I can't add anything to the current topic so i will be quiet now,

Dan.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 08, 2020, 09:22:08 AM
So when energy appears by going in and out of existence which science detects and they wonder how to get this energy with the zero point process, this is the potential of negative power to create where it is perpetual in  way and just like self running heat pump with excess left over power so in that sense.


Also for it to achieve less than zero, it does not make sense if you view it from a converting or conserving effect, but would make more sense from a perpetual sense, going beyond zero means it has bypass the all forces being equal where perpetual power is well not enabled with the all forces being equal simply put and is perpetually in it's form by going beyond zero which has been proven.


Due to the nature of zero point and the understanding of it means that this is a one sided view of it and very hard to see past it but if you can see negative potential in it then yes, because there are two opposites zero point which is positive (and science seems to think only positive exists) and is a ultimate prison of energy and thus can't do this or that because it goes down to zero, where as negative implosion where it goes right up to up is dead opposite of the laws established in science and the laws as based of the ultimate prison of energy which is zero point and is incompatible and within the incompatible manifests the understanding of impossible and within that it give the dead opposite of more out than in effect and the power to create unlike zero point actually break them in a fully incompatible opposite manner regarding energy dissipation in a freely state it breaks the prison in a opposite manner and in the opposite manner the prison of energy effect ultimately does not apply with this regarding the negative power to create force.

They are two parallels of energy and have no interaction what so ever regarding the two parallel energy which is zero point positive power to destroy and the negative power to create, if you try to connect both forces like an electric circuit well that is fully impossible i think but yea because of positive to positive an fully positive nothing can come in or out regarding how impossible it is to get energy from vacuum.

The potential of energy dissipation where the momentum cause electric circuit to be hot is beyond zero effect.

Regarding the bedini motor it use a energy exciter and the Stanley Meyer hydrogen thingy energy excitation of hydrogen production, it uses the re guageing effect and to understand that it works like a solar panel pump and like the self running heat pump with excess energy left over well like that so read this > http://www.cheniere.org/references/brokensymmetry.htm both the stanley and bedini motor works with that exact priniciple, and it the same breed as the image of this website > https://phys.org/news/2019-10-quantum-vacuum-energy.html so look at the image of broken syrmmetry website and the other phys.org image website i mean both images as in harmony with how the nature of this energy corresponds.

So if negative power to create energy is better known then you can tune into that negative energy and i think this is possible like tuning in a radio to the desired frequency, so instead of the hot frequency you solely tap into the negative power to create which will cause the circuit to get cold and colder that is if they have worked out how to tap into the heart of negative power to create energy which is fully incompatible when compared to hot or zero point power to destory.

Tuning in to the negative to negative energy manifestation where it is fully negative unlike the incompatible positive to positive which is fully positive where energy returns back to the core perpetual power of either zero point positive hot power to destroy or the opposite power to create cold.

This reasoning with positive to positive and why the circuit gets hot would be understood anyways take that with pinch of salt, if they work out negative to negative and why it gets cold is off to a good start.

I think the way we understand energy and all the electrical equipment etc is designed for hot current power to destroy energy and it would be incompatible unless you know if it allows sole negative power on its own or not, just like the sole power of positive energy which is power to destroy energy it is how that energy manifests behind it.

Energy generated by coal whatever done by power stations does not give a single watt out (because the perpetual effect to create that watt in the first place apply's here and the perpetual way this watt manifests from the power station, its potential is indeed perpetual as to how this watt travels into your power socket, its momentum is done by perpetual process otherwise this watt would not exist as in no power coming from the power station if the perpetual effect is not there which comes back to create nor destroy again if the perpetual effect within create nor destroy is how the watt manifests so within the create nor destroy for the watt to manifest somewhere is the perpetual effect for that to happen within create nor destroy so for the watt to manifest is perpetuates it self within a create nor destroy environment externally i think) due to the conversion process so that is impossible because of create a watt does not exist here and destroy a watt also does not apply so figure out the true potential of how these watts manifest, i think they manifest fully outside of create nor destroy in a full external manner in a perpetual way (fully bypassing the convert or energy conservation or the conserving of energy, look at it that way if that makes sense or not)  or not but both perpetual or not fully apply here due to state of energy being active or not, this reasoning is simple and understood.

If the converting of energy or converting or the conserve of energy get in the way and same with all of the known laws of electric in fact then the watt will never manifest, it bypasses that fully i mean breaks the laws of known electric for it to manifest and behind that i think somewhere a perpetual process is responsible as to how the watt manifests and will lead you with this thinking to better understand as to how to get free energy etc and is very probable, the momentum of the potential charge of electric is not prevented by all know laws of electric and is done fully external like a open loop circuit which does not prevent energy extraction well similar which enables power to manifest so you need to know as to how this energy manifests behind it all behind the creation of the electric.

Because for the electric to self sustain it self is propelled by a perpetual force an this perpetual nature can be activate or not, if it wasn't propelled by a perpetual force then you can say bye to electric power manifestation in your home power socket.

It is a form of reactive power, the process of how electric manifests in the impossible hot power to destroy circuit but the manifest of it all the electric is done by a negative power to create force so you can indeed tap into that already really and all of its perpetual processes and y nature of it , it will do the opposite which is breaking the laws of energy which is established with the hot positive explosive power to destroy energy, it done by a fully external way for it to manifest and in the process it does not completely shut down all the mechanisms meaning all perpetual mechanisms are not prevented and can manifest ability for it to self perpetuate otherwise if not then no energy manifestation will occur in your home power socket regrading the all mechanisms of perpetual, it can push giving over unity within a all force being equal hot circuit and the momentum of this is like beyond zero limit which was proven and can happen but yea

You would get implosions of cold electric within that hot totally incompatible circuit with the nature of the two opposite energy's which are fully incompatible with each other but electric manifests within the impossible incompatible energy's so the power manifest of the electron is linked to the cold power to create force and if fully used it would cause the opposite which is where the circuit gets cold instead of hot.

If electric came from hot source zero power power to destroy then there would be no electric in existence but if it came from a power to create then it will exist and it returns back the energy to what made it exist in the first place.

Within the laws of energy ok, if the electron behaved like the laws of electric directly with what self sustains the electrons existence not externally , think about this, there would be no electric in existence and no electric power manifest so it bypasses the understanding of electric fully externally where these laws have no effect meaning you can break the so called laws of energy realistically fully yea.

When people say it breaks the laws of physics and energy just remember there are only 2 opposites basically speaking one by nature and another one by nature, two fully incompatible sources of energy that cannot inter exchange with each other.

One force equates to impossible manifesting the impossible and the other one manifesting the possible with the possible.

Don't get the two opposing energy's mixed up with explain it with the laws of known energy, it is one sided and the laws are fully based off hot explosive power to destroy and hardly anything about the power to create force, there would be two sets of laws of energy i think.

If the perpetual power as to how electric manifest is prevented there would be no electric manifest what so ever.

Regarding parallel path technology it can be possible to tap into negative (implosion) to negative (implosion) and have energy interaction that way leading to a full negative induction and this way enable the possible to possible way, in a way like with single wire power transmission perhaps but take that with a pinch of salt, it has to tap it like that way to enable the ultimate holy grail of free energy, and will be accused of breaking all known laws of energy so with the way parallel works in each single parallel there is only negative imposition energy is needed and that will enable the full potential of power to create.


If you know why energy works like that regarding negative to negative and only negative with no positive then you will be much more likely to succeed.

Anyways you have read my metaphysics theory's of things, science actually needs metaphysics.

Anyways read > “The EmDrive has officially made it through peer review, which is amazing because it literally breaks every law of physics.” from https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1219586/nasa-news-physics-broken-albert-einsten-emdrive-spacecraft-engine-tested-spt seems to be legit and credible and supports my theory of the ability to break the laws of energy.

Also read > http://www.physics-astronomy.com/2017/03/the-impossible-quantum-space-engine.html

I have nothing to add (twice i posted this) but was interesting so i explaining in this way so am now finished so i be quiet now,


Dan.





Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 09, 2020, 01:17:55 PM
With the way we know of the casmir acceleration effect with a equal equilibrium effect, regarding what the arrows look like here is a quantum fluctuation. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCasimir_effect&psig=AOvVaw3J0kY-sSxkLPiq9Hy6zug0&ust=1583842097377000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCICF3N6tjegCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD .


The casmir effect is not in a unequal perpetual equilibrium but if you capture the acceleration effect it will indeed break the laws of physics, like when the two plates are near creating a flow of energy from nothing which is concluded as to why they do think it breaks it due to the perpetual nature of how it manifest and indeed perpetual effect being witness here.


Casmir effect where it gives energy when two plates are near right causing that effect, this effect can be used in many ways, the arrows of acceleration potential right is the effect of when two plates are near indeed giving a force out of nothing i.e. that is well and truly is a perpetual effect and is repulsive i think


With that effect it can be multiplied over and over with no limit like the heat pump i was on about within a equal equilibrium and the way you see rotational power that occurs with this effect out of nothing actually will accelerate with power from nothing roughly saying and indeed will work in that manner, but it won't give excess energy left over energy that is and the potential will i think well draw no usable power potential of whatever because it is within a equal equilibrium where the force is equal and all forces being equal limit but would work and accelerate out of nothing which does ultimately break the laws of energy.


So the energy from casmir force can be re put in again to a unlimited acceleration the bit where it gives energy from nothing and reputing the energy back in to where it came from to multiply the acceleration effect of it and will work.

If that is understood and applied what you will see would be the impossible really, it would look like a perpetual machine due to the nature of the casmir force and how it gets energy from no input of energy.

No input? well again science has ultimately proven it gets energy from no input and the energy exceeds beyond the no input bit (the energy that exceeds in a unequal perpetual measure within a equal equilibrium which isn't perpetual are the big arrows and the no input bit is the small arrows of the picture of casmir force) which is the perpetual acceleration effect and it indefinitely is a sole perpetual effect without a doubt.

So if you get energy from no input and then reputing that energy from nothing back to it again, it will cause it to accelerate to no end whatsoever, just like the heat pump with cop over 1 and putting that heat back into the extraction  process causing it to get hot to no limit and it would have potential to have left over excess energy to power a load which is negative energy potential from perpetual power to create process in a way, so think of it like that but with the casmir effect where it gives energy from nothing whatsoever and see what perpetually happens and will do the impossible there.

But the casmir effect is a different kettle of fish energy, it would be replusive against repulsive to achieve the unlimited acceleration effect like a repulsive magnet motor and work but with magnet motors well the problem is trying to get it to work with magnetic gates but if conventional powered magnet motors that it does bypass the gate to give motion then the permanent magnet motor could work but in another way.

This is quite clear understood, so the energy from nothing causing the energy from nothing to be accelerated to no end also apply here.

So this casmir effect giving energy from completely nothing can be reused to get energy more energy like a perpetual pump of some sort but yea, it would accelerate on its own with no input and the way that works is the beyond zero process i think which is unequal equilibrium which is perpetual.

It will accelerate with seeming potential but you can't get any energy from it same way with the problem with scientists knowing you can't get energy from casmir effect but it won't prevent it from accelerating to no end which is unlimited acceleration potential so there you go a seemingly perpetual machine indeed but look closer though it is within a equal equilibrium where all forces being equal meaning it isn't perpetual but this acceleration process is a dip beyond equal equilibrium.

If you understand quantum mechanics the better you know how it breaks the laws of energy and is indeed possible and can be done like that and i believe in the process which i understand can fully break the laws of energy.


So this casmir force it is greater than 1, and if you use all of that energy which is greater than 1, you will get an ever more expansive energy in a unequal equilibrium perpetual nature of what it truly is it would mean it is even much much greater than 1 from where it began with because you are reusing all of the energy back to where it came from, because the output is much greater then the input, and the arrows of the casmir forces shows this and the input is nothing which is all forces being equal so the effect comes from the beyond zero effect where all forces are unequal

With this force if fully understood and applied to everything, would mean the obvious impossible which it truly is, but it is withing a equal equilibrium, you could have electric circuits that would need alot of energy but with this it can run with a few miliamps of power instead of, a few hundred megawatts but you won't be able to use this abundant energy which is what everyone will find, and what science knows about nature of casmir effect and fully knowing wnhy you can' get energy from it but with my thinking it could be possible to get usable work from it but yea.

So when i mean it is greater than 1 and then re putting that energy giving a far far greater than 1 , i mean in this process the small arrows get ever smaller and the big arrows get further bigger in a perpetual sense and does work exactly as that and it would accelerate like that with an every increasing power/torque actual work in the process getting greater to no end, it will increase in power/torque/work to no end with the acceleration process of the casmir force.

The waves of that picture is the equal equilibrium which is not perpetual and the arrows is the unequal perpetual equilibrium but somewhere you could tap into this useful power maybe externally so the potential does not get cut off and extract/harvest then could be possible as all things could be possible with the nature of quantum mechanics.

So in that sense using casmir forces, both repelling each other will give energy/power/torque powered from the nothing and gain even more nothing and power, like in the same way with the cancelling of forces which is the anti-lenz force, but that gives a neutral cancelled out equal power.

I seem to think the negative resistor is in fact a casmir effect device, using two repulsive parallel plates to gain and magnify the energy to no end and then in between the repelling forces manifests energy and externally tapping the energy in between fully externally that to possible gain energy extraction so you can actually use this energy for work.

It is like nuclear fission or the spliting of the atmo to get electric like with fuel cells but with this yea (casmir effect) regarding the emdrive it is exactly the same when two casmir plates give repulsive energy from nothingness of the vaccum but the real energy is from beyond zero point or beyond the nothingness and that it how it manifests power which science knows of.

I seem to think that by going beyond zero possibly that is how it breaks the laws of energy but use this to conclude and has to be tested but is possible for it to go beyond zero.

But apparently the casmir forces plates on it's own creates a repulsive effect though from the news about casmir force so yeah i think that manifest is beyond zero or maybe use an input of power whichever but this is dangerous because i don't recommend to people who do not know the power to destory which is what the casmir effect is of, so be very very careful.

Maybe the casmir force done by plates just acts like a solar panel with no input, i don't know all of this has to be tested but the theory is pretty understandable.

So yea with negative entropy in quantum mechnics and the negative entropy, it enables the possible effect and the possible effect violates the laws of it all and comes from power to ccreate negative energy.

So when the negative entropy effects a positive one, it bypasses the restriction fully where it would have been thought to be totally impossible.

Because this is a permanent energy it explains why things are impossible or possible.

So the casmir effect plates whatever, they work exactly like a solar panel but different and you could maybe use a earth battery or whatever to power it, so two repelling positive power to destroy forces cancelling each other out to give in between that a negative power to create force, and if somehow you could tap the cold negative power to create it would have to be done with single wire physics, or single wire transmission, the reason for this is because the energy is one way only and a single wire or single wire physics fit this nicely if it is possible or not but yea.

Maybe if you power two casmir plates using earth battery it might just automatically tap into the negative power to create implosion force because energy being interlinks and that will come from the earths electric circuit which is connected to negative power to create cold electric.

https://overunity-generator-guide.blogspot.com/2019/10/radiant-energy-machine-cold-electricity.html

https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/nikola-teslas-radiations-and-cosmic-rays

I might not be correct with all of this, but just some food for thought.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 10, 2020, 09:00:17 PM
To George1, if you want a free lunch of true perpetual power/free energy click this link > https://overunity.com/18428/real-free-energy-from-magnets/msg543667/#new (https://overunity.com/18428/real-free-energy-from-magnets/msg543667/#new) and read my post.


You are an educated person you will see very clearly i am right by comparing the self running heat pump but with the gyroscope by clicking that link regarding the facts.


Dan
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 11, 2020, 02:09:27 PM
Hi Dan,
I will consider carefully the link in your last post. But meanwhile I would like ask you to read carefully the link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf and answer the following simple question: "Can we choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0?" Yes or no?
Looking forward to your answer.
George


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 29, 2020, 04:23:36 PM
Any opinions, recommendations, positive critique?
Please read carefully the link https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf and answer the following simple question: "Can we choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0?" Yes or no?
Looking forward to your answer.
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 05, 2020, 03:40:53 PM
Some interesting discussion occurs in besslerwheel.com/forum. This discussion is related to our zigzag conception. The title of the topic is just the same, that is, "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?". Please have a look at this discussion, if you like. It would be interesting if you share your opinions about this discussion.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 12, 2020, 04:29:14 PM
Hi everyone,
Any opinions related to the discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum? (This discussion is related to our zigzag conception. The title of the topic is just the same, that is, "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?".)
Looking forward to your answer.
George1
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 20, 2020, 03:05:01 PM
Hi everyone,
1) THEORY and PRACTICE! Two words! It is a SIMPLE OBVIOUS FACT that if a certain scientific THEORY is correct, then the related PRACTICE has to be also correct. And if you have any objections against this SIMPLE OBVIOUS FACT, then you have some mental problems for sure.
2) In overunity.com and in besslerwheel.com/forum we (our team) released ABSOLUTELY FREE two pieces of THEORETICAL research, whose titles are " IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively. For these two pieces of scientific THEORETICAL research is valid the statement in the previous item 1.
3) These two pieces of scientific THEORETICAL research (mentioned in the above item 2) unambiguously show (no serious and reasonable THEORETICAL  objections within a period of two years in overunity.com and in besslerwheel.com/forum) that the law of conservation of energy and the law of coservation of linear momentum are not always correct. But there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact as any rule/law has its exceptions.
4) Our third piece of technology is a new electric technology which increases many times (at least twice as a minimum) the distance traveled by any standard electric vehicle on a single charge.
5) Our new electric technology has both THEORY and PRACTICE. In other words, we have a WORKING PROTOTYPE which perfectly confirms the correctness of the theoretical concept on which is based the principle of operation of our new electric technology. The latter is practically ready for production on a large industrial scale.
6) The secret of our new electric technology however is NOT FREE. It costs already 40,000,000 (forty) million dollars and this price will further rise if our first two pieces of THEORETICAL  research (mentioned in the above item 2) do not win public recognition in the nearest future.
7) These 40,000,000 (forty) million dollars will be used mainly for charity and only a small part of this money will be used for some R&D work.
8) We (our team) are looking for buyers of the secret of our new electric technology (and of our next 7 (seven) inventions and technology innovations).
-------------------
George1     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 26, 2020, 02:19:27 PM
Prof. S. L. Srivastava did not notice the O. U. It's obvious. Otherwise  he would become a Nobel prize winner. (The same for his Russian/Soviet colleagues 50 years ago.)
-----------------------------------
Please read carefully the text below.
-----------------------------------
1) THEORY and PRACTICE! Two words! It is a SIMPLE OBVIOUS FACT that if a certain scientific THEORY is correct, then the related PRACTICE has to be also correct. And if you have any objections against this SIMPLE OBVIOUS FACT, then you have some mental problems for sure.
2) In overunity.com and in besslerwheel.com/forum we (our team) released ABSOLUTELY FREE two pieces of THEORETICAL research, whose titles are " IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively. For these two pieces of scientific THEORETICAL research is valid the statement in the previous item 1.
3) These two pieces of scientific THEORETICAL research (mentioned in the above item 2) unambiguously show (no serious and reasonable THEORETICAL  objections within a period of two years in overunity.com and in besslerwheel.com/forum) that the law of conservation of energy and the law of coservation of linear momentum are not always correct. But there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact as any rule/law has its exceptions.
4) Our third piece of technology is a new electric technology which increases many times (at least twice as a minimum) the distance traveled by any standard electric vehicle on a single charge.
5) Our new electric technology has both THEORY and PRACTICE. In other words, we have a WORKING PROTOTYPE which perfectly confirms the correctness of the theoretical concept on which is based the principle of operation of our new electric technology. The latter is practically ready for production on a large industrial scale.
6) The secret of our new electric technology however is NOT FREE. It costs already 40,000,000 (forty) million dollars and this price will further rise if our first two pieces of THEORETICAL  research (mentioned in the above item 2) do not win public recognition in the nearest future.
7) These 40,000,000 (forty) million dollars will be used mainly for charity and only a small part of this money will be used for some R&D work.
8) We (our team) are looking for buyers of the secret of our new electric technology (and of our next 7 (seven) inventions and technology innovations).
-------------------
George1   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 03, 2020, 03:23:57 PM
Hi everyone,
1) "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" up-to-now discussions unambiguously show that the law of conservation of energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are not always correct. But there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact as any rule/law has its exceptions. That's all.
2) We are selling our next 8 (eight) inventions. As a first step we are selling a new electric technology, which increases many times (at least twice as a minimum) the distance traveled by any standard electric vehicle on a single charge. Actually we are selling a WORKING PROTOTYPE together with a full description of its principle of operation.
3) Our new electric technology can be successfully used in any battery-based electric device. For example if our new electric technology is used in an ordinary standard electric torch, then its working hours would be increased many times (at least twice as a minimum) preserving at the same time its standard rated intensity of light. So the electric torch industry could realize a good financial jump by using our new electric technology. (Please note that in many emergency cases the duration and the  intensity of an electric torch light are of vital importance for saving of human lives for example.)
4) We have some ideas for how to sell our new electric technology. We are negotiating now with some big companies. At the same time however we are open for collaboration. If some member of this forum suggests a smart method of selling of our new electric technology and/or takes part in the selling process, then he/she would firstly earn good money and secondly, he/she would indirectly contribute to our charity causes.
----------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George1
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 10, 2020, 03:12:07 PM
Any buyer of our new electric technology? Any good idea for a successful selling of our new electric technology? (As mentioned in our previous post we are negotiating now with some big companies, but any help/any good idea is welcome.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 17, 2020, 05:43:08 PM
1) 40,000,000 (forty) million dollars! This is the price (for the present!) of our new electric technology that increases twice (as a minimum) the distance traveled by any standard electric vehicle on a single charge. Actually this new electric technology is our third piece of overunity conception (that is, let's say, 1W at the inlet, 2W at the outlet and efficiency = 2, respectively; the same for 1kW/2kW, 10kW/20kW, etc.), but this time it is experimentally proved. There is a working prototype which can be dullicated/copied as many times as you want (in several variations), if you are familiar with the related basic principle of operation.
-----------------------------------------
2) 1,000,000 (one) million dollars prize will be awarded to that member of this forum who can create a method for a successful selling of our third piece of overunity technology, mentioned in previous item 1.
(Note. Big companies seem to be heavy bureaucratic machines, which work in a very slow manner. Besides big companies' officers of different ranks as if tend to avoid taking responsibilities of any kind. Many of these officers (mainly in US) demonstrate total lack of business and/or technology competence. Furthermore our first two pieces of technology ("IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1") have not won public recognition yet and because of this they are still not famous enough and they are still of no interest to the general public. So as a final result the mentioned-in-our-previous-posts negotiations have been dragging on a little.
-----------------------------------------
3) 1,000,000 (one) million dollars prize will be awarded to that member of this forum who can create a method, which is able to win QUICKLY public recognition for the concepts, described in "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and in "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1". (If the concepts, described in "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and in "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", win public recognition, then the negotiations, mentioned in the above 'Note', would accelerate substantially for sure.
-----------------------------------------
4) It is evident that 2,000,000 (two) million dollars prize will be awarded to that member of this forum who can create simultaneously the two methods, described in previous items 2 and 3.
-----------------------------------------
So rack your brains and earn some good money, and invest it in your own OU projects. (I am sure that most members of this forum have OU (and other non-standard) projects of their own.)   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 24, 2020, 05:56:13 PM
1,000,000 (one) million dollars prize will be awarded to that member of this forum who can create a method, which is able to win QUICKLY public recognition for the concepts, described in "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and in "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1".
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 31, 2020, 05:11:51 PM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,000,000 (one) million dollars prize will be awarded to that member of this forum who can create a method, which is able to win QUICKLY public recognition for the concepts, described in "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and in "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1".
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on June 03, 2020, 07:30:54 PM
Any unbalanced mass spinning 360° with varying speed or oscillating within 180° or less converts centrifugal force into linear acceleration.

In other words you can literally 'swim' in space. I'll put it in simple words, imagine you are floating in space, you got a hammer in each hand. As you swing them in front of you horizontally in opposite directions close to 180° but no further resultant vector is pure unidirectional acceleration, that is, you are pulled forward just as if someone pushed you from behind. And it makes death of Matt Kowalski very ironic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYDaIyfitn8

If your mind attacks you with idea 'but if you stop the hammers from going beyond 180° there will be a backward reaction', just realize you are stoping them at the axis by friction, not by acting on the spinning masses directly.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 07, 2020, 04:07:15 PM
To nix85.
--------------------
Thank you for your post. Please give us some time to consider it carefully.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 07, 2020, 04:27:25 PM
Ok, we will not talk about money anymore. Let us try another approach.
1) Firstly," IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATRE THAN 1" must win public regognition and become an integral part of any standard textbook/manual of physics as quickly as possible. Besides our team (or at least one member of our team) must become a Nobel prize winner as this Nobel prize's money will used ENTIRELY for charity.
2) After realizing of previous item 1 we will release absolutely free the secret of our third invention (both theory and experiment) as well as the secrets of our next seven revolutionary and technology breakthrough inventions.
3) Thirdly, if the above item 1 is not realized successfully, then we will get back to the money-related variation, that is, the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
4) In one word, the realization of the above item 1 is actually a test for the stage of mental development of humankind. If the above item 1 is not realized soon, then this means that human society in general and its intelectual and scientific elite in particular are still at a primitive stage of mental development as they cannot properly evaluate obvious truths and revolutionary technology breakthroughs.
5) So do your best to help realizing the above item 1 as quickly as possible. Otherwise the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
Regards, 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 07, 2020, 04:41:06 PM
Ok, we will not talk about money anymore. Let us try another approach.
1) Firstly," IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" must win public recognition and become an integral part of any standard textbook/manual of physics as quickly as possible. Besides our team (or at least one member of our team) must become a Nobel prize winner as this Nobel prize's money will used ENTIRELY for charity.
2) After realizing of previous item 1 we will release absolutely free the secret of our third invention (both theory and experiment) as well as the secrets of our next seven revolutionary and technology breakthrough inventions.
3) Thirdly, if the above item 1 is not realized successfully, then we will get back to the money-related variation, that is, the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
4) In one word, the realization of the above item 1 is actually a test for the stage of mental development of humankind. If the above item 1 is not realized soon, then this means that human society in general and its intelectual and scientific elite in particular are still at a primitive stage of mental development as they cannot properly evaluate obvious truths and revolutionary technology breakthroughs.
5) So do your best to help realizing the above item 1 as quickly as possible. Otherwise the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on June 11, 2020, 05:01:56 AM
Basic principle.

Only reason this device stops is because he allows the weights to go beyond 180°. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI

So, that's the key difference between throwing the mass away from you which throws you in opposite direction, and swinging the mass in front of you which pulls you in the same direction instead.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 14, 2020, 05:33:48 PM
To nix85.
------------------
Interesting, very interesting! Please give us some time to consider this carefully.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 14, 2020, 05:34:48 PM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Firstly," IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" must win public recognition and become an integral part of any standard textbook/manual of physics as quickly as possible. Besides our team (or at least one member of our team) must become a Nobel prize winner as this Nobel prize's money will used ENTIRELY for charity.
2) After realizing of previous item 1 we will release absolutely free the secret of our third invention (both theory and experiment) as well as the secrets of our next seven revolutionary and technology breakthrough inventions.
3) Thirdly, if the above item 1 is not realized successfully, then we will get back to the money-related variation, that is, the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
4) In one word, the realization of the above item 1 is actually a test for the stage of mental development of humankind. If the above item 1 is not realized soon, then this means that human society in general and its intelectual and scientific elite in particular are still at a primitive stage of mental development as they cannot properly evaluate obvious truths and revolutionary technology breakthroughs.
5) So do your best to help realizing the above item 1 as quickly as possible. Otherwise the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 21, 2020, 11:23:31 AM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Firstly," IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" must win public recognition and become an integral part of any standard textbook/manual of physics as quickly as possible. Besides our team (or at least one member of our team) must become a Nobel prize winner as this Nobel prize's money will used ENTIRELY for charity.
2) After realizing of previous item 1 we will release absolutely free the secret of our third invention (both theory and experiment) as well as the secrets of our next seven revolutionary and technology breakthrough inventions.
3) Thirdly, if the above item 1 is not realized successfully, then we will get back to the money-related variation, that is, the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
4) In one word, the realization of the above item 1 is actually a test for the stage of mental development of humankind. If the above item 1 is not realized soon, then this means that human society in general and its intelectual and scientific elite in particular are still at a primitive stage of mental development as they cannot properly evaluate obvious truths and revolutionary technology breakthroughs.
5) So do your best to help realizing the above item 1 as quickly as possible. Otherwise the price of our third invention is $40,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 27, 2020, 02:50:44 PM
Hi everyone,
It is really surprising that obvious scientific truths cannot gain popularity quickly and easily among the members of the official science community. Do you have an explanation of this absurd fact?
Anyway let us repeat again the text of our last post with some small corrections and additions.
-------------------------------------------------------
1) Firstly," IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" must win public recognition and become an integral part of any standard textbook/manual of physics as quickly as possible. Besides our team (or at least one member of our team) must become a Nobel prize winner as this Nobel prize's money will used ENTIRELY for charity.
2) After realizing of previous item 1 we will release absolutely free the secret of our third invention (both theory and experiment) as well as the secrets of our next seven revolutionary and technology breakthrough inventions.
3) Thirdly, if the above item 1 is not realized successfully, then we will get back to the money-related variation, that is, the price of our third invention is ALREADY $50,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
4) In one word, the realization of the above item 1 is actually a test for the stage of mental development of humankind. If the above item 1 is not realized soon, then this means that human society in general and its intelectual and scientific elite in particular are still at a primitive stage of mental development as they cannot properly evaluate obvious truths and revolutionary technology breakthroughs.
5) So do your best to help realizing the above item 1 as quickly as possible. Otherwise the price of our third invention is $50,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future. (BUT PLEASE DO NOT THINK THAT WE ARE PATHOLOGICALLY GREEDY. ON THE CONTRARY! THE GREATER PART OF THESE $50,000,000 WILL BE USED FOR CHARITY AND ONLY A SMALL PART WILL BE USED FOR SOME R&D WORK.)
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 04, 2020, 12:53:00 PM
We tend to think that most of the official science community members are a kind of mafia, which oppresses and stops the technology progress. It is absolutely sure, of course,  that there are exceptions, but how to find them? Anyway let us repeat again the text of our previous post.
-----------------------------------------
1) Firstly," IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" must win public recognition and become an integral part of any standard textbook/manual of physics as quickly as possible. Besides our team (or at least one member of our team) must become a Nobel prize winner as this Nobel prize's money will used ENTIRELY for charity.
2) After realizing of previous item 1 we will release absolutely free the secret of our third invention (both theory and experiment) as well as the secrets of our next seven revolutionary and technology breakthrough inventions.
3) Thirdly, if the above item 1 is not realized successfully, then we will get back to the money-related variation, that is, the price of our third invention is $50,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future.
4) In one word, the realization of the above item 1 is actually a test for the stage of mental development of humankind. If the above item 1 is not realized soon, then this means that human society in general and its intelectual and scientific elite in particular are still at a primitive stage of mental development as they cannot properly evaluate obvious truths and revolutionary technology breakthroughs.
5) So do your best to help realizing the above item 1 as quickly as possible. Otherwise the price of our third invention is $50,000,000 and this price will further rise in the nearest future. (Let us remind again the greater part of these $50,000,000 will be used for charity and only a small part will be used for some R&D work.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 04, 2020, 01:45:03 PM
Please look at the link https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7839&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=195 and especially to our post of Apr 05, 2020, 3:48 pm. This post contains the equalities V' = V" and Vi = Vr. Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against the validity of these two equalities? YES OR NO?
Looking forward to your answer.
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 11, 2020, 02:21:26 PM
V' = V" and Vi = Vr. A simple obviuos fact. It unambiguously shows the incorrectness of the law of conservation of mechanical energy and/or the law of conservation of linear momentum. (But you have to be a highly qualified expert in theoretical and applied mechanics (or in physics as a whole) in order to understand what we are talking about.)
And yet the above mentioned simple obvious fact (V' = V" and Vi = Vr) cannot gain popularity quickly and easily among the members of the official science community. Do you have an explanation of this absurd situation?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. S. Please look at our last post of  July 04, 2020, 01:45:03 PM, in order to see how the two equalities V' = V" and Vi = Vr has been generated.     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 18, 2020, 01:25:23 PM
Please look at the link https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7839&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=195 and especially to our post of Apr 05, 2020, 3:48 pm. This post contains the equalities V' = V" and Vi = Vr. These two equalities unambiguously show the invalidity of the law of conservation of mechanical energy and/or the law of conservation of linear momentum. How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner? When human race will wake up from its mental coma?   


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 18, 2020, 01:29:50 PM
Please look at the link https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7839&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=195 and especially to our post of Apr 05, 2020, 3:48 pm. This post contains the equalities V' = V" and Vi = Vr. These two equalities unambiguously show the invalidity of the law of conservation of mechanical energy and/or the law of conservation of linear momentum. How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner? When human race will wake up from its mental coma?   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 25, 2020, 09:13:35 AM
No one here in this forum who is brave and competent enough to accept the simple obvious truth that the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are not correct?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 01, 2020, 10:18:30 AM
Any positive or negative comments? Positive ones are prefarable. :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 08, 2020, 10:56:23 AM
Please follow our discussion with ME (and before that with eccentrically1) in besslerwheel.com/forum. The title of the topic is just the same.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 15, 2020, 11:20:06 AM
An interesting discussion occurs in besslerwheel.com/forum. The title of the topic there is just the same as mentioned in our previous post. Some guys in this forum are even ready to sacrifice the third Newton's law in order to save the false law of conservation of energy. Their arguments are absurd and ridiculous. I suspect them being agents of the BIG MAFIA.   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 22, 2020, 02:18:53 PM
Please follow our discussion in https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum. Starts to be interesting.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on August 25, 2020, 05:13:34 PM
i think i already responded to this thread, i'm doing it again cause ppl often don't grasp this simple phenomena at first. so called reactionless or inertial propulsion comes down to a simple natural law which can be formulated as:

Unbalanced mass spinning 360° with varying speed or oscillating within 180° or less, accelerated and deccelerated at the axis, converts centrifugal force into linear acceleration.

in other words, any time you move an unbalanced mass, such as your arm, on an axis, you are breaking all the sacred "laws" of so called physics, namely,

law of action and reaction
law of conservation of angular momentum
and law of conservation of energy

or to put it more simply, you can literally swim in space

your mind will probably resist this, but how can it be, there must be a back reaction as you slow the mass down, but no, if mass if slowed down at the axis, inertia of the arm is converted into heat or magnetic breaking, no reaction.

consider also a fluid solution. imagine a circular pipe, bottom half 4 times the diameter of the upper, there is a pump inside the system,

in short, centrifugal force will be 4 x greater in upper part despite the fact that volume of water is 4 times less.

this is due to venturi effect (continuity principle), that water in narrower part speeds up proportionally to how much narrower pipe is (https://youtu.be/UJ3-Zm1wbIQ?t=97 ) and a fact that centrifugal force is proportional to velocity squared.

here calculate for yourself http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

of course increase of velocity means more friction and very low friction tube must be used, like electropolished stainless steel

of course, such design is not the best cause volume of water in bottom part is too big, this can be avoided using 45 degree knee due to a bernouli's principle, that is, that water loses pressure as it enters narrower part. as it exits into the wider part inertia is converted into static pressure (acting on all sides of the pipe) and there is no backward reaction.

picture below how it could be made

there are also other approaches to water inertial drives, like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIri1tTuaqU
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on August 25, 2020, 08:01:49 PM
just to add to anyone questioning the water principle i described above.. there was on keeynet.com an account i can no longer find, also site is down since owner died.

account said a guy was driving on a mountain road somewhere in us, suddenly a saucer landed in front of him. from it emerged if i remember correctly 2 ordinary americans, they asked him if he has water to share. he said yes if they allow him to peek inside. they agreed.

inside he saw a tube or a pipe going all around the circumference of the saucer and this pipe was every so often narrowing upward then again expanding downward.

the problem with this system is how strong the pump has to be to achieve sufficient velocity of water or whatever fluid they used to lift itself and the craft.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 29, 2020, 03:13:20 PM
To nix85.
---------------------------
Hi nix85,
Thank you for your replies.
1) Please give us some time to consider carefully your posts.
2) Please follow our discussion in https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum. Starts to become really interesting!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on August 30, 2020, 03:59:18 PM
To nix85.
--------------------
Hi nix85,
1) Need some more time to consider carefully your last posts.
2) Please follow our discussion in https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 05, 2020, 12:37:56 PM
Please look again at besslerwheel.com/forum. An interesting discussion occurs in this forum. Some people there try constantly to imitate ignorance and stupidity. The latter is an elementary manipulation method and because of this we suspect these people for being agents of the BIG MAFIA. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 12, 2020, 02:36:38 PM
A hot discussion occurs in besslerwheel.com/forum. Please follow it, if you like.


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 19, 2020, 04:51:36 PM
Please look again at the interesting discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. The agents of the big mafia (or may be these people are simply stubborn and ambitious ignorants) do their best to distort obvious facts. Very interesting! 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on September 26, 2020, 04:08:05 PM
Please keep following the discussion at besslerwheel.com/forum.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 04, 2020, 04:40:28 PM
Please follow the interesting discussion between ME and George1 in besslerwheel.com/forum. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 18, 2020, 05:43:04 PM
Keep an eye on our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. The title of the topic is just the same.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 24, 2020, 01:34:42 PM
Deep silence again?
========================
Please keep an eye on our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on October 31, 2020, 10:10:01 AM
Please look again at our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. Seems to be intersting.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 07, 2020, 03:51:01 PM
1) Any comments, objections, recommendations?
2) A hot discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. Our opponents in this forum are ME and agor95. Please follow the discussion, if you like. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 14, 2020, 11:48:38 AM
A copy of our last post in besslerwheel.com/forum is given below. The title of the topic is the same. Some members of besslerwheel.com/forum simply reject the third Newton's law in order to save the law of conservation of mechanical energy and/or the law of conservation of linear momentum. (Are these people criminals? Or idiots)   
=========================
To ME.
---------------------------------------
YOU ARE NOT READING MY POSTS AT ALL! STOP IMITATE IGNORANCE! ARE YOU AN AGENT OF THE BIG MAFIA?
I AM EXPLAINING AGAIN SOME SIMPLE THINGS. KEEP IN MIND MY PREVIOUS POSTS.
--------------------------------
1) The experiment below is carried out in a space station under weghtlessness conditions.
--------------------------------
2) We can always choose a suitable combination of (1) sizes, masses and inertia moments of bodies 1 and 2 and (2) a spring, for which if the spring contracts, then an astronaut would see that (a) the longitudinal axis of symmetry of the spring is motionless, (b) the distance between the centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2 decreases, (c) each of the two identical dynamometers registers a force of 10 N, (d) body 1 rotates at an angle α and (e) body 2 rotates at an angle β.
---------------------------
(Note 1. The centers of rotation of bodies 1 and 2 are their centers of mass, respectively. Besides bodies 1 and 2 rotate in the same direction, let's say clockwisely.)
---------------------------
(Note 2. The force of 10 N, registered by each of the above mentioned two identical dynamometers, does not depend on decreasing of the distance between the centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2. This is because we use a spring of characteristic 4. Please refer to our previous posts.)
---------------------------
3) In one word, a constant force of magnitude of 10 N is applied to the center of mass of body 1 and is directed to the center of mass of body 2. At the same time another constant force of the same magnitude of 10 N is applied to the center of mass of body 2 and is directed to the center of mass of body 1. Under the action of these two forces the centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2 move one to another in a straight line (the common line of action of the two forces coincides with the longitudinal axis of symmetry of the spring) and at the same time rotate clockwisely at angles α and β, respectively.
------------------------------
4) Having in mind the text above can we conclude that body 1 exerts force G on body 2 and body 2, on its behalf, exerts force - G on body 1 as forces G and - G are equal in magnitude (10 N) and opposite in direction? Can we accept the validity of equality |G| = |-G| = 10 N = const.?
-----------------------------
(Note 3. Symbol G can be replaced by any of the symbols F, K, L, M, etc.; we can choose any capital Latin letter.)
-----------------------------
I hope that all of us here in this forum are honestly seeking for the truth and none of us here is arguing because of arguing itself.
-----------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George1
======================
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 16, 2020, 11:08:48 AM
A hot discussion occurs in besslerwheel.com/forum. The agents of the BIG MAFIA, supported by some random ignoramuses (arguing because of arguing itself), are doing their best and are making desperate efforts to smash the third Newton's law to smithereens in order to save the law of conservation of energy and/or the law of conservation of linear momentum. But how to reject an obvious truth?
---------------------------
The copies of our last two posts in besslerwheel.com/forum are given below. The title of the topic is the same.
===================================
===================================
POST 1.
-------------
To ME.
--------------------------------
I have mentioned many times already that you are not reading carefully my posts (if reading them at all). YOUR ANIMATION DOES NOT PRESENT THE SITUATION CORRECTLY. THE RAMP AND THE BALL ARE FIRMLY ATTACHED ONE TO ANOTHER THUS FORMING ONE UNITED WHOLE, WHICH IS CALLED BODY 2. SO CORRECT YOUR ANIMATION!
--------------------------------
Further let us split the text of our last post into several sub-steps. Sub-step 1, which is given below, is limited/surrounded up and down by double dashed lines.
==================
SUB-STEP 1
1) The experiment below is carried out in a space station under weghtlessness conditions.
--------------------------------
2) We can always choose a suitable combination of (1) sizes, masses and inertia moments of bodies 1 and 2 and (2) a spring, for which if the spring contracts, then an astronaut would see that (a) the longitudinal axis of symmetry of the spring is motionless, (b) the distance between the centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2 decreases, (c) each of the two identical dynamometers registers a force of 10 N, (d) body 1 rotates at an angle α and (e) body 2 rotates at an angle β.
---------------------------
(Note 1. The centers of rotation of bodies 1 and 2 are their centers of mass, respectively. Besides bodies 1 and 2 rotate in the same direction, let's say clockwisely.)
---------------------------
(Note 2. The force of 10 N, registered by each of the above mentioned two identical dynamometers, does not depend on decreasing of the distance between the centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2. This is because we use a spring of characteristic 4. Please refer to our previous posts.)
===================
Question: Do you accept the validity of the above written SUB-STEP 1?
If yes, then you have to correct your animation for a second time, that is,
the spring must be motionless.
If not, then why?
==================================
==================================
POST 2.
----------------------
An addition to our last post. More precisely, the longitudinal axis of symmetry of the contracting spring must be motionless. Correct your animation!
=================================
=================================
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 17, 2020, 10:00:22 AM
Please follow our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 20, 2020, 10:59:18 AM
Any comments, opinions, recommendations? Please follow our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 22, 2020, 04:48:36 PM
Some questions, recommendations, opinions?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 23, 2020, 01:12:16 PM
Deep silence again?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 24, 2020, 10:16:42 AM
Please follow the discussion on the same topic (the same title of the topic) in besslerwheel.com/forum. A member of this forum promised to make a third animation, which would help to clafify the situation.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 27, 2020, 10:20:48 AM
Please follow the discussion on the same topic (the same title of the topic) in besslerwheel.com/forum. A member of this forum promised to make a third animation, which would help to clafify the situation. We are looking forward this third animation.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 27, 2020, 03:54:49 PM
besslerwheel.com/forum is full of agents of the big mafia who do their best to reject obvious truths. Tragedy!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on November 28, 2020, 01:49:36 PM
Please follow our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. The same topic and the same title. Seems to be interesting. A gang of professional rejectors against a single hero warrior. :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 03, 2020, 10:55:48 AM
Interesting discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. Please follow it if you like.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 06, 2020, 04:17:42 PM
Deep silence again? Any comments, questions?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 08, 2020, 11:46:58 AM
Please follow our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. Below is a copy of our last post there. (The copy is surrounded/limited up and down by double dashed lines.
===========================================
To ME.
--------------------------------------------
The link below describes how the experiment (and the related possible animation) has to take place. The link below contains four drawings, that is, these are Fig. 1A, Fig. 1B, Fig. 2A and Fig. 2B.
--------------------------------------------
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2020/12/2020_fig1-2.pdf
---------------------------------------------
1) Firstly please look at Fig. 1A.
---------------------------------------------
1 - 1) The red block is called body 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1 - 2) The green ramp and the blue cube are firmly attached one to another thus forming one united whole, which is called body 2.
-------------------------------------------------
1 - 3) The center of mass of body 1 coincides with its geometric center.
--------------------------------------------------
1 - 4) The center of mass of body 2 coincides with the geometric center of the blue cube.
--------------------------------------------------
1 - 5) A spring of characteristic 4 (please look at our previous posts) is attached to the centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2, respectively.
--------------------------------------------------
1 - 6) A straight (dashed) line "a" connects the center of mass of body 1 to the center of mass of body 2. The straight line "a" has the following 2 properties.
-------------------------------------------------
1 - 6 -1) The straight line "a" is the longitudinal axis of symmetry of the spring.
-------------------------------------------------
1 - 6 - 2) The straight line "a" is motionless, that is, it does not move sideways and/or does not rotate at any angle. Actually we illustrate here the point of view of an observer, who is motionless with respect to the straight line "a". In other words, this is the point of view of an observer, who is fixed to (with) the straight line "a".
-------------------------------------------------
1 - 7) The experiment is carried out in a space station under weightlessness conditions. Friction is negligible.
-------------------------------------------------
1 - 8) The sliding contact between the red block and the green ramp is never lost, that is, while sliding relative one to other the red block and the green ramp are always in contact.
-------------------------------------------------
2) Let us now allow the spring to contract. (Please look at Fig. 1B.) The contraction of the spring generates 4 results, which take place simultaneously.
-------------------------------------------------
2 - 1) Body 1 covers the distance "k".
-------------------------------------------------
2 - 2) The centers of mass of bodies 1 and 2 approach each other while moving on the straight line "a".
-------------------------------------------------
2 - 3) Body 1 rotates clockwise at some angle α. The related center of rotation is the center of mass of body 1.
-------------------------------------------
2 - 4) Body 2 rotates clockwise at some angle β. The related center of rotation is the center of mass of body 2.
--------------------------------------------
3) Please look at Figs. 2A and 2B. The experiment here is just the same with the only difference that now (a) the blue cube is bigger, (b) the related angles of rotation are smaller and (c) the distances, traveled by the two centers of mass (while moving on the straight line "a" and while approaching each other), are smaller too. In one word, the bigger the blue cube, the smaller the related angles of rotation and the smaller the distances, traveled by the two centers of mass (while moving on the straight line "a" and while approaching each other).
---------------------------------------------
Note 1. The sizes of the red block and the sizes of the green ramp do not change and remain constant. The same for distance "k", that is, k = const.
---------------------------------------------
Note 2. Figs. 1A and 2A illustrate the starting positions of the experiments and Figs. 1B and 2B illustrate the final positions of the experiments.
--------------------------------------------
4) What is the couple of forces, which causes the combined motion (straight-line motion + rotary motion) of bodies 1 and 2? These two forces (let us call them G and -G (or whatever capital Latin letter you choose)) are opposite in direction and equal in magnitude. The common line of action of these two forces is the straight line "a". Force G is applied to the center of mass of body 1 and is directed to the center of mass of body 2. Force -G is applied to the center of mass of body 2 and is directed to the center of mass of body 1. And the situation does not change and remains the same if the blue cube is bigger (or much bigger) than the green ramp and the red block.
----------------------------------------------
Shall we do the animation now in accordance with the four drawings and the related text above?
Everything seems to be clear now, doesn't it?
Looking forward to your answer.
===========================
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 12, 2020, 03:47:01 PM
Interesting discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. Below is a copy of our last post there. (The copy is surrounded/limited up and down by double dashed lines.)
===========================================
Hi ME.
------------------------
Thank you for your reply.
------------------------
1) Everything you have written is correct.
------------------------
2) In order to avoid the system to behave like a pendulum we put some (partially or entirely) inelastic stop at the end of the distance k.
------------------------
3) But the focus of our research is not focused on problems related to the previous items 1 and 2. Please focus on the following aspects of the situation.
-----------------------
3A) Fixed (to the screen of the animation) and motionless straight line "a". EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!
----------------------
3B) Simultaneous straight-line and rotary motions of bodies 1 and 2 while their two centers of mass move on the straight line "a" under the influence of the contracting spring.
-----------------------
3C) Direction and magnitude of each of the two forces, which are applied to the two centers of mass/to the two ends of the spring. (If each of the two ends of the spring is equipped with a dynamometer, then what would be the readings of each dynamometer? (The two dynamometers are identical.)
----------------------
Looking for ward to your answer
======================================
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 16, 2020, 01:11:19 PM
A copy of our last post in besslerwheel.com/forum. The copy is surrounded/limited up and down by double dashed lines. The same topic and the same title.
=========================
To ME.
----------------------------------
Hi ME,
1) Negligible friction. Weightlessness conditions.
2) Two bodies.
3) Two centers of mass.
4) Two ends of a spring.
5) Two forces, (a) which cause the motion of bodies 1 and 2, (b) which are opposite in direction and equal in magnitude, (c) which have a common line of action (this is the straight line "a") and (d) which are applied to the two centers of mass, respectively.
6) Two identical dynamometers, which are attached to the two ends of the spring (to the two centers of mass), respectively.
----------------------------
Question: What would be the readings of the two identical dynamometers (a) while the spring contracts and (b) while covering (SOLELY AND ONLY!!!!) distance "k" bodies 1 and 2 slide (without losing contact) relative one to other?
----------------------------
Answer: The readings of the two identical dynamometers would be absolutely identical (as this fact does not depend on sizes, masses and inertia moments of bodies 1 and 2).
----------------------------
As if even without any animation everything seems to be clear enough from Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B and from the related texts. (It's better to have an animation, of course.)
-----------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 17, 2020, 11:39:03 AM
Any comments/questions?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 21, 2020, 03:59:59 PM
Please follow our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. The same topic and the same title.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 23, 2020, 01:19:18 PM
Please follow our discussion in besslerwheel.com/forum. The same topic and the same title. There are two obvious and most active agents of the official science mafia there. These are ME and Tarsier79. I am shocked by their desperate efforts to reject obvious truths. Terrific! 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 26, 2020, 04:14:21 PM
ME and Tarsier79 from besslerwheel.com/forum are extremely stubborn manipulators. These two obviously get good money in order to cheat and manipulate the audience. As a counter-attack here is our last post there. (This last post is given below the double dashed line.)
===============================================
1) It is a real obvious fact that each of the two identical dynamometers would register one and same force G in Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B.
2) The validity of the above item 1 directly leads to the validity of steps 1, 2, 3, 4 and 4a, published in some previous posts of ours.
3) The validity of the above item 2 directly leads to the validity of our first post of . The zigzags generate mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. The final result is a mechanical OU device combined with a reactionless drive. Simple, clear and understandable.
----------------------------------------------------
How many years are necessary for a simple obvious truth to win public recognition? 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? As if human race is on its road to perdition.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on December 26, 2020, 04:25:54 PM
1) It is a real obvious fact that each of the two identical dynamometers would register one and same force G in Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B.
2) The validity of the above item 1 directly leads to the validity of steps 1, 2, 3, 4 and 4a, published in some previous posts of ours.
3) The validity of the above item 2 directly leads to the validity of our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 pm. The zigzags generate mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. The final result is a mechanical OU device combined with a reactionless drive. Simple, clear and understandable.
----------------------------------------------------
How many years are necessary for a simple obvious truth to win public recognition? 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? As if human race is on its road to perdition.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 03, 2021, 03:50:05 PM
Ok. I see that it is difficult for some people here to imagine what really happens. That is why we are preparing now a precise computer simulation and animation of the zigzag concept (half a zigzag only for an easier understanding). It will take some time. Please be patient. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 04, 2021, 02:44:37 PM
We are preparing now a precise computer simulation and animation of the zigzag concept (half a zigzag only for an easier understanding). It will take some time. Please be patient.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 05, 2021, 01:15:09 PM
Our precise computer simulation and animation of the zigzag concept (half a zigzag only for an easier understanding) is under construction. It will take some time. Please be patient.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 08, 2021, 10:40:52 AM
Our zigzag concept simulation/animation is under construction. It will take some time to prepare it in a precise manner.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 09, 2021, 12:46:55 PM
Our computer simulation and animation of the zigzag concept is under construction. It will take some time. Please be patient.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 11, 2021, 02:40:54 PM
We keep working on our computer simulation and animation of the zigzag concept. It will take some time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 12, 2021, 03:09:00 PM
Our zigzag concept simulation/animation is under costruction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 13, 2021, 03:54:17 PM
We are preparing now our zigzag concept simulation/animation. It will take some time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 14, 2021, 10:44:25 AM
I am disclosing here a simplest to build inertial drive.

It's just a double pendulum that oscillates within ~90°.

Oscillation is limited with springs on the side walls.

If there was just one pendulum, whole frame would of course be pushed in the opposite direction but since there are two pendulums going in opposite directions against same frame, frame remains in place.

What is left is pure linear pull due to asymmetrical centrifugal force.

This is an example of free energy cause we are using reactive power (compression and decompression of the spring/band) to do real work (linear acceleration).

Another way to do this is to accelerate and decelerate pendulums at the axis, like so https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0

But this is more complicated. Springs are the simplest way to demonstrate the principle.

This device, if you use good springs that can store enough energy can easily lift whole device against gravity.

See a mouse trap lift itself, watch with 0.25x speed,

https://youtu.be/VZqwvGhoHKU?t=219  (https://youtu.be/VZqwvGhoHKU?t=219)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 18, 2021, 02:32:59 PM
To nix85.
----------------------------------
Thank you for your post.
Seems to be an interesting conception. Would you give us some time to consider it carefully? (We cannot open the second link.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 18, 2021, 02:34:32 PM
Our simulation/animation is under costruction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 18, 2021, 03:11:18 PM
Strange you can't open the second link, works fine for me.

https://youtu.be/VZqwvGhoHKU?t=219 (https://youtu.be/VZqwvGhoHKU?t=219)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 19, 2021, 02:28:25 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------
It's OK now. Please give us some time to consider the concept carefully and thoroughly.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 19, 2021, 02:29:43 PM
Our zigzag simulation/animation is under costruction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 20, 2021, 02:52:58 PM
This guy almost gets it but he is under delusion that he needs to counterrotate the base.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bReKEKpoyjo

Shipov device, notice it accelerates until pendulums cross the 180°.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI

Also this Polish guy, this is real, altho he never shown the video of it. Whether intentionally or not this is a rip off of this patent

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040159090

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIri1tTuaqU

Just one problematic thing he says in the video that centrifugal force pushes the liquid into another wheel through sieve, yea on the right side, but also on the left in the wrong direction. I guess this is where electromagnet and ferrofluid comes to play.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 20, 2021, 03:16:22 PM
To nix85.
---------------------------------
Hi there,
Thank you for your post.
Well, it seems to be workable at first sight. At the same time however this (no doubt!) original concept as if needs some more careful analysis. Please give us some more time to think over it and make some additional calculations. (The theoretical construction of this device is not very simple, isn't it?)   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 20, 2021, 03:19:30 PM
Our zigzag simulation/animation is under costruction. It is not very easy to prepare it correctly.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 20, 2021, 03:20:39 PM
Proof of concept device from last page is simple to build.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 20, 2021, 03:25:47 PM
Notice at 1:09 machine is like 10cm in the air. Why do you think it selfdestructs. Brick first lifts it in the air and then slams it against cement at more than 2g.

https://youtu.be/vROdVsU_K80?t=65

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 20, 2021, 03:42:29 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
1) About your first post. Ok, we will follow your instructions to consider carefully the last page. Please give us some time to consider it carefully.
2) About your second post. The same appeal --  please give us some time to consider it carefully.
3) Anyway my respect to your enthusiasm! :) Your posts are really very interesting! You obviously belong to our inventors' brotherhood! Would you join our team? (Not pressing, only suggesting. :))
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 20, 2021, 03:47:43 PM
Consider also this idea of mine, i copy paste from original thread. Just to add, toroid is not the best solution, halftoroid is. With toroid there is too much water in the wider part, wider part must be as short as possible to reduce the weight.

https://overunity.com/18599/water-inertial-drive/

i shared this on other thread but i think it deserves it's own.

principle is simple. imagine a circular pipe, bottom half 4 times the diameter of the upper, there is a pump inside the system,

in short, centrifugal force will be 4 x greater in upper part despite the fact that volume of water is 4 times less.

this is due to venturi effect (continuity principle), water in narrower part speeds up proportionally to how much narrower pipe is (https://youtu.be/UJ3-Zm1wbIQ?t=97 ) and centrifugal force is proportional to velocity squared.

let's say 5 liters is enclosed in the tube, since upper half is 1/4 diameter, there are 4 liters in bottom half and 1 liter in upper half.

let's say pump is pushing bottom part water at 1m/s, this means water in upper part moves at 4m/s.

let's say radius of the circle is 0.5m

let's calculate the centrifugal force http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

for 4 liters at 1m/s force is 8N or 0.8kg.

for 1 liter at 4m/s force is 32N or 3.2kg.

or constant 2.4kg, but since only at the center force is pure y component it is 1/2 or 1.2kg average up


and

for 4 liters at 2.5m/s force is 50N or 5kg.

for 1 liter at 10m/s force is 200N or 20kg.

or constant 1/2 x 15kg = 7.5kg up

etc

of course increase of velocity means more friction and very low friction tube must be used, like electropolished stainless steel, but principle is clear and should be tested.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 20, 2021, 03:49:36 PM
Tnx, George. I am already a part of the team here, at disposal to help in any way i can.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 20, 2021, 03:55:49 PM
Also regarding this water based inertial system, there was an article on KeelyNet.com i can no longer find on waybackmachine.

It was a report from a guy somewhere in US, he was driving his car in mountainous area, suddenly a saucer landed on the road in front of him.

Occupants were regular Americans, they asked him for water. He agreed to give if he can inspect the ineterior.

Inside, he saw a pipe going all around the outer wall of the saucer and periodically going up narrowing and then going back down widening again.

This is the same thing as my idea. The thing is water speeds up in narrow parts and slows down in wider.

On the way down momentum of water converts into static pressure, that is why there is no reaction downward, only up pull due to fast water in narrow pipe.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 20, 2021, 04:32:52 PM
To nix85.
----------------------------
Thank you, nix85! Thank you, brother-inventor! Thank you for your interesting posts! You are already a member of our team! I will write to you in the nearest future! Meanwhile if you find some interesting additional information, then please share it with us!
Regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 21, 2021, 09:46:10 AM
To nix85.
-------------------------------------
Hi there,
1) We discussed in our team the possibility of making a computer simulation/animation of this rotation principle. The latter however is much more sophisticated and much more difficult for a possible computer simulation (if compared to the zigzags).
2) But we must not give up, I guess. Some time ago we came upon some companies whose declarations were that they could realize a computer simulation of any real mechanical process. So may be it's worth to think over the possibility of engaging such a company for a possible realization of a computer simulation/animation of the rotational principle. What is your opinion? 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 21, 2021, 10:29:57 AM
I already linked to animation as good as animation can be, perfect demonstration of the basic principle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0

There's no need for animations, just understanding that when you swing your arms in front of you, you are accelerated forward without reaction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 21, 2021, 10:39:01 AM
OK, I agree. My personal opinion is that this machine is workable. But let us wait for some other team's members of ours to make some calculations. We'll be in touch.
Regards,
George   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 22, 2021, 02:56:05 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
Could we install the device on a toy-boat of length of, let's say, 50 cm? To see what would happen? (Only giving small ideas.)
Regards,
George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Paul-R on January 22, 2021, 03:45:00 PM
I already linked to animation as good as animation can be, perfect demonstration of the basic principle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0)

There's no need for animations, just understanding that when you swing your arms in front of you, you are accelerated forward without reaction.

Surely, you are up against Newton's 3rd Law.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 23, 2021, 02:58:46 PM
To Paul-R.
-------------------------------------------
As if there is some hidden potential in this rotational principle however. Let us consider it carefully and thoroughly and let us not be in a hurry to reject it immediately.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 24, 2021, 01:06:15 PM
1) No comments related to the rotational principle?
2) Our simulation/animation is under construction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 25, 2021, 12:45:53 PM
Sit in an office chair, keep your back straight, swing two masses in front of you in opposite direction. You will be pulled as if someone pushed you.

Do it on water, ice, oil or free space, same effect.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 25, 2021, 01:24:45 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------
Hi brother-inventor,
It's always a pleasure to correspond with you! :)
So let us do it! Are the two masses equal or differ in value? 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 26, 2021, 01:33:29 PM
To nix85.
--------------------------------
Some colleagues and I tried with an office chair according to your instructions, but we failed. May be we did not do things in the proper manner. Would you be so polite to describe in detail your office chair experiment? How exactly to do it? 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 27, 2021, 03:56:21 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
Where did you disappear, dear colleague? Would you be so polite to describe in detail your office chair experiment? How exactly to do it?
Because in our case something goes wrong.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on January 29, 2021, 03:22:30 PM
A member of our team, who is an expert in theoretical and applied mechanics, started writing formulas related to the office chair experiment. Well, the mathematics behind this rotational phenomenon is quite sophisticated. It will take some time to get some correct initial theoretical results.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on January 29, 2021, 03:29:55 PM
body movement freedom degrees and physical translation : rotatory,translatory,linear

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirouetteneffekt (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirouetteneffekt)
rotational

and

translational to linear
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapult (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katapult)
https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/hew06.sci.phys.maf.trebuchet/energy-transfer-in-a-trebuchet/ (https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/hew06.sci.phys.maf.trebuchet/energy-transfer-in-a-trebuchet/)

to feel what they mean :
go straight with two plastic bags,empty,in each hand one

go straight with two plastic bags ,filled with water or sand,in each hand one

a.arms with empty/filled bags down
b.arms with empty/filled bags moving to front and back
forefront/ward force and backward =counter force

Force positive and/or negative scalar and vector arrows !

                             or : one arm positive arrow and other negative arrow  ,experimenting !

human                                       Trebuchet
" A massive counterweight at one end of a lever falls because of gravity, causing the other end of the lever to rise and release a projectile from a sling. ..."                                                       effect

learning by doing ! ;)


"Trebuchet"-analog application and prototype :
 https://www.yumpu.com/de/document/read/20184764/otto-stein-die-zukunft-der-technik-pdf (https://www.yumpu.com/de/document/read/20184764/otto-stein-die-zukunft-der-technik-pdf)
page 30

http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0904S25-30.pdf (http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0904S25-30.pdf) Felix Wuerth trials and experiments,financial fiasko
theories :
http://www.evert.de/ap0604.htm (http://www.evert.de/ap0604.htm)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on January 30, 2021, 01:24:44 PM
I did not do it, one woman did it with two heavy swords. I told her keep your back straight and just swing them in front of you horizontally in opposite directions.

She and the chair were pulled forward.

I can't believe this simplest of ALL natural phenomena is still not recognized.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 01, 2021, 12:48:15 PM
To lanca IV.
-------------------------------
Hi there,
Learning by doing! Well said! Perfectly agree with you! :)
-------------------------------
The last three links of your last post are written in German. No member of our team speaks German. How to translate these three texts in English? Aren't there some English versions/translations of these texts?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 01, 2021, 12:53:14 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------------
Very interesting! Some pictures and/or videos related to this two-swords experiment? To copy and repeat it one-to-one?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 02, 2021, 01:59:43 PM
To nix85.
--------------------------------------
Some instructional pictures and/or videos related to this two-swords experiment? May be there is some secret here? Маy be it is better if we аsk a professional athlete to carry out this rotational experiment?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 02, 2021, 02:03:01 PM
To lanca IV.
---------------------------------
Some English versions/translations of the three links' texts? Seems to be interesting, but no member of our team speaks German.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on February 02, 2021, 02:05:55 PM
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.evert.de/ap0604.htm (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.evert.de/ap0604.htm)


this pdf http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0904S25-30.pdf (http://www.borderlands.de/net_pdf/NET0904S25-30.pdf)

 to cut each page  = too large for the translator https://translate.google.com/?hl=de (https://translate.google.com/?hl=de)
for example first page :

As can be seen from the introductory texts by Würth AG, the focus of their research and development work is on the generation of energy from gravity, centrifugal force and inertia1. The inertia-active swing systems developed by Felix Würth are intended to utilize the effects of self-acceleration, as they also occur in cyclones, hurricanes and tornadoes. According to his theory, such machines vibrate in an open natural system and resonate with gravity. In the first phase, various types of gearboxes were developed that achieve a power boost of 200% and more. The inventor assumes that amplification factors of 700% to 800% can be achieved with appropriately further developed systems. The following article shows that it is possible to achieve such effects for certain periods of time, provided that energy is temporarily stored in the system, e.g. via flywheels. Whether and to what extent an energetic effect also plays a role in addition to a verifiable increase in torque and power is an open question. Conventional scientific analyzes show that in a closed mechanical system - unlike in complex energy conversion systems such as hurricanes - generally none continuous energy input is to be expected. Since, however, not only Felix Würth, but a whole series of other inventor systems of a similar type, partly also in combination with electric motors and generators - see also the following article - have been set up and successfully tested September / October 2004 Volume No. 9, Issue No. 9 / 1025NET-Journal it cannot be ruled out that a clever combination of mechanical and electromagnetic resonance systems may involve new types of energetic energy conversion processes. Open and closed systems Felix Würth emphasizes on his website that he is very well aware that a perpetual motion machine is not possible. However, he emphasizes that the principle of the conservation of energy only applies to closed systems, but that his system is open. In physics, “open” is a system that can exchange both energy and matter (or particles) with the environment. An example of an open thermodynamic system is an open cooking pot that exchanges both energy in the form of heat (from the stove top) and matter in the form of water vapor with its surroundings. A system is defined as closed (not closed!), Which can exchange energy but not matter (or particles) with its environment. An example of a closed thermodynamic system is a pressure cooker that absorbs and radiates energy in the form of heat, but cannot give off any water vapor. A system that captures, for example, electromagnetic radiation, gravity or neutrino radiation and transforms it into another form of energy, also belongs in this category. Finally, there are also completely closed systems (at least in the imagination) that have no interaction with the environment. Such a closed or isolated system can neither exchange energy nor matter with the environment, i.e. the energy and matter present in the system remain constant. This clearly means, for example, that no volume work can be carried out on a system or that no heat exchange takes place. In technology, one speaks of a closed system when the external forces are negligibly small compared to the forces in the system. Efficiency, performance figure and "Over Unity" When assessing new types of energy machines with high efficiency, it is important to use clear terms3. We are guided by the explanations given by Dipl.-Ing. Andreas Hecht has summarized on the website "borderlands.de". In every physics book there is an explanation that the efficiency is to be understood as the ratio of the output to the input power. For reasons of convenience, efficiency is sometimes also expressed as the ratio of two (physical) jobs. Because of the inevitable losses, the efficiency is always less than one, than less than 100 percent. With the invention of the heat pump, one faced a problem: the power supplied was less than the output! Of course, no energy was 'produced' here either, but you needed a term to describe the relationship when energy is not only supplied, but by a process



 Otto Stein his book as pdf  https://www.yumpu.com/de/document/read/20184764/otto-stein-die-zukunft-der-technik-pdf
 not automatic translationable  :'( only by a manual translator typing  :P ,classical standart  ::)
or learning Deutsch or knowing someone with good Deutsch-Kenntnissen and dolmetsch-ing potential ! ;)


Sincerely
OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 02, 2021, 02:28:26 PM
To lancaIV.
-----------------------------
Thanks a lot! Need some time to consider carefully everything you have sent.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 03, 2021, 03:15:48 PM
To lancaIV.
--------------------------------
Very, very interesting! Really need some time to consider everything carefully and to understand it thoroughly.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on February 03, 2021, 04:11:43 PM
basic literature :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19850314&CC=DE&NR=3330899A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19850314&CC=DE&NR=3330899A1&KC=A1#)
The invention is based on the knowledge that there is an analogy between electrical engineering and fluid engineering. [0013]
This consists in the fact that an electromagnetic field around an arbitrarily bent wire-shaped conductor and a flow field around an arbitrarily shaped vortex thread are described by the same law, Biot-Savart's law. The quantities "increase in magnetic field strength" and "increase in speed" therefore correspond to one another. Since magnetic field strength can be concentrated by winding a current-carrying conductor into a coil, an increase in speed can also be achieved in fluid technology by winding a vortex thread into a coil. If you arrange several whibs rotating in the same direction so that their axes lie on a circle, they will rotate around the center of the circle as a result of mutual induction. The induction increases with the number of vortices. The winding speed increases and the wedged threads approach the shape of closely spaced ring vortices. The velocity field that these ring vortices induce in their interior creates the desired concentration effect.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%25C3%25A9lix_Savart (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%25C3%25A9lix_Savart)
                                                                         sonic engineering,also




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Constantinescu (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Constantinescu)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Constantinescu#/media/File:Constantinesco_Car.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Constantinescu#/media/File:Constantinesco_Car.jpg)
                                 5 hp ic engine
                             to ? KW electric motor !?


calculation I :

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fripower-elektrofahrzeuge.de%2Felektroauto-umbau-kosten%2F (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fripower-elektrofahrzeuge.de%2Felektroauto-umbau-kosten%2F)
A 30 kW electric motor can achieve a torque of 170 Nm, which roughly corresponds to a gasoline engine with a displacement of 2,000 cm³ and 95 kW (129 PS).
                                                 ( 5 hp / 129 hp ) x 30 KW = 1,162 KW nominal electric motor


calculation II :


 Re: car energy consume improvements (https://overunity.com/16706/car-energy-consume-improvements/msg487672/#msg487672)  « Reply #2 on: July 03, 2016, 03:37:14 PM »

from the austinev.org page:ic-engine:136HP=100KW ~12,5 KW electro motor
 www.austinev.org/evalbum/motor (http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/motor)
"The peak hp of an electric motor is usually 8 to 10 times its  continuous rating."


                                    ( 5 hp / 136 hp) x 12,5 KW = 0,46 KW ::) nominal electric motor


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=toribio+bellocq&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=toribio+bellocq&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search)


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=GB&NR=324598A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19300130&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=GB&NR=324598A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19300130&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#)
In general, liquids are regarded as incompressible: but all are sufficiently compressible and elastic to give rise to the following phenomena, and to transform the liquid into a kind of spring Owing to this compressibility and elasticity, the laws of acoustics in sonorous pipes are applicable to them, as are also the most recent laws of electricity as applied to wireless aerials, the suction pipe being comparable with a sonorous pipe Vibraf Price 1/-1 324,598 tion occurs in the pipe, producing a pressure wave which travels the whole length 55 of the pipe.

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=GB&NR=352453A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19310707&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=GB&NR=352453A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=3&date=19310707&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)
An action, analogous to induction inl electrotechnics, which should be called inertia, can be attained with the device g0 according to the invention by reductions of the cross-section of the liquid pipeline. An additional space. connected with the liquid pipe-line, and filled with liquid, has an effect which is analogous to 95 capacity in electrotechnies. With the device according to the invention, the media working as inertia, holding-capacity, and leakage, can be provided inl any desired number, and may be fornied 1j( so that they let through or pr oduce either only vibrations of low frequency or -only those of higher frequency, or also on the other hand only vibrations whose frequency lies between two predetermined ios values, and alter or hold up the other vibrations. For thle arraingement of these media, working as inertia, holdingcapacity (volume), and leakage, the same laws hold as in electrotechnics for the iijl arrangement of filters working 'as induction, capacity, etc. It is comparatively simple to arrange that the media employed according to the invention have only a small margin of error in relation ii5 to the desired cut-off frequency.




https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=DE&NR=102012002418A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20130814&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=DE&NR=102012002418A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20130814&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#) 

Figure 3 instead "passive windturbine" a "permanent active ..... "  ::)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on February 03, 2021, 08:38:21 PM
To nix85.
--------------------------------------
Some instructional pictures and/or videos related to this two-swords experiment? May be there is some secret here? Маy be it is better if we аsk a professional athlete to carry out this rotational experiment?

No pictures or videos, those are top secret. Yes, professional athlete is needed to perform this delicate experiment, he must wear a cooking pot on his head while doing it and chair must be precisely aligned with true north (not magnetic north) for success.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on February 03, 2021, 09:17:51 PM
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 04, 2021, 02:23:21 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------------
Ok, let us assume that the experiment works. What will be the next step?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 04, 2021, 02:25:31 PM
To NdaClouDzzz.
---------------------------
You have sent something, but it cannot be read. Send it again, please, if possible.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 04, 2021, 02:28:29 PM
Our zigzag concept simulation/animation is under construction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on February 04, 2021, 07:33:48 PM
Depends on the professional athlete, if he can keep swinging the swords while keeping the cooking pot on his head, he might theoretically reach the north pole and fall into Hollow Earth.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on February 04, 2021, 10:50:15 PM
To NdaClouDzzz.
---------------------------
You have sent something, but it cannot be read. Send it again, please, if possible.




Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 05, 2021, 03:17:53 PM
To NdaClouDzzz.
-------------------------------
Thanks for the traffic lights! :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 05, 2021, 03:24:37 PM
To nix85.
------------------------------
IT WORKS!
What will be the next step? Shall we do a bigger device, let's say, with the sizes of a small car? But as if it will not be very cheap, I guess. (At least the first prototype.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on February 05, 2021, 07:38:00 PM
Yea small car and 2 professional athletes should be enough to power the car, maybe even levitate it.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 06, 2021, 01:31:11 PM
To nix85.
-------------------------------
We (our team) are ready to help, if you need some assistance for doing the device.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on February 06, 2021, 03:40:14 PM
We just need to make sure our athletes are well fed while they swing their swords on our way to the Moon.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Paul-R on February 06, 2021, 06:27:22 PM
We just need to make sure our athletes are well fed while they swing their swords on our way to the Moon.

Usually, three shredded wheat is an impossible hill to climb, but, in this case, might be insufficent.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on February 07, 2021, 09:34:32 PM
Correction #351 number :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Constantinescu#/media/File:Constantinesco_Car.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Constantinescu#/media/File:Constantinesco_Car.jpg)
                                  5 hp ,but

https://simanaitissays.com/2018/04/01/george-constantinescu-scientist-engineer-inventor-automaker-part-2/ (https://simanaitissays.com/2018/04/01/george-constantinescu-scientist-engineer-inventor-automaker-part-2/)
like by the french 2CV,fiscal horsepower ,not physical-technical :

The Constantinesco automobile, manufactured in France 1926–1928,......
The Constantinesco automobile engine was a two-stroke design with two vertical cylinders between which nestled the torque converter. This water-cooled engine displaced a mere 494 cc and produced 5 taxable hp (http://wp.me/p2ETap-1FE).

small two cylinder engine comparison
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/19391/lot/120/ (https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/19391/lot/120/)1925 BMW 494cc R32Friz's masterwork 486cc flat-twin gave 8.5 horsepower, good for a top speed of about 60 mph, plenty for the roads of the day.

the given 170 Nm torque ic engine to convert in KW electric  is RPM dependent = velocity :

https://x-engineer.org/automotive-engineering/internal-combustion-engines/performance/power-vs-torque/ (https://x-engineer.org/automotive-engineering/internal-combustion-engines/performance/power-vs-torque/)
http://x-engineer.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Tightening-torque-at-wheel-bolt-300x270.jpg?c4395d&c4395d (http://x-engineer.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Tightening-torque-at-wheel-bolt-300x270.jpg?c4395d&c4395d)


https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/electrical-motors-hp-torque-rpm-d_1503.html (https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/electrical-motors-hp-torque-rpm-d_1503.html)

                         "full torque"

for IC engines :The full load engine torque curve Te [Nm] is characterized by four points:
T0 – engine torque at minimum engine speed
 Tmax – maximum engine torque (peak torque or rated torque)
 TP – engine torque at maximum engine power
 TM – engine torque at maximum engine speed


for electric motor "full torque" :

3450 RPM +- 170 Nm   62 KW
2000 RPM +- 170 Nm   35 KW

1750 RPM +- 170 Nm   32 KW

1000 RPM +- 170 Nm   18 KW

  500 RPM +- 170 Nm   10 KW



next :

torque definition :
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-the-torque-output-of-the-motor-unique-for-an-electric-motor-with-a-specific-power-rating (https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-the-torque-output-of-the-motor-unique-for-an-electric-motor-with-a-specific-power-rating)
maximum torque 

rated torque


When "inventors" plays with numbers,without showing these claims in real world application,like here :
https://patents.google.com/patent/DE4031920A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/DE4031920A1/en)
https://patents.google.com/patent/DE10011074A1/en (https://patents.google.com/patent/DE10011074A1/en)
A car with an electric motor (1500 watts, 4000 rpm)

 using a conventional battery-set,instead :
  "..... which gets its energy from the extra built in the engine compartment Power generator (generator with 6000 watts of power) takes and moves. .....

This ensures that a car with a low overall weight can drive up to 120 km / h
( without refueling and consumption is zero. )

Average 40 Km/h and 3000 Wh= 3 KWh  electric power consume ,okay ! Without extra appliances as load,heater et cetera !Assuming 600 Kg total weight !

Compared :
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_much_torque_is_required_to_move_a_300_kg_vehicle (https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_much_torque_is_required_to_move_a_300_kg_vehicle)
Sulaymon Eshkabilov (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sulaymon_Eshkabilov) North Dakota State University
The Electric car making 40 kmph with E-motor of 1200 W  .....

and

Martin Schulz (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Schulz11)Infineon Technologies
Dear Ambar,Here is a result of an experiment  conducted just for you:
I tried to move my personal electric vehicle at 40km/h, observing what power is needed to do so.Outcome: In even terrain the car consumes more than 3kW to maintain 40km/h.Accounting that the weight is 1200kg and power to overcome friction is four times that of a 300kg vehicle, about 1.2kW are needed simply to overcome friction.This also means, about 2kW are needed to overcome air drag.The car is Volkswagen Golf III and in case your vehicle has to achieve 40km/h with only 1200W, you would have to get down to less than half the A*cp-value.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 08, 2021, 02:26:59 PM
To lancaIV.
---------------------------------
Thanks a lot for your very, very interesting post! Please give me some time to consider it carefully.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 09, 2021, 02:55:44 PM
To lancaIV.
--------------------------------------
Your last post is very, very interesting! Keep reading.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 10, 2021, 01:50:28 PM
Our zigzag concept simulation/animation is still under construction. Please be patient. It is not easy to make everything in a proper and precise manner. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 10, 2021, 04:17:25 PM
Our zigzag concept simulation/animation is under construction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 11, 2021, 02:26:40 PM
Hi there,
Any new "crazy" mechanical idea except our OU zigzag concept? :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 12, 2021, 02:42:20 PM
To lancaIV.
---------------------------------
The Bessler wheel concept seems to be very interesting. But it has a great variety of modifications. Which is the simplest modification and where to find it? Please give some link, if possible.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 13, 2021, 01:43:39 PM
Please say a few words about the Kapanadze generator. Is there any company(or person), that sells working devices of this type?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 15, 2021, 03:52:21 PM
Is there any company(or person), that sells a working Kapanadze generator?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 18, 2021, 02:58:31 PM
Our zigzag concept simulation/animation is still under construction. But it will published here in this forum in the nearest future.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 19, 2021, 03:55:38 PM
Please have a look at the two links below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNEPcYlDENM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnKjv9hnepE
This is the basic Bessler wheel's design, isn't it?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 22, 2021, 02:31:56 PM
Any comments related to the basic Bessler's wheel concept?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 22, 2021, 05:26:38 PM
Well people would think friction would make it not work but if it has a spike of precision torque then it can work all the time even with friction, but if there is a load then it will not work, it only self sustains it self.


People know that spins of atoms alone would correspond with the Bessler wheel it self, so i view this wheel to abide by with the spin of an atom.


If you can reverse engineer how motion works then i know it can work.


I do have faith in these sorts of ideas regarding Bessler wheel by looking and reason with the obvious but the bit where it gets baffling is understanding each process.

You have to know how the atom alone can spin all the time and then apply the process idea to the bessler wheel, when i mean that processes that self sustain the atom is going to be alien with the way we know electronics because there are signs of no energy dissipation etc with what maintains the atoms spin, so if the atom can spin then this bessler wheel can spin round and round as well which would never stop.

Also the atoms keeps on spinning where there is electric resistant and all of the losses it still spins which is the atom, so what is going on, but again baffling to understand the detailed physics.

Argument or not the obvious is how the motion of the atom does spin, reason with that and why it is unaffected.

If the atom and electron is not supported by a perpetual source then why doesn't the atom or electron get wasted as in how nothing is perpetual and gets consumed away, if does not so there is an opposite of non perpetual which is perpetual, how can the electron survive and not get wasted, these are obvious signs and can be translated into the bessler wheel etc,

I am open to reason and want to hear why it wouldn't work.

Anyways use Ockham's razor reasoning and apply it to never ending spins atoms and everything else,

Occam's razor, Ockham's razor, Ocham's razor, or law of parsimony is the problem-solving principle that "entities should not be multiplied without necessity", or more simply, the simplest explanation is usually the right one.

https://i1.wp.com/marketbusinessnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Ockhams-razor-image-with-explanation-and-example.jpg?w=925&ssl=1

So the momentum of atom spin never ending translated into bessler wheel, things behind how it spins more importantly.

Ultimately is possible to have a seemingly perpetual element powered device i say, just copy how the atom spins and all of its unknown and know processes, you may end up with a device that self sustains it selfs and the more you know maybe just maybe power a load if you can see past the sustainable process, but again the detailed physics will be baffling.

I understand if mastered with how the atom spins and you apply it, it will eventually slow down and stop very understood but there is a way it can run and fully work even with friction.

I know why it would slow down and eventually stop but to solve that sort of problem there ultimately is a way for it to work and never stop spinning any educated person would know how to do exactly that, because it has a by process in friction and will not stop.

Very easy to think why it will slow down eventually and stop but i know there is a solution for that, even as what caused it to slow down and stop.

Dan




Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 23, 2021, 02:37:33 PM
To lltfdaniel1
---------------------------------
Hi Dan,
Interesting analysis, dear colleague. Need some time to consider it carefully.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 23, 2021, 02:47:55 PM
To lltfdaniel1
---------------------------------
Hi Dan,
Interesting analysis, dear colleague. Need some time to consider it carefully.
Regards,


Yes, your welcome, with your time to consider then consider the perpetual motion holder > https://leedskalnin.com/LeedskalninsPerpetualMotionHolder.html



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 24, 2021, 02:27:42 PM
To lltfdaniel1.
-----------------------------------
Hi Dan,
Hi dear colleague,
Thank you for your reply.
I will also consider very carefully the perpetual motion holder > https://leedskalnin.com/LeedskalninsPerpetualMotionHolder.html you have sent. And I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 24, 2021, 02:55:27 PM
To George,


Welcome anyways this perpetual motion holder i think is just an electro magnet, when you power it up and then disconnect, it somehow maintains it's magnetic properties with no power input whatsoever.


Apparently after 2 years of no power input it still maintained it's magnetic properties according to some youtube video.


Also apparently it works different when compared to what schools teach about electric so they cannot explain some things with this perpetual holder.


It is a good starting point so that is why i recommended the perpetual holder,


Dan



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 24, 2021, 03:13:35 PM
To lltfdaniel1.
----------------------------
Hi Dan,
Thanks a lot for your prompt reply.
1) Yes, you are absolutely right, that many of the schools teach has nothing to do with reality.
2) Yes, it is really interesting how this device maintains its magnetic properties with no power input whatsoever.
3) Can we find somewhere some instructive and detailed (more or less) instructions for how to build such a machine? Or to buy it from somewhere and test it by ourselves?
4) Is there some theoretical explanation of this phenomenon? May be some new physical effect stands behind this 2 years of no power input?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 24, 2021, 03:41:03 PM
1 - welcome
2. Indeed people on youtube know it maintains a magnetic field with no power input after input power into it and then disconnect the power input, all of them have no reason to lie otherwise it would be debunked by now.
3.I don't know where the building plans are.
4.I cannot explain but at the least from the inventor of this device actually explains what magnetic current does though however click this for an intro > https://www.leedskalnin.com/ .


You should be on this page if you click that link above so click this as well > https://i.ibb.co/grKKnyT/Screenshot-2021-02-24-at-14-39-21.png


Anyways a double helix by it self will allow excess energy from what i know.

 some videos below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=832qz3s1M-s&t=1419s > this is the video about if the pmh will work after 2 years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3STs883YHA > this video will explain what magnetic current is about























Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: gyulasun on February 24, 2021, 04:58:49 PM
To George,


Welcome anyways this perpetual motion holder i think is just an electro magnet, when you power it up and then disconnect, it somehow maintains it's magnetic properties with no power input whatsoever.

Apparently after 2 years of no power input it still maintained it's magnetic properties according to some youtube video.

Also apparently it works different when compared to what schools teach about electric so they cannot explain some things with this perpetual holder.

It is a good starting point so that is why i recommended the perpetual holder,

Dan
Hi Dan,
Yes the so called perpetual motion holder is a kind of electromagnet: you energize it with a current pulse and the core gets magnetized. However, how long it holds its magnetism depends strongly on the core material, how soft or hard iron it is made of.  You surely have heard of remanent magnetism of the different cores:  core remanence is the explanation for the perpetual motion holder.  If you suddenly pull the keeper apart, the enclosed (remanent) magnetism induces a higher singly pulse in the coil and vice versa. 

Please have a look at this youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/Raselli1/videos (https://www.youtube.com/user/Raselli1/videos)  and watch the videos like  Transformer core tests part 1  and then part 2, you will understand this more.
Gyula
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 24, 2021, 05:06:45 PM
This link is for the sceptic > https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/167356/ed-leedskalnins-perpetual-motion-holder-pmh


This is another link > https://fdocuments.in/document/edward-leedskalnin-magnetism-plus.html


seemingly it seems people on youtube have designed a collapsing field oscillator for it to power a load.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 24, 2021, 05:08:44 PM
Hi Dan,
Yes the so called perpetual motion holder is a kind of electromagnet: you energize it with a current pulse and the core gets magnetized. However, how long it holds its magnetism depends strongly on the core material, how soft or hard iron it is made of.  You surely have heard of remanent magnetism of the different cores:  core remanence is the explanation for the perpetual motion holder.  If you suddenly pull the keeper apart, the enclosed (remanent) magnetism induces a higher singly pulse in the coil and vice versa. 

Please have a look at this youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/Raselli1/videos (https://www.youtube.com/user/Raselli1/videos)  and watch the videos like  Transformer core tests part 1  and then part 2, you will understand this more.
Gyula


Thank you i will study that.

This phenomena is now explained much better for George here as well as me so without your input we would not know as you know better here anyways a link > https://www.electrical-engineering.academy/posts/the-secret-of-remanence (mind you it appears what led leedskalnin the inventor of the perpetual magnet holder it is a different electric wavelength when compared to the other wave length of this link here which is secret of remanence link.)

Seemingly magnet current right, well.. according to secret of remeance link no current is there but if you collapse all of it, current comes back out though (actual current to power a led spike until the field is gone_, i don't know but there seems to be a magnetic memory current flowing though.

However what the inventor says that the waveform is a double helix meaning it is different and i know full well you can get exceeding energy from it, because the double helix allows flow of energy to come in and out, unlike traditional electric wave forms which the understanding is more mostly based off.

Understand remanence is maybe one key to understand the overunity prospects of designs like the tpu and the like.

Those youtube videos experiment will help teach me also recommend others to watch, nicely educational for people to think outside of the box.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZV4-2pFI5M

The only thing i can see is the vital bit for free energy machines to work is regauging effect for the magic to work https://www.freeenergyplanet.biz/energy-from-vacuum/lorentz-regauging-of-the-maxwellheaviside-equations.html and http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/jap/masterprinciple.htm

Every other technique known to man won't work unless it is regauging energy.



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 26, 2021, 03:55:32 PM
To lltfdaniel1.
--------------------------
Hi Dan,
Very, very interesting posts! My respect to your ability for finding of such valuable pieces of non-standard technology information! I am starting reading your last posts immediately! And I will write to you in the nearest future!
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on February 26, 2021, 04:01:00 PM
Our simulation/animation is given below.
=========================
Firstly, please always keep in mind and please always refer to our first post of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and to the related two links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
--------------------------------------------
Secondly, our simulation/animation presentation is subdivided into three consecutive separate parts for an easier understanding.
=========================
PART 1. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/9cBGurYSryw
1) The zigzag device and the straight-line device are put together vertically one to another and are fixed motionless to a horizontal motionless plane.
2) The two blue T-shaped components start free falling together and simultaneously. Friction is negligible.
3) In the straight-line case the T-shaped blue component falls freely without any interruptions and obstacles.
4) In the zigzag case however after the blue balls enter the zigzag channel the blue T-shaped component slows down its vertical downward motion and decreases its downward vertical velocity.
5) In one word, the straight-line modification blue T-shaped component covers the distance between the highest position and the lowest position much faster than the zigzag modification blue T-shaped component.
==========================
PART 2. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/aVOfWLDrYwA
1) How to slow down the vertical downward motion (that is, how to decrease the vertical downward velocity) of the straight-line modification blue T-shaped component?
2) The answer is simple. The straight-line segment "s" is made rough (inside the channels) as the related force of friction is chosen in such a manner so that in the lowest position the linear downward velocities of the two blue T-shaped components are one and same and equal one to another.
3) In one word, the zigzags generate mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
===========================
PART 3. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/pPGPktU_kpo
The last link simply repeats the experiment, described in our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 pm and in the related two links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The zigzags generate again mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
===========================
In one word, the text above and the related links above unambiguouly show that (a) either the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct or (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct or (c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
===========================
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 26, 2021, 09:39:20 PM
Also take a look at the rodin coil > https://endalldisease.com/rodin-coil-complete-guide/
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on February 27, 2021, 12:29:30 AM
This is nice as well > https://endalldisease.com/betaray-crystal-sphere-solar-energy/
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 01, 2021, 03:35:45 PM
Let us shorten our previous explanations (of February 26, 2021, 04:01:00 PM) by jumping directly to PART 3 (and having a brief glimpse at a small section of PART 2).
----------------------------------------
So let us start our shorter explanations.
----------------------------------------
1) Firstly, please have a look for a while at PART 2 and at the related link https://youtu.be/aVOfWLDrYwA from 00:00 to 00:03. This is only for getting a notion about the limits of the segment "s", that is, how this segment "s" is situated in relation to (relative to) the zigzag section.
----------------------------------------
2) Now let us focus on PART 3 and on the related link https://youtu.be/pPGPktU_kpo . The experiment is carried out in a space station under weightlessness conditions. Friction is negligible as the only exception is the friction inside the two straight-line channels of the segment "s". (The inside surfaces of the straight-line channels of the segment "s" are made rough thus able to generate friction (and heat, respectively).)
----------------------------------------
3) The mass of each blue component is Ma.
-----------------------------------------
4) The mass of each black component is Mb.
-----------------------------------------
5) There are four couples blue ball/blue rod. Each blue ball is firmly attached to the related blue rod thus forming one united whole.
-----------------------------------------
5A) The mass of each blue ball is negligible (if compared to Ma or to Mb), but not equal to zero.
-----------------------------------------
5B) The mass of each blue rod is negligible (if compared to Ma or to Mb), but not equal to zero.
-----------------------------------------
6) From 00:00 to 00:03 the two blue components move simultaneously and uniformly. Each blue component's linear velocity is V' as V' = const. The two black components are at rest.
------------------------------------------
7) At 00:03 the four blue balls enter simultaneously (a) the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
------------------------------------------
8) From 00:03 to 00:15 the four blue balls move (a) inside the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) inside the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
-------------------------------------------
9) At 00:15 the four blue balls exit simultaneously (a) the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
-------------------------------------------
10) The force of friction inside the two rough channels of the segment "s" is chosen in such a manner (we could use for example a variable roughness and the related variable force of friction, respectively) that:
-------------------------------------------
a) the blue components decelerate in one and same manner, that is, their decelerations are one and same and equal one to another;
-------------------------------------------
b) the black components accelerate in one and same manner, that is, their accelerations are one and same and equal one to another.
-------------------------------------------
11) From 00:15 to 00:17 the two blue components move simultaneously and uniformly. Each blue component's velocity is V" as V" = const.
-------------------------------------------
12) From 00:15 to 00:17 the two black components also move simultaneously and uniformly. Each black component's velocity is V"' as V"' = const.
-------------------------------------------
13) Therefore for the "upper" zigzag modification we can write down that
(Ma) x (V') = ((Ma) x (V'')) + ((Mb) x (V''')) (1)
(1/2) x (Ma) x (V') x (V') = ((1/2) x (Ma) x (V'') x (V'')) + ((1/2) x (Mb) x (V''') x (V''')) (2)
-------------------------------------------
14) And for the "lower" straight-line modification we can write down that
(Ma) x (V') = ((Ma) x (V'')) + ((Mb) x (V''')) (1)
(1/2) x (Ma) x (V') x (V') = ((1/2) x (Ma) x (V'') x (V'')) + ((1/2) x (Mb) x (V''') x (V''')) + Q (3),
where Q is the heat, which is generated while the two blue balls move inside the two rough channels of the segment "s" in the "lower" modification.
------------------------------------------
15) It is evident that (a) the system of equations in item 13 and (b) the system of equations in item 14 cannot be true simultaneously.
------------------------------------------
16) And it directly follows from the previous item 15 that either (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct or (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct or (c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
------------------------------------------
17) Please refer, if necessary, to our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 and to the two related links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 01, 2021, 03:46:18 PM
In our last post because of some defect of the system some stupid yellow head with black spectacles replaced number eight. So the  yellow head with the black spectacles to be read as/to be replaced with number eight (item eight).   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 01, 2021, 03:51:59 PM
To lltfdaniel1.
--------------------------------
Very, very interesting links! Congratulations! Welcome to our team! :) We need enthusiasts like! :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 02, 2021, 03:38:18 PM
Some comments, opinions or recommendations, related to our post of March 01, 2021 03:35:45 PM?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 02, 2021, 03:41:12 PM
To lltfdaniel1.
-------------------------------------------
And what about the link https://endalldisease.com/hyperdrive-free-energy-gerard-morin/
Really amazing! Does this machine really work? How to build it? Some more information?
Welcome to our team! :) We need enthusiasts like you! :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 02, 2021, 05:30:52 PM
Yes that website has interesting devices,


No idea if it works, as for how to build it i know they sell kits


They sell kits for hyper drive here > https://www.hyper-drive-hv.com/


Also you can ask any question here > https://www.hyper-drive-hv.com/contact-us/

You could ask them for plans and how it is meant to work but i am willing to consider buying parts so you can put them together and with your knowledge determine if it works or not.

Always a risk if you don't know and maybe scams but i am optimistic but a little sceptical because i believe in free energy.

I am willing to buy what you need and be out of my way but it is best to know exactly how this works before i buy anything or if you need parts or you do all the parts yourself.

I know that you studied physics and taking a proper look at it and then started questioning it but you will need every detail as to how this hyper drive works which is sensible in my opinion (this is where some people start)

I don't know where to get every detail claimed and explanation for this hyper drive.

despite that there are videos to explain it but we need professional know how as to how this is supposed to work > https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Hyper+Drive+-+Gerard+Morin

Anyways... you could study about bedini motor here > https://thingiverse-production-new.s3.amazonaws.com/assets/93/06/22/d6/ec/Instructions.pdf and image of the 3 books here > https://i.ibb.co/PhLBdqh/Screenshot-2021-02-13-at-18-41-05.png

I recommend study bedini generator motor because he gives the explanations as to how it is meant to work well enough and then decide if it is bunk or not but i remember looking at a university page for the bedini generator motor and it achieved a cop over 1 for sure.

Another link about bedini > http://www.panaceatech.org/John%20Bedini%20Technology.pdf


Dan.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 04, 2021, 03:10:42 PM
Hi Dan,
Hi dear colleague,
Thanks a lot for your reply. It is always a great pleasure for me to correspond with you! :)
Your last post contains again a very interesting information. I will consider it very carefully. But meanwhile I would like to ask a question: Is it possible to buy directly this device from somewhere and then put it in your basement for example thus satisfying all energy needs of your household? Are there any households in the world which satisfy their energy needs by using this machine?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 04, 2021, 07:40:12 PM
I have looked everywhere and no i cannot find a fully assembled device.


Instead i sent the inventor an email asking for a assembled device.


Dan.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 05, 2021, 02:40:52 PM
Hi Dan,
Hi dear colleague,
1) Yes, you are absolutely right! The best approach is to get firstly an assembled device! And to test this assembled device for a certain period of time.
2) And what is the inventor's answer? When will he send to you an assembled device?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
---------------------------------
P.S. I will follow your path and will also send the inventor an email asking for an assembled device.
 
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 05, 2021, 04:12:25 PM
To George,


I am still waiting for an email from the inventor, i hope he is not too busy and responds.


Dan
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 08, 2021, 02:35:07 PM
To Dan.
-------------------------------
The same for me. Waiting for an email from the inventor.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 08, 2021, 02:46:17 PM
Please look again at our post of March 01, 2021, 03:35:45 PM. Any comments, questions, recommendations, related to this post?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 09, 2021, 02:30:51 PM
Please look again at our post of February 26, 2021, 04:01:00 PM. A copy of this post is given below.
=========================
Our simulation/animation is given below.
=========================
Firstly, please always keep in mind and please always refer to our first post of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and to the related two links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
--------------------------------------------
Secondly, our simulation/animation presentation is subdivided into three consecutive separate parts for an easier understanding.
=========================
PART 1. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/9cBGurYSryw
1) The zigzag device and the straight-line device are put together vertically one to another and are fixed motionless to a horizontal motionless plane.
2) The two blue T-shaped components start free falling together and simultaneously. Friction is negligible.
3) In the straight-line case the T-shaped blue component falls freely without any interruptions and obstacles.
4) In the zigzag case however after the blue balls enter the zigzag channel the blue T-shaped component slows down its vertical downward motion and decreases its downward vertical velocity.
5) In one word, the straight-line modification blue T-shaped component covers the distance between the highest position and the lowest position much faster than the zigzag modification blue T-shaped component.
==========================
PART 2. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/aVOfWLDrYwA
1) How to slow down the vertical downward motion (that is, how to decrease the vertical downward velocity) of the straight-line modification blue T-shaped component?
2) The answer is simple. The straight-line segment "s" is made rough (inside the channels) as the related force of friction is chosen in such a manner so that in the lowest position the linear downward velocities of the two blue T-shaped components are one and same and equal one to another.
3) In one word, the zigzags generate mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
===========================
PART 3. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/pPGPktU_kpo
The last link simply repeats the experiment, described in our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 pm and in the related two links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The zigzags generate again mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
===========================
In one word, the text above and the related links above unambiguouly show that (a) either the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct or (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct or (c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
===========================
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 09, 2021, 02:34:55 PM
Please look again at our post of March 01, 2021, 03:35:45 PM. A copy of this post is given below.
======================
Let us shorten our previous explanations (of February 26, 2021, 04:01:00 PM) by jumping directly to PART 3 (and having a brief glimpse at a small section of PART 2).
----------------------------------------
So let us start our shorter explanations.
----------------------------------------
1) Firstly, please have a look for a while at PART 2 and at the related link https://youtu.be/aVOfWLDrYwA from 00:00 to 00:03. This is only for getting a notion about the limits of the segment "s", that is, how this segment "s" is situated in relation to (relative to) the zigzag section.
----------------------------------------
2) Now let us focus on PART 3 and on the related link https://youtu.be/pPGPktU_kpo . The experiment is carried out in a space station under weightlessness conditions. Friction is negligible as the only exception is the friction inside the two straight-line channels of the segment "s". (The inside surfaces of the straight-line channels of the segment "s" are made rough thus able to generate friction (and heat, respectively).)
----------------------------------------
3) The mass of each blue component is Ma.
-----------------------------------------
4) The mass of each black component is Mb.
-----------------------------------------
5) There are four couples blue ball/blue rod. Each blue ball is firmly attached to the related blue rod thus forming one united whole.
-----------------------------------------
5A) The mass of each blue ball is negligible (if compared to Ma or to Mb), but not equal to zero.
-----------------------------------------
5B) The mass of each blue rod is negligible (if compared to Ma or to Mb), but not equal to zero.
-----------------------------------------
6) From 00:00 to 00:03 the two blue components move simultaneously and uniformly. Each blue component's linear velocity is V' as V' = const. The two black components are at rest.
------------------------------------------
7) At 00:03 the four blue balls enter simultaneously (a) the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
------------------------------------------
8) From 00:03 to 00:15 the four blue balls move (a) inside the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) inside the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
-------------------------------------------
9) At 00:15 the four blue balls exit simultaneously (a) the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
-------------------------------------------
10) The force of friction inside the two rough channels of the segment "s" is chosen in such a manner (we could use for example a variable roughness and the related variable force of friction, respectively) that:
-------------------------------------------
a) the blue components decelerate in one and same manner, that is, their decelerations are one and same and equal one to another;
-------------------------------------------
b) the black components accelerate in one and same manner, that is, their accelerations are one and same and equal one to another.
-------------------------------------------
11) From 00:15 to 00:17 the two blue components move simultaneously and uniformly. Each blue component's velocity is V" as V" = const.
-------------------------------------------
12) From 00:15 to 00:17 the two black components also move simultaneously and uniformly. Each black component's velocity is V"' as V"' = const.
-------------------------------------------
13) Therefore for the "upper" zigzag modification we can write down that
(Ma) x (V') = ((Ma) x (V'')) + ((Mb) x (V''')) (1)
(1/2) x (Ma) x (V') x (V') = ((1/2) x (Ma) x (V'') x (V'')) + ((1/2) x (Mb) x (V''') x (V''')) (2)
-------------------------------------------
14) And for the "lower" straight-line modification we can write down that
(Ma) x (V') = ((Ma) x (V'')) + ((Mb) x (V''')) (1)
(1/2) x (Ma) x (V') x (V') = ((1/2) x (Ma) x (V'') x (V'')) + ((1/2) x (Mb) x (V''') x (V''')) + Q (3),
where Q is the heat, which is generated while the two blue balls move inside the two rough channels of the segment "s" in the "lower" modification.
------------------------------------------
15) It is evident that (a) the system of equations in item 13 and (b) the system of equations in item 14 cannot be true simultaneously.
------------------------------------------
16) And it directly follows from the previous item 15 that either (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct or (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct or (c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
------------------------------------------
NOTE. Please refer, if necessary, to our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 and to the two related links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
------------------------------------------
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 09, 2021, 02:36:38 PM
1) We (our team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
------------------------------
2) Two of the above mentioned 11 technology breakthroughs (entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively) are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------
3) Our third technology breakthrough is an entirely new and revolutionary electric technology, which increases many times (twice as a minimum and more than 15 (fifteen) times as a maximum) the capacity of any standard electric battery.
------------------------------
4) As a next step we would like to sell our third technology breakthrough and/or to enter a certain kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for production of our third technology breakthrough on a large industrial scale.       


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 10, 2021, 01:38:09 PM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
=================
1) We (our team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
------------------------------
2) Two of the above mentioned 11 technology breakthroughs (entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively) are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------
3) Our third technology breakthrough is an entirely new and revolutionary electric technology, which increases many times (twice as a minimum and more than 15 (fifteen) times as a maximum) the capacity of any standard electric battery.
------------------------------
4) Our third technology breakthrough is experimentally proved. Our third technology breakthrough has a working prototype
(accompanied by a detailed description of its principle of operation).
------------------------------
5) We would like either (a) to sell our third technology breakthrough only once or (b) to enter a suitable kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for production of our third technology breakthrough on a large industrial scale.
=================
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 11, 2021, 01:08:45 PM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
=================
1) We (our team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
------------------------------
2) Two of the above mentioned 11 technology breakthroughs (entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively) are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------
3) Our third technology breakthrough is an entirely new and revolutionary electric technology, which increases many times (twice as a minimum and more than 15 (fifteen) times as a maximum) the capacity of any standard electric battery.
------------------------------
4) Our third technology breakthrough is experimentally proved. Our third technology breakthrough has a working prototype
(accompanied by a detailed description of its principle of operation).
------------------------------
5) Our third technology breakthrough is not patented. Instead we would like to sell our third technology breakthrough as a trade secret and/or to enter a suitable kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for production of our third technology breakthrough on a large industrial scale.
------------------------------
6) Contact email address: randdgroup34@gmail.com.
=================
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 11, 2021, 03:05:20 PM
To lltfdaniel1.
-------------------------------
Hi Dan,
Do you have any message from the inventor?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on March 11, 2021, 06:56:55 PM
To George,


No email so far,


Dan.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 12, 2021, 01:16:32 PM
To Dan.
--------------------------------
Same here -- no email from the inventor yet. Waiting.

George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 12, 2021, 01:27:00 PM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
=================
1) We (our team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
------------------------------
2) Two of the above mentioned 11 technology breakthroughs (entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively) are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------
3) Our third technology breakthrough is an entirely new and revolutionary electric technology, which increases many times (twice as a minimum and more than 15 (fifteen) times as a maximum) the capacity of any standard electric battery.
------------------------------
4) Our third technology breakthrough is experimentally proved. Our third technology breakthrough has a working prototype
(accompanied by a detailed description of its principle of operation).
------------------------------
5) Our third technology breakthrough is not patented. Instead we would like to sell our third technology breakthrough as a trade secret and/or to enter a suitable kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for production of our third technology breakthrough on a large industrial scale.
------------------------------
6) Besides we would like to enter a suitable kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for a practical realization and for an industrial production on a large industrial scale of our first two pieces of theoretical research, (a) which are entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" and (b) which are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------ 
7) Contact email address: randdgroup34@gmail.com.
=================
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 13, 2021, 01:32:33 PM
I'm posting this so that immense mis/disinformation in this thread does not obscure the simple and powerful TRUTH.

4th LAW OF MOTION STATES

ANY UNBALANCED MASS OSCILLATING WITHIN 180° OR LESS OR SPINNING FULL CIRCLE WITH VARYING SPEED CONVERTS CENTRIFUGAL FORCE INTO LINEAR ACCELERATION OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM

In practical terms, most simple device to make and prove this is with a board if you want with wheels but no wheels are needed, key part being the

SIDE WALLS

which constrain the oscillation to 90°. Simplest method is to use a rubber band attached to right and left sides and an oscillating arm in the middle. Make band slightly tense when at rest so that it gets a good stretch.

When released it will oscillate pulling against the sides while centrifugal force will pull the whole device forward with great force.

Of course, with just one arm there is also going to be countertorque giving whole device a spin along with linear acceleration. This is easily solved with two counterrotating arms.

This is an example of reactive power (oscillating rubber band) doing REAL WORK.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 13, 2021, 09:18:49 PM


Yes, there is slight back force first half of the oscillation cause arm with weight wants to follow shortest, linear, not circular path to the side wall, so this gives slight back push, but once arm crosses the center point now the reverse happens which pulls it forward, so these two cancel out, only forward centrifugal pull remains.

Simple satellite/drone could accelerate at 1G with milliwatts cause most power is reactive only friction losses must be compensated. At 1 g to Moon in less than 3 and half hours with half way deceleration.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 15, 2021, 04:10:16 PM
To nix85.
-------------------------------
Hi there,
4th law of motion? Sounds interesting. Please give me some time to consider in depth your two last posts. I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 15, 2021, 11:17:15 PM
Just build the device as shown, it will shoot in any direction you point it like a bullet with 0 back reaction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 16, 2021, 01:11:08 AM
If for some strange reason someone does not understand the principle, basically,

once the metal ball starts moving it wants to keep moving in a straight line at a tangent to the curve

rotating arm forces it to follow. Since it does not want to follow this curved path it pulls the arm and the axis

and the whole contrivance forward.

In other words, it is imparting linear momentum to the system without losing any momentum of it's own (apart from friction losses).
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 16, 2021, 09:23:11 AM
             I HERE PRONOUNCE THE SEARCH FOR A
           TRUE, UNQUESTIONABLE AND REPLICABLE
          OVERUNITY AND REACTIONLESS PROPULSION
                                  O V E R
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 16, 2021, 03:49:05 PM
To nix85.
-------------------------
Hi nix85,
Hi dear colleague,
I ACCEPT YOUR CONCEPT! But I really need some time to understand it completely and thoroughly. Please give me some time, if possible. :)
Regards, 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 16, 2021, 04:26:13 PM
Ofc :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 17, 2021, 01:19:18 PM
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
=================
1) We (our team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
------------------------------
2) Two of the above mentioned 11 technology breakthroughs (entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1", respectively) are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------
3) Our third technology breakthrough is an entirely new and revolutionary electric technology, which increases many times (twice as a minimum and more than 15 (fifteen) times as a maximum) the capacity of any standard electric battery.
------------------------------
4) Our third technology breakthrough is experimentally proved. Our third technology breakthrough has a working prototype
(accompanied by a detailed description of its principle of operation).
------------------------------
5) Our third technology breakthrough is not patented. Instead we would like to sell our third technology breakthrough as a trade secret and/or to enter a suitable kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for production of our third technology breakthrough on a large industrial scale.
------------------------------
6) Besides we would like to enter a suitable kind of collaboration of mutual benefit for an industrial production on a large industrial scale of our first two technology breakthroughs, (a) which are entitled "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?" and "A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1" and (b) which are released freely here in this forum.
------------------------------
7) Contact email address: randdgroup34@gmail.com.
=================
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 17, 2021, 01:36:31 PM
To nix85.
-------------------------------
Hi there,
1) We started designing a plan for building a real device/laboratory experiment, based on your instructions. But keep in mind that the realization process will take some time. It's inevitable. Some questions may appear too.
2) And here is the first question. Is there any device, which is either similar or identical to the one you have presented? (Asking this question in order to save some time and not  to start the building procedure from the very beginning.)
Regards,
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 18, 2021, 12:09:39 PM
Ofc, every inertial device is based on this same principle.

Side walls might not be the best solution, one guy tried to replicate it and he says he failed.

I'll give it a try when i get time.

My main basic approach that always works is accelerating and decelerating the unbalanced weight AT THE AXIS, similar to shipov

BUT NEVER LET THE ARMS GO BEYOND 180° or even better beyond 90°.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI

As you can see his weights go full circle and thus device curbs itself.

My idea (not really my idea, it's an old idea and it's good) is the same just you don't let them go beyond 180° EVER.

Similar to this animation i already shared https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0

When you accelerate the arms from 0 position as in picture below, device will of course accelerate forward.

As each weight crosses the half point motor must start to decelerate them so they stop at opposite side.

Key point being that as motor decelerates the arms it is experiencing back torque and back torque has nothing to do with linear acceleration, it simply tries to spin the cart, since there are two opposing back torques spin is neutralized, like in helicopter.

Centrifugal pull remains. Pure linear acceleration.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think most of you have a good understanding and sense for what centrifugal force is.

But still most of you have trouble seeing the simplicity of it's conversion to linear acceleration.

One way to resolve this is imagine yourself stationary in space, there is a mass passing by parallel to you at certain speed.

Say you throw a lasso and capture the mass as it passes by, what happens.

Of course, due to your own inertial mass, object's trajectory is now curved toward you,

You have deflected it from it's straight path and as a consequence it is now pulling you, accelerating you as it follows it's new, curved path.

What we got here is the same thing in more controlled environment.


Every vibrator is doing it, it's just that it pulls axis to one side, then another.

Pull must be contained on one side.

This is a good video that demonstrates the phenomena. As long as ball keeps oscillating on the right side, it pulls the cart to the right. That is all there is to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM9tkgjVVrI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM9tkgjVVrI)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 18, 2021, 03:21:26 PM
To nix85.
---------------------------
Hi nix85,
Hi dear colleague,
Thanks a lot for your last post! Extremely interesting!
1) About the first link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI. It is written below: ".....тормоз включен....". The latter (translated from Russian) as if means that some kind of brake is used periodically in order to eliminate the recoil. But I am not sure about this. It's a hypothesis for the present. Need some time to consider and understand completely and thoroughly everything in this link.
2) About the second link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0. Yes, this is really amazing! A few questions appear however. 
What would happen if the device is put on a small toy-boat? Or on a permanent-magnet-levitation platform like the one in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A&ab_channel=MartyMcFly? Besides would this principle of operation would work in a space station under weightlessness conditions? And if yes, then what would be the related modification?
-------------------------
What do you think about the above small questions? What is your opinion?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,   

 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 18, 2021, 07:47:49 PM
For first video brake is perfectly fine as long as braking is on the axis, no back reaction.

In space, anywhere, works perfectly.

Just keep pendulum swinging on one side, there is nothing else to it.

https://downloadhdwallpapers.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Metronome-Animated-Gif-Hot-.gif
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 19, 2021, 02:38:39 PM
To nix85.
-------------------------------
Hi nix85,
1) About the first link. A small question: The brake is used in the wheels, that support the platform, isn't it?
2) About the second link. A small question: If put on a toy-boat, then wouldn't the platform (together with the toy-boat) move in a direction opposite to the direction of motion of the ball?
-------------------------------
Please note -- NOT REJECTING ANYTHING, only asking small (and to some extent may be stupid :)) questions. But this is because this device/concept is entirely new for us for the present.
Regards, 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 19, 2021, 02:41:18 PM
We give below again a copy of our post of February 26, 2021, 04:01:00 PM.
=========================
=========================
Our simulation/animation is given below.
=========================
Firstly, please always keep in mind and please always refer to our first post of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and to the related two links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
--------------------------------------------
Secondly, our simulation/animation presentation is subdivided into three consecutive separate parts for an easier understanding.
=========================
PART 1. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/9cBGurYSryw
1) The zigzag device and the straight-line device are put together vertically one to another and are fixed motionless to a horizontal motionless plane.
2) The two blue T-shaped components start free falling together and simultaneously. Friction is negligible.
3) In the straight-line case the T-shaped blue component falls freely without any interruptions and obstacles.
4) In the zigzag case however after the blue balls enter the zigzag channel the blue T-shaped component slows down its vertical downward motion and decreases its downward vertical velocity.
5) In one word, the straight-line modification blue T-shaped component covers the distance between the highest position and the lowest position much faster than the zigzag modification blue T-shaped component.
==========================
PART 2. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/aVOfWLDrYwA
1) How to slow down the vertical downward motion (that is, how to decrease the vertical downward velocity) of the straight-line modification blue T-shaped component?
2) The answer is simple. The straight-line segment "s" is made rough (inside the channels) as the related force of friction is chosen in such a manner so that in the lowest position the linear downward velocities of the two blue T-shaped components are one and same and equal one to another.
3) In one word, the zigzags generate mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
===========================
PART 3. Please look at the link https://youtu.be/pPGPktU_kpo
The last link simply repeats the experiment, described in our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 pm and in the related two links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The zigzags generate again mechanical resistance, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
===========================
In one word, the text above and the related links above unambiguouly show that (a) either the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct or (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct or (c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
===========================
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 19, 2021, 02:42:34 PM
We give below again a copy of our post of March 01, 2021, 03:35:45 PM.
======================
======================
Let us shorten our previous explanations (of February 26, 2021, 04:01:00 PM) by jumping directly to PART 3 (and having a brief glimpse at a small section of PART 2).
----------------------------------------
So let us start our shorter explanations.
----------------------------------------
1) Firstly, please have a look for a while at PART 2 and at the related link https://youtu.be/aVOfWLDrYwA from 00:00 to 00:03. This is only for getting a notion about the limits of the segment "s", that is, how this segment "s" is situated in relation to (relative to) the zigzag section.
----------------------------------------
2) Now let us focus on PART 3 and on the related link https://youtu.be/pPGPktU_kpo . The experiment is carried out in a space station under weightlessness conditions. Friction is negligible as the only exception is the friction inside the two straight-line channels of the segment "s". (The inside surfaces of the straight-line channels of the segment "s" are made rough thus able to generate friction (and heat, respectively).)
----------------------------------------
3) The mass of each blue component is Ma.
-----------------------------------------
4) The mass of each black component is Mb.
-----------------------------------------
5) There are four couples blue ball/blue rod. Each blue ball is firmly attached to the related blue rod thus forming one united whole.
-----------------------------------------
5A) The mass of each blue ball is negligible (if compared to Ma or to Mb), but not equal to zero.
-----------------------------------------
5B) The mass of each blue rod is negligible (if compared to Ma or to Mb), but not equal to zero.
-----------------------------------------
6) From 00:00 to 00:03 the two blue components move simultaneously and uniformly. Each blue component's linear velocity is V' as V' = const. The two black components are at rest.
------------------------------------------
7) At 00:03 the four blue balls enter simultaneously (a) the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
------------------------------------------
8) From 00:03 to 00:15 the four blue balls move (a) inside the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) inside the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
-------------------------------------------
9) At 00:15 the four blue balls exit simultaneously (a) the "upper" black component's smooth zigzag channels and (b) the "lower" black component's rough straight-line channels of the segment "s", respectively.
-------------------------------------------
10) The force of friction inside the two rough channels of the segment "s" is chosen in such a manner (we could use for example a variable roughness and the related variable force of friction, respectively) that:
-------------------------------------------
a) the blue components decelerate in one and same manner, that is, their decelerations are one and same and equal one to another;
-------------------------------------------
b) the black components accelerate in one and same manner, that is, their accelerations are one and same and equal one to another.
-------------------------------------------
11) From 00:15 to 00:17 the two blue components move simultaneously and uniformly. Each blue component's velocity is V" as V" = const.
-------------------------------------------
12) From 00:15 to 00:17 the two black components also move simultaneously and uniformly. Each black component's velocity is V"' as V"' = const.
-------------------------------------------
13) Therefore for the "upper" zigzag modification we can write down that
(Ma) x (V') = ((Ma) x (V'')) + ((Mb) x (V''')) (1)
(1/2) x (Ma) x (V') x (V') = ((1/2) x (Ma) x (V'') x (V'')) + ((1/2) x (Mb) x (V''') x (V''')) (2)
-------------------------------------------
14) And for the "lower" straight-line modification we can write down that
(Ma) x (V') = ((Ma) x (V'')) + ((Mb) x (V''')) (1)
(1/2) x (Ma) x (V') x (V') = ((1/2) x (Ma) x (V'') x (V'')) + ((1/2) x (Mb) x (V''') x (V''')) + Q (3),
where Q is the heat, which is generated while the two blue balls move inside the two rough channels of the segment "s" in the "lower" modification.
------------------------------------------
15) It is evident that (a) the system of equations in item 13 and (b) the system of equations in item 14 cannot be true simultaneously.
------------------------------------------
16) And it directly follows from the previous item 15 that either (a) the law of conservation of linear momentum is not correct or (b) the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct or (c) both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously.
------------------------------------------
NOTE. Please refer, if necessary, to our first post of Sat Jul 28, 2018 12:41 and to the two related links
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 19, 2021, 03:22:58 PM
Any comments, related to our last two posts?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 20, 2021, 11:10:18 AM
To nix85.
-------------------------------
Hi nix85,
1) About the first link. A small question: The brake is used in the wheels, that support the platform, isn't it?

No, brakes must be put on flakes to prevent the bakes from sakes in case of fakes.

Quote
2) About the second link. A small question: If put on a toy-boat, then wouldn't the platform (together with the toy-boat) move in a direction opposite to the direction of motion of the ball?
-------------------------------
Please note -- NOT REJECTING ANYTHING, only asking small (and to some extent may be stupid :)) questions. But this is because this device/concept is entirely new for us for the present.
Regards,

Professional athletes move where they want.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 25, 2021, 11:56:06 AM
About the third interesting link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM9tkgjVVrI. It shows the achievements of the Serbian inventor Veljko Milkovic. The same small question: If put on a toy-boat, then wouldn't the platform (together with the toy-boat) move in a direction opposite to the direction of motion of the ball?
-------------------------------
Please note -- NOT REJECTING ANYTHING, only asking small (and to some extent may be stupid :)) questions. But this is because this device/concept is entirely new for us for the present.
Regards, 

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 25, 2021, 10:11:12 PM
Honestly, i am 50 50 if you're trolling or sincerely asking.

In case you are sincerely asking, boat example is totally irrelevant.

On a boat weight swinging to the right like in the video would indeed create waves

that would probably make boat move back while centrifugal force would pull it forward

so i guess it would oscillate in place. Again, not relevant.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 26, 2021, 05:19:17 PM
A successful Inertial Reaction Propeller must work in a variety of environments - on land and snow (or ice), on and under water, in the air, and in space.  So what a particular system will do on a small boat is a relevant question.


The slanted pendulum moves the cart as a reaction to the cart's Inertia pulling the pendulum mass into a curve.  The cart's Inertia applies an action force against the pendulum mass, and experiences an equal but opposite reaction force.  The pendulum mass experiences a resultant force.  This resultant force is attenuated, and dissipated by the perpendicular action of gravity (or a magnet under the cart). Sometimes, there is a torque effect which moves the cart backwards as the pendulum swings through a small angle, but this angle is less than that of the pendulum's total travel.  So the cart's centrifugal reaction - felt by the cart - is greater than the torque counter vector, and the cart moves forwards overall.


Another thing to consider is that when the pendulum changes direction at the bottom of it's swing, and starts back up, it's downwards momentum is released, producing a momentary downwards pulse.  This isn't obvious with the cart, but were the pendulum suspension post to be mounted on a small boat, rather than the cart, this downwards impulse would push the front of the boat down into the water a little.  Then, the floation angle will cause the boat to 'float' forwards a small distance.  This will be in addition to the centrifugal reaction movement.  Also, if the back of the boat is flat, this would inhibit the reverse torque movement.  But the boat would still move incrementally, rather than with  smooth acceleration.


You can verify the 'float' effect by kicking downwards while standing in the front of a rowboat.  The boat WILL move forward.  (edit): This forwards movement will last longer if you keep applying a downwards force by slowly rolling your chest upwards, while inhaling.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 27, 2021, 11:10:30 AM
A successful Inertial Reaction Propeller must work in a variety of environments - on land and snow (or ice), on and under water, in the air, and in space.  So what a particular system will do on a small boat is a relevant question.


The slanted pendulum moves the cart as a reaction to the cart's Inertia pulling the pendulum mass into a curve.  The cart's Inertia applies an action force against the pendulum mass, and experiences an equal but opposite reaction force.  The pendulum mass experiences a resultant force.  This resultant force is attenuated, and dissipated by the perpendicular action of gravity (or a magnet under the cart). Sometimes, there is a torque effect which moves the cart backwards as the pendulum swings through a small angle, but this angle is less than that of the pendulum's total travel.  So the cart's centrifugal reaction - felt by the cart - is greater than the torque counter vector, and the cart moves forwards overall.


Another thing to consider is that when the pendulum changes direction at the bottom of it's swing, and starts back up, it's downwards momentum is released, producing a momentary downwards pulse.  This isn't obvious with the cart, but were the pendulum suspension post to be mounted on a small boat, rather than the cart, this downwards impulse would push the front of the boat down into the water a little.  Then, the floation angle will cause the boat to 'float' forwards a small distance.  This will be in addition to the centrifugal reaction movement.  Also, if the back of the boat is flat, this would inhibit the reverse torque movement.  But the boat would still move incrementally, rather than with  smooth acceleration.


You can verify the 'float' effect by kicking downwards while standing in the front of a rowboat.  The boat WILL move forward.  (edit): This forwards movement will last longer if you keep applying a downwards force by slowly rolling your chest upwards, while inhaling.

No, it's not relevant. First of all that cart with slanted pendulum is not the most proper representation of the principle. Pendulum should be at right angle to the axis not slanted. Therefore how that particular cart would act on water is totally irrelevant.

As for the rest of your post it's just totally off, as if i did not literally draw the basic principle so a child can understand it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As long as weights swing on one side cart will accelerate in that direction even to near speed of light, in free space or any medium.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 27, 2021, 11:39:20 AM
To nix85.
---------------------------------
1) But nix85, you are sensitive as if more than necessary to even the slightest form of expressing criticism and/or doubt. Please keep in mind that this principle of operation is new for us and it is normal sometimes to ask, let's say to some extent, stupid questions. :)
2) And what about this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A ? Let us replace the toy-boat with a permanent magnet hoverboard. No waves now. The whole installation oscillating in place?
   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 27, 2021, 11:46:39 AM
To nix85.
---------------------------------
1) But nix85, you are sensitive as if more than necessary to even the slightest form of expressing criticism and/or doubt. Please keep in mind that this principle of operation is new for us and it is normal sometimes to ask, let's say to some extent, stupid questions. :)
2) And what about this link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A ? Let us replace the toy-boat with a permanent magnet hoverboard. No waves now. The whole installation oscillating in place?
 


Not sensitive but having little tolerance for (intentional?) junk that obscures the simple truth.

I stressed clearly many times already "in all mediums" and again you ask the same.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on March 27, 2021, 12:01:19 PM
To nix85.
----------------------------------
Ok. I agree. :) But what is actually your aim? To prove the concept theoretically, to prove the concept experimentally, to produce this machine on a large industrial scale? Or may be  something else? Please specify your goal, if possible.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 27, 2021, 12:14:04 PM
You love to use emojis don't you, in every single post lol.

I have no goal but to remove the veils of confusion about this simple and powerful principle which i believe has been done.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 27, 2021, 05:08:28 PM
Ofc, every inertial device is based on this same principle.

Side walls might not be the best solution, one guy tried to replicate it and he says he failed.

I'll give it a try when i get time.

My main basic approach that always works is accelerating and decelerating the unbalanced weight AT THE AXIS, similar to shipov

BUT NEVER LET THE ARMS GO BEYOND 180° or even better beyond 90°.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI)

As you can see his weights go full circle and thus device curbs itself.

My idea (not really my idea, it's an old idea and it's good) is the same just you don't let them go beyond 180° EVER.

Similar to this animation i already shared https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0)

When you accelerate the arms from 0 position as in picture below, device will of course accelerate forward.

As each weight crosses the half point motor must start to decelerate them so they stop at opposite side.

Key point being that as motor decelerates the arms it is experiencing back torque and back torque has nothing to do with linear acceleration, it simply tries to spin the cart, since there are two opposing back torques spin is neutralized, like in helicopter.

Centrifugal pull remains. Pure linear acceleration.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think most of you have a good understanding and sense for what centrifugal force is.

But still most of you have trouble seeing the simplicity of it's conversion to linear acceleration.

One way to resolve this is imagine yourself stationary in space, there is a mass passing by parallel to you at certain speed.

Say you throw a lasso and capture the mass as it passes by, what happens.

Of course, due to your own inertial mass, object's trajectory is now curved toward you,

You have deflected it from it's straight path and as a consequence it is now pulling you, accelerating you as it follows it's new, curved path.

What we got here is the same thing in more controlled environment.


Every vibrator is doing it, it's just that it pulls axis to one side, then another.

Pull must be contained on one side.

This is a good video that demonstrates the phenomena. As long as ball keeps oscillating on the right side, it pulls the cart to the right. That is all there is to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM9tkgjVVrI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM9tkgjVVrI)


@nix85 : The Second Law of Thermodynamics:  "No collection of particals can change their overall speed or direction strictly through internal forces".


The slanted pendulum has an external force (gravity).  Where's the external force with your vibrator?



https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/180991/image//
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 27, 2021, 06:09:27 PM

@nix85 : The Second Law of Thermodynamics:  "No collection of particals can change their overall speed or direction strictly through internal forces".


The slanted pendulum has an external force (gravity).  Where's the external force with your vibrator?



https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/180991/image//

External? There is no such thing as external.

I described the principle in detail with given example, study it, try it.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 27, 2021, 07:16:38 PM
I've already tried that in free fall.  There is no centrifugal force with nothing to push off against.  The mass weights move one direction, the rest of it moves the other way.  It vibrates.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 27, 2021, 11:28:22 PM
I have no idea what you tried but you sure did not understand the principle described which works always with zero exception.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 28, 2021, 12:30:25 AM
It sure didn't work with Cook's Inertial Propeller.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 01:14:48 PM
Cook claimed it worked, again irrelevant to the principle above.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on March 28, 2021, 01:39:23 PM
"... The CIP engine is not a new energy source,but a tested and proven method of converting Coriolis and centrifugal forces into linear thrust . ...",
CIP = Cook Inertial Propulsion   http://www.rexresearch.com/cookip/cookip.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/cookip/cookip.htm)

I studied the net-info about Cooks device in the End 90' and compared with Otto Steins "Die Zukunft der Technik"-engine !




http://www.rexresearch.com/cookip/cookip.htm#uarepor (http://www.rexresearch.com/cookip/cookip.htm#uareport)t

During this segment of the cycle the propellant is stopped at the expense of the forward momentum of the cart.



https://www.yumpu.com/de/document/view/20184764/otto-stein-die-zukunft-der-technik-pdf (https://www.yumpu.com/de/document/view/20184764/otto-stein-die-zukunft-der-technik-pdf)


                                       acceleration and stop -  cycle




Thrust :  weight/specific weight

Propulsion/PWM






Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 03:05:27 PM
I knew of CIP for years, here is the principle, never liked it, overly complicated and apparently not so efficient.

I do like tho how he solved the issue to change the direction the weight oscillates elegantly simply using additional rotation along it's axis. How is the weight captured by the arm not exactly sure, looks too complicated and probably wouldn't work well at higher rpm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48Ri_HjLWR4

What Cook shows in this diagram is the same thing i am showing. It's always the same principle.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on March 28, 2021, 04:06:53 PM
Referring R. Cook  : https://www.freepatentsonline.com/20080257079.pdf (https://www.freepatentsonline.com/20080257079.pdf)


http://www.dlinevitch.narod.ru/Eng/Time_Ctrl.pdf (http://www.dlinevitch.narod.ru/Eng/Time_Ctrl.pdf)


http://www.dlinevitch.narod.ru/ (http://www.dlinevitch.narod.ru/)




propulsation "start/stop"-cycle http://www.forceborne.com/FBW/index2.htm  http://www.forceborne.com/FBW/principle.htm


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 28, 2021, 06:37:38 PM
Start/stop means it jigs or it jags.  Neither of these movements can change the overall velocity, only the position.  This can't raise an orbit, only shift the phase.  But can a change in lateral position change orbital inclination?  If it can, this isn't irrelevant.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 07:52:30 PM
Eh the blindness. Again

ANY UNBALANCED MASS

1. OSCILLATING WITHIN 180° OR LESS

2. OR SPINNING FULL CIRCLE WITH VARYING SPEED

CONVERTS CENTRIFUGAL FORCE INTO
LINEAR ACCELERATION OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 28, 2021, 07:53:48 PM
External? There is no such thing as external.


Anything which is perpendicular to the plane of a rotational system is external to that system's rotation.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 28, 2021, 07:58:45 PM
Eh the blindness. Again

ANY UNBALANCED MASS

1. OSCILLATING WITHIN 180° OR LESS

2. OR SPINNING FULL CIRCLE WITH VARYING SPEED

CONVERTS CENTRIFUGAL FORCE INTO
LINEAR ACCELERATION OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM



Blind?  You forgot to say MOMENTARY.  Stopping cancels the increase.


Also, see my last post on the previous page.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 08:08:28 PM

Anything which is perpendicular to the plane of a rotational system is external to that system's rotation.

There is nothing external here. Completely sealed system can accelerate in space by simply oscillating a pendulum within 90° on the inside.

It is interacting with the spatial energy, not displacing matter or acting against "external" forces.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 08:44:26 PM

Blind?  You forgot to say MOMENTARY.  Stopping cancels the increase.


Also, see my last post on the previous page.

Yes, blind. I didn't forget anything.

"Stopping cancels the increase" lol.

Yea stopping the oscillation stops the acceleration, also sky is blue.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 28, 2021, 10:35:56 PM
There is nothing external here. Completely sealed system can accelerate in space by simply oscillating a pendulum within 90° on the inside.

It is interacting with the spatial energy, not displacing matter or acting against "external" forces.


Don't forget that when a pendulum changes direction it's momentum doesn't just disappear - it's transferred to the overall mechanism, in the reverse direction.


Can you show that the 'force' of Inertia is related to the ZPE? 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 11:19:40 PM

Don't forget that when a pendulum changes direction it's momentum doesn't just disappear - it's transferred to the overall mechanism, in the reverse direction.


Can you show that the 'force' of Inertia is related to the ZPE?

Ofc it doesn't just disappear no one said nor implied that. It is key to stop it or withdraw in a way that does not produce back reaction. Stopping it at the axis produces zero back reaction as i said many times. It produces back torque which is totally different thing. And of course inertia is related to ZPE, everything springs from it.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 28, 2021, 11:25:37 PM
I already linked to this but here it is again. https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/antigravity-drone-lge-first-in-the-world--2?fbclid=IwAR15eef813rphbWcgTphbZw-i3X4-Vd_xCvMPI6NwFsni2Ccmf1Lv90Rjgo#/ This guy is a naval mechanical engineer and he teamed up with a friend automotive engineer and after months of testing came up with working inertial drone based on ferrofluid. It is something very similar to this patent i also already linked https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040159090
I corresponded with him over the mail several times, he is completely ignorant of the basic principle described before and thinks his drone would not work in space. They got no support at all on Indiegogo probably cause people thought it was fake. Well, it's up to you to decide if it is.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 12:33:30 AM
Thanks for the two links; I am aware of claims relating to fluidic thrust.  Now and in the ancient times.


It's been an interesting discussion.  I hope I contributed something of value.


I also like to make sparks.  So I'll be around.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 12:46:54 AM
You're welcome and no worries, i like sparks.

All skepticism goes away when you grasp the simple basic principle.

So simple, so powerful.

But after all, all inertial drives are the lowest kind of reactionless propulsion.

Stone age "antigravity". They do have a purpose still.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 06:16:17 AM
PS:  The term "reactionless propulsion" is a misnomer.  With Inertia, thrust IS the reaction.  It's  "propellantless propulsion".


Or "Inertial Reaction Propulsion".
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 11:30:44 AM
Ofc thrust is reaction, and what you say now i figured many years ago.

But at the same time it is proper to call it reactioness in a sense perfectly implied

that it does not react with outside matter or force. You like to nitpick don't you,

and yet you still don't get the basic principle.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 03:38:39 PM
I've been active in this field since 1965.  I've built a dozen machines which work.  I have a levitation machine which proves non stop acceleration by constantly overcoming gravity's acceleration.  (And it doesn't use your "basic principle").


One of the biggest obstacles to having this field accepted is the word 'reactionless'.  I'm not nitpicking; I'm trying to wise everyone up, so there can be productive discussion.


Scientific circles currently consider this to be Advanced Propulsion, not because some claim there is no reaction, but because there is no propellant mass.  Even if it's low tech, with gears and pulleys.


Now tell us all about the Conservation of Momentum, and display your own lack of understanding.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 03:54:04 PM
Quote
I have a levitation machine

Funny. Let me guess, all cameras suddenly break when you try to film it.

Quote
And it doesn't use your "basic principle"

All inertial propulsion devices ever built and that ever shall be built use it.

Quote
One of the biggest obstacles to having this field accepted is the word 'reactionless'..

No it's not, everyone knows very well it just implies not reacting with outside matter or force.

Quote
Now tell us all about the Conservation of Momentum, and display an absence of understanding.

Overall energy in creation is 0, everything is conserved. As for lack of understanding it sure abounds on your side
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on March 29, 2021, 03:54:43 PM
https://www.google.com/search?q=jerry+volland+aetherforce&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&ei=sNthYMGVIK-j1fAPtKuF-Ac&oq=jerry+volland+aetherforce&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAw6DQgAEMcBEK8BELADEA06CQgAELADEAoQHjoJCAAQsAMQDRAeUPwiWM9DYPdTaAFwAHgAgAG4AYgBqQySAQM2LjmYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6yAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwjBrcmT09XvAhWvURUIHbRVAX8Q4dUDCA0 (https://www.google.com/search?q=jerry+volland+aetherforce&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&ei=sNthYMGVIK-j1fAPtKuF-Ac&oq=jerry+volland+aetherforce&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAw6DQgAEMcBEK8BELADEA06CQgAELADEAoQHjoJCAAQsAMQDRAeUPwiWM9DYPdTaAFwAHgAgAG4AYgBqQySAQM2LjmYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6yAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwjBrcmT09XvAhWvURUIHbRVAX8Q4dUDCA0)


about ZPE or https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullpunktsenergie


In the classical case, the state of lowest energy is that in which the particle is at rest at {\ displaystyle x = 0} x = 0, i.e. {\ displaystyle p = 0} p = 0. In quantum mechanics, however, the uncertainty relation between position and momentum prohibits both quantities from having exact values. The more precisely the location is known, the less precisely the impulse is known and vice versa. The zero point energy is clearly shown as the mean value of these fluctuations.

THE MEAN VALUE BETWEEN POSITION AND MOMENTUM
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 04:43:48 PM
I'm gonna share again the design i came up with, not the first who came up with it tho.

Advantage of this system is it doesn't need a ferrofluid.

There is a better way to do this with much less water in useless bottom part, but principle is the same.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

imagine a circular pipe, bottom half 4 times the diameter of the upper,

there is a pump inside the system,

in short, centrifugal force will be 4 x greater in upper part despite the

fact that volume of water is 4 times less.

this is due to venturi effect (continuity principle), water in narrower part

speeds up proportionally to how much narrower pipe is (https://youtu.be/UJ3-Zm1wbIQ?t=97 )

and centrifugal force is proportional to velocity squared.

let's say 5 liters is enclosed in the tube, since upper half is 1/4 diameter,

there are 4 liters in bottom half and 1 liter in upper half.

let's say pump is pushing bottom part water at 1m/s, this means water

in upper part moves at 4m/s.

let's say radius of the circle is 0.5m

let's calculate the centrifugal force http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/newtonian/centrifugal

for 4 liters at 1m/s force is 8N or 0.8kg.

for 1 liter at 4m/s force is 32N or 3.2kg.

or constant 2.4kg, but since only at the center force is pure y component it is 1/2 or 1.2kg average up


and

for 4 liters at 2.5m/s force is 50N or 5kg.

for 1 liter at 10m/s force is 200N or 20kg.

or constant 1/2 x 15kg = 7.5kg up

etc

of course increase of velocity means more friction and very low friction tube

must be used, like electropolished stainless steel, but principle is clear and should be tested.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 05:32:13 PM
You talk, I build.
Here's one of my videos:


https://youtu.be/yzaJuyPpBcs


I disclose the principle of non planer thrust, and prove that it does work.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 05:38:56 PM
You build scrap, i build sophisticated stuff.

I've seen your "levitation" video. Better tie it down so it doesn't fly away.

Basic principle always stands.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 05:46:30 PM
You haven't seen my Levitation video - I've never uploaded it.


I did have a "tip lift" video showing the 'basic principle' behind Tesla's Flying Stove.  It's not there now, for some reason.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 05:50:25 PM
Oh it's "secret", i see :)

Understand the basic principle, 4th law of motion.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 06:14:44 PM
Oh it's "secret", i see :)

Understand the basic principle, 4th law of motion.


It's worse than that; I have people who keep telling me they're going to kill me if I do.


Now YOU discuss why the Principle of Conservation of Momentum FORCES a machine to move if the radius is shortened.


Or are you just a troll, delighting in misdirecting the conversation away from one thing after another?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 06:28:28 PM

It's worse than that; I have people who keep telling me they're going to kill me if I do.

Sure, sure. "They" don't let you. Meanwhile i have broken down the whole inertial business to it's basic components so a monkey could understand and build a basic device.

Quote
Now YOU discuss why the Principle of Conservation of Momentum FORCES a machine to move if the radius is shortened.

Radius does not have to be shortened at all. See what happens when you don't understand the basic principle, you are confused and confuse others, so let me repeat it..

ANY UNBALANCED MASS
OSCILLATING WITHIN 180° OR LESS
OR SPINNING FULL CIRCLE WITH VARYING SPEED
CONVERTS CENTRIFUGAL FORCE
INTO LINEAR ACCELERATION
OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM

No changing of radius.

Quote
Or are you just a troll, delighting in misdirecting the conversation away from one thing after another?

That is exactly what you are doing, asking ridiculous questions, distracting from the subject.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 09:28:58 PM
This isn't even your thread.  Yet you jumped in spouting gibberish and claiming that EVERY working system is based on YOUR stated principle, with everything else being irrelevant.  I'm trying to discuss issues related to the opening post, on the first page.  As well as general aspects of mechanical force propulsion.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 11:04:55 PM
@nix85:
That's an interesting diagram you posted, of a torus having a smaller diameter on one side.  I mean, it's interesting that you think that a faster flow, with less mass will produce more centrifuge force (not a miss spelling) than appears on the slower side having much more mass.  And your drawing is SO very unsofisticated.  The bottom part contains NONE of the intricate detail of the Mercury Drive.  (Presented as "The Modern Day Workhorse of Inertial Propulsion").


And haven't you heard that the so-called "Fourth Law of Motion" (surge) is in direct opposition to the Second Law, which holds that it takes just as much energy to accelerate something quickly as to slowly accelerate to the same velocity?  Introducing this factor did not suddenly make the Dean Drive start working.  So why even mention it?  Distraction?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 11:13:24 PM
This isn't even your thread.  Yet you jumped in spouting gibberish and claiming that EVERY working system is based on YOUR stated principle, with everything else being irrelevant.  I'm trying to discuss issues related to the opening post, on the first page.  As well as general aspects of mechanical force propulsion.

Never said it's my thread. I'm sure it sounds like gibberish to you cause you don't get it. In fact you are the only one spouting gibberish. It's not my principle i just defined it so anyone can understand. And i am not stopping you from trying to discuss anything.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 29, 2021, 11:21:50 PM
@nix85:
That's an interesting diagram you posted, of a torus having a smaller diameter on one side.  I mean, it's interesting that you think that a faster flow, with less mass will produce more centrifuge force (not a miss spelling) than appears on the slower side having much more mass.  And your drawing is SO very unsofisticated.  The bottom part contains NONE of the intricate detail of the Mercury Drive.  (Presented as "The Modern Day Workhorse of Inertial Propulsion").

I don't think lesser volume at greater speed produces more force proportionally to ratio of  speed, it is a simple fact cause cent. force is velocity squared, basic math.

Mercury Drive? What does that have to do with anything here, this is water drive.

Quote
And haven't you heard that the so-called "Fourth Law of Motion" (surge) is in direct opposition to the Second Law, which holds that it takes just as much energy to accelerate something quickly as to slowly accelerate to the same velocity?  Introducing this factor did not suddenly make the Dean Drive start working.  So why even mention it?  Distraction?

Everyone knows this principle "violates" conservation of momentum and thus conservation of energy (not really in the wider scope of things).

So this principle is OU, it is an example of reactive power doing real work.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 29, 2021, 11:55:06 PM
The water drive illustrates the construction of the more powerful Mercury system.  With water, a garden hose goes around the top half of a car tire, then spirals around the bottom half.  There's enough room between the spirals for the hose to wrap 4 or 5 times.  Then hang it on a rope from a tree, with the long wraps pointing to the side, and turn the hose on.  Force from the spirals cancel from side to side, but nothing offsets the force on the long wrapped side.  There is no difference in velocity anywhere.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 12:13:53 AM
Mercury is 13 times denser than water, you should understand energy to propel it is proportionally larger, not to mention Mercury is toxic and totally out of question for system like this.

As for the rest, you are wrong. Like said before due to Venturi Effect, water speeds up in narrower parts and since cent. force is mass velocity squared over radius, force is proportionally larger in narrower part.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 01:41:00 AM
HaHa. nix and his overblown ego getting spanked again! Suckit nix, you fukn lame!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 01:13:28 PM
LOL this guy is so lame and delusional..

So you wanna suck me, hmm, i'll pass on that.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 01:55:50 PM
This device produces low force but i like the atmosphere of these videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjV5PaqDpR4
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 03:13:04 PM
Video on Thornson

https://youtu.be/5JEFME-V_zw?t=2249

I have no doubt water inertial system is the best.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 05:11:10 PM
The funny part is you actually believe there is no shorter radius in your diagram.  (And "there is no such thing as external").


What are you going to do about laminary flow, where the water hugs the inner most part of the wider section?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 06:03:37 PM
Ofc there is really no such thing as external in wider sense,

everything being a part of 1 medium, call it universal fluid or however you like.

Only funny (or rather tragicomic) thing is that you still don't get it.

In all examples i gave

- oscillation within 180

- spinning 360 with varying speed

- circular narrowing tube

radius always remains exactly the same in each and every moment.

Do you see what kind of nonsense you speak.

As for laminar and turbulent flow, all we care about is time average water velocity.

Again key point being Venturi effect (water speeds up in narrow tube)

and Bernoulli's principle (faster water drops in pressure). So as fast water

reenters the wider part it's velocity is again converted into static pressure, no reaction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 07:11:34 PM
Thicker skin than I thought ;D
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 07:14:03 PM
Adjacent to the fast moving laminary flow, vorticies will form.  This water won't even go through the narrow part of the tube.


I don't think you're qualified to discuss this field.  You willingly refuse to open your eyes.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 08:18:45 PM
Adjacent to the fast moving laminary flow, vorticies will form.  This water won't even go through the narrow part of the tube.


I don't think you're qualified to discuss this field.  You willingly refuse to open your eyes.

That is what gradual narrowings are for, to eliminate turbulent flow.

Of course water will go through narrow part.

That paint sketch was just first crude 2 second sketch to memorize the idea,

later last year i designed near perfect narrowing mold for this very purpose,

perfected to a level you can't even dream of. But..

What are you focusing on, secondary things

meanwhile you don't even get the core principle.

Yesterday you laughed how i "think" water is faster in the narrower part.

You don't even know formula for centrifugal force, not even Venturi effect.

When i told you the formula and that it really is so you started to drool with

laminar flow lol. You are ignorant, incompetent to discuss this or probably anything.

Aaron exposed you nicely, what an ignorant thief you are.

http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/free-energy-frauds-pseudoskeptics/aether-force/11650-jerry-volland-aether-force-debunked#post337747

"willingly refuse to open your eyes" hah, the irony, you blind man.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 08:22:14 PM
Thicker skin than I thought ;D

One really has to have a thick skin to embarrass himself like you do.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 08:29:20 PM
I'm supposed to be embarrassed? Who knew!😘🤣
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 08:35:54 PM
Your Murakami reference is slanderous; I demand you delete it immediately.  I subsequently helped him recognize his mistake and he deleted all of that from the energetic forum, then reset the membership requirements to allow me to post again.  Which I won't.


If you DON'T delete it, I'll report you to this forum's Aministration, and refer the matter to my attorney.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 08:36:30 PM
Well, i guess not, monkey is never embarrassed of being a monkey lol
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 08:40:33 PM
Who said anything about Murakami? Calm down, all fun here!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 08:41:41 PM
Slanderous, haha.

If he deleted it i wonder why it's still online, hehe.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 08:43:16 PM
 ;D
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 08:44:30 PM
Calm down and zip it. No one asked you anything.

Or keep making a fool of yourself, i'm enjoying it ;)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 08:45:43 PM
Slanderous, haha.

If he deleted it i wonder why is still online, hehe.


It's not online on HIS site.  The ether force guy is a friend of mine who preserved Aaron's slander, in case further damages arise.  I'm taking screenshots of what you've been saying.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 08:47:21 PM
Thread is on energeticforum.com owned by Aaron
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 08:56:20 PM
WELL, it seems he set up a specific thread just to slander me to a greater extent.


I can prove in a court of law that he's lying.  You want part of that?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 09:00:22 PM
Lol this guy, something else.

Here's the link again.

http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/free-energy-frauds-pseudoskeptics/aether-force/11650-jerry-volland-aether-force-debunked
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 09:15:15 PM
Why don't you contact Aaron and see what he recommends you do, now that you've called me a liar and defamed my character, based on his slander, which resets HIS statute of limitations.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 09:19:03 PM
I don't even care about others exposing you, it's enough to see what you wrote here.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 09:25:02 PM

That statement is also defamatory. What YOU wrote here exposes you to liability, and establishes current damages for what Aaron said in the past.  Now tell him "You're welcome".
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 09:35:52 PM
I've going to go over this with my attorney.


Right now, I'm going to shift gears and work on something electrical.  I really like my reflective spark.  I can barely see it in the dark, but it's bright and beautiful in the sunshine.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 09:57:47 PM
You got a boo boo? Where does it hurt? ;D
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 10:00:52 PM
Hah, i simply shared the 3rd result on google search lanca shared

https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/msg556303/#msg556303

And here is the link

https://www.google.com/search?q=jerry+volland+aetherforce&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&ei=sNthYMGVIK-j1fAPtKuF-Ac&oq=jerry+volland+aetherforce&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAw6DQgAEMcBEK8BELADEA06CQgAELADEAoQHjoJCAAQsAMQDRAeUPwiWM9DYPdTaAFwAHgAgAG4AYgBqQySAQM2LjmYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6yAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwjBrcmT09XvAhWvURUIHbRVAX8Q4dUDCA0

Such a terrible slander, unbelievable, haha.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 10:04:50 PM
Jerry: Judge, this guy at the overunity forum slandered me.

Judge: What's this overunity forum?

Jerry: It's where people share ideas on how to build perpetual motion machines.

Judge: Case dismissed.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 10:07:02 PM
I went to get you some bananas, here here nanana, good boi ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 10:08:54 PM
What kind if weirdo doesn't like bananas?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 10:14:02 PM
Love the bananas, in fact, im gonna go eat one right now

only i'll eat it while sitting up instead of upside down   ;D ;D ;D 🙈🙉🙊
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 10:23:30 PM
Jerry: Judge, this guy at the overunity forum slandered me.

Judge: What's this overunity forum?

Jerry: It's where people share ideas on how to build perpetual motion machines.

Judge: Case dismissed.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Don't you mean where we discuss Advanced Space Propulsion, for the betterment of humanity?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: NdaClouDzzz on March 30, 2021, 10:24:47 PM
Oh, yeah. My bad ;D
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 30, 2021, 10:28:15 PM
Great, two clowns again managed to clutter the thread with bs so anyone sincerely looking for understanding has to dig through tons of garbage.

Reposting this

~~~~~~~~~~~~

My main basic approach that always works is accelerating and decelerating

the unbalanced weight AT THE AXIS, similar to shipov

BUT NEVER LET THE ARMS GO BEYOND 180° or even better beyond 90°.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI

As you can see his weights go full circle and thus device curbs itself.

My idea (not really my idea, it's an old idea and it's good) is the same just you don't let them go beyond 180° EVER.

Similar to this animation i already shared https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeZXNo4EII0

When you accelerate the arms from 0 position as in picture below, device will of course accelerate forward.

As each weight crosses the half point motor must start to decelerate them so they stop at opposite side.

Key point being that as motor decelerates the arms it is experiencing back torque and back torque has nothing to do with linear acceleration, it simply tries to spin the cart, since there are two opposing back torques spin is neutralized, like in helicopter.

Centrifugal pull remains. Pure linear acceleration.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think most of you have a good understanding and sense for what centrifugal force is.

But still most of you have trouble seeing the simplicity of it's conversion to linear acceleration.

One way to resolve this is imagine yourself stationary in space, there is a mass passing by parallel
to you at certain speed.

Say you throw a lasso and capture the mass as it passes by, what happens.

Of course, due to your own inertial mass, object's trajectory is now curved toward you,

You have deflected it from it's straight path and as a consequence it is now pulling you,

accelerating you as it follows it's new, curved path.


What we got here is the same thing in more controlled environment.

Every vibrator is doing it, it's just that it pulls axis to one side, then another.

Pull must be contained on one side.

This is a good video that demonstrates the phenomena. As long as ball keeps oscillating

on the right side, it pulls the cart to the right. That is all there is to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM9tkgjVVrI
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 11:07:44 PM
The Shipov device also tips down in the front, due to gravity (an external force), as the weights get there.  This is the same thing the TIE on the boat does.  Both of these systems use the same principle as the slanted pendulum.


Of course, braking will be effective.  The Conservation of Angular Momentum Law states:  *In the absence of external torque input*, Angular Momentum will be conserved".  Speeding up the motor is also a torque input.


The Water Drive doesn't use centrifugal force; the walls of the tube exert 'cenripedal' force, and the result - felt by the wall - is a 'centrafuge' force.  Just like a spinning washing machine.


Something else: according to Scientific American magazine, one tenant of quantum mechanics holds that "anything which rotates is external to the rest of the universe". There certainly is something which is 'external'.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 30, 2021, 11:54:30 PM
Other working systems exist which do not embody this specific type of operation.  But that doesn't mean they are irrelevant.


My personal opinion is that the 'best' low-tech propulsion system would have no moving parts to wear out.  Something which can operate continuously for an extended time.  I can see how the Water Drive might work, if modified. That would provide financial advantage, so I'm not going to share it with someone who is disrespectful.  And I do know the details of the Mercury Motor, WHICH also doesn't mean everything else is irrelevant.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 12:09:51 AM
Off topic: I see that a lot of my videos have been deleted, including my recent electrolysis video showing all of the bubbles coming off only one of the electrodes.


A smear campaign isn't the only thing I'm up against. So you guys mellow out.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 12:39:46 AM
The Shipov device also tips down in the front, due to gravity (an external force)..

Everything you said is soo wrong it's ridiculous.

No, Shipov device does not tip down in the front, two unbalanced weights spin around always on the same level vertically.

No, external force is not required, that is the whole point.

Water inertial device does use centrifugal force.

There is really no such thing as external.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 12:59:15 AM
Nice to know I'm corresponding with someone who's smarter than the quantum physicists.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 01:05:15 AM
Sarcasm doesn't help you look smarter. Why are you so stuck on term external which is obvious to everyone. Something can be relatively external and whole point of inertial drive is that it does not react to anything external. In wider sense, again, nothing is really external.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 01:20:03 AM
Don't feed the troll.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 01:26:02 AM
Tnx for the advice.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 01:58:39 AM
Actually, I'm not putting the Big Eye on myself.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 02:21:58 AM
Sure you are.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 03:30:12 AM
Hah, i simply shared the 3rd result on google search lanca shared

https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/msg556303/#msg556303 (https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/msg556303/#msg556303)

And here is the link

https://www.google.com/search?q=jerry+volland+aetherforce&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&ei=sNthYMGVIK-j1fAPtKuF-Ac&oq=jerry+volland+aetherforce&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAw6DQgAEMcBEK8BELADEA06CQgAELADEAoQHjoJCAAQsAMQDRAeUPwiWM9DYPdTaAFwAHgAgAG4AYgBqQySAQM2LjmYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6yAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwjBrcmT09XvAhWvURUIHbRVAX8Q4dUD (https://www.google.com/search?q=jerry+volland+aetherforce&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&ei=sNthYMGVIK-j1fAPtKuF-Ac&oq=jerry+volland+aetherforce&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAw6DQgAEMcBEK8BELADEA06CQgAELADEAoQHjoJCAAQsAMQDRAeUPwiWM9DYPdTaAFwAHgAgAG4AYgBqQySAQM2LjmYAQCgAQGqAQdnd3Mtd2l6yAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwjBrcmT09XvAhWvURUIHbRVAX8Q4dUDCA0)

Such a terrible slander, unbelievable, haha.


Why didn't you include the title of the search item ("smear campaign") rather than mearly propagating the smear?


edit: My reputation is still being damaged 12 years later.  That's pretty terrible, isn't it?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 04:13:05 AM
By the way, I did finish my EV Gray Tube,
and it doesn't have anything to do
with Murakami's circuit.
Or his claim that I stole it.
He certainly wasn't able
to replicate the Gray Tube.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 04:56:13 AM
Any juror with average intelligence will be able
to plainly see the difference between the two circuits,
my circuit which produces a hot Plasmoid.
with Radiant sparks, which Murakami copyrighted.
falsely explained and forbid me to discuss,
and the circuit he's still promoting, which
produces a cool plasma discharge,
with no Radiant Energy.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 01:39:52 PM
Search keywords, as anyone can see, are "jerry volland aetherforce".

As for Grey, i happen to know some key details of how he ran kilowatt

motors on miliwatts, but that is not the subject of this thread.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 02:13:31 PM
Where did you get aetherforce?
Search my name - two words.  That's what someone would
likely do.  Then scroll down till you find "smear campaign".
Ignore Facebook.  That's someone else with the same name.
 
And I don't have a store or foundation.  And
there's five of us on Research Gate. 
It's a common name.

If you have accurate details about Gray's system,
publish them, and see what kind of crap
hits YOUR life.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 03:08:43 PM
Speaking of "smear campaign", here is a vid about

your buddy Ray, that is, Rayam Azab Youssef

Interview with him at 43:11

https://vimeo.com/188462072

No intention to shame him or anyone, we all got pasts.

we all got issues, i post it for entertainment value only.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 03:44:28 PM
Right, we all have pasts.  But Ray is the only one who helped me
with this suppression attack.


Why are you still digging into this matter? 
Do you have any intention to delete your own defamatory statements?


Your post right there isn't going to look good to the jury.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 04:01:30 PM
Defamatory lol. Am i to blame he spoke on public TV how

his phallus is beautiful and he is a genius

I'm sure jury is gonna love those parts xD
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 04:15:57 PM
You are to blame for publicly saying that I'm a thief.


I published my circuit 4 years before I joined his forum and found gotoluc's open source Water Sparkplug Circuit, noticing the similarity between the left side of that circuit and what I was using. (Aaron uses the right side of that specific circuit). The two sides of the circuit are completely different, as far as which way the capacitor discharges through the spark gap.


I once worked at a XXX theater, as a union projectionist.
But that doesn't mean I know who owned it (if it was 'syndicated'), or that I would say anything if I did.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 04:21:50 PM
Blah
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 04:44:32 PM
Blah


Noted.


You're also responsible for saying you don't need Aaron's input to see what kind of person I am.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 04:51:33 PM
For all i know you're not a person but a spam bot.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on March 31, 2021, 04:55:49 PM
My #462 poste was #460 '...since 1965 . ...' related ,not pro/contra positioning,neutral !
That adult people can mis-/ab-use information or intentions You both are very good examples,Kinder-garden like !

Sincere
OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 05:08:44 PM
I also don't use a "reverse diode", which can be dangerous if you don't know what you're doing.


https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Plasma_charge
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 05:13:52 PM
My #462 poste was #460 '...since 1965 . ...' related ,not pro/contra positioning,neutral !
That adult people can mis-/ab-use information or intentions You both are very good examples,Kinder-garden like !

Sincere
OCWL

Didn't say or imply your are pro/contra, just that you shared a google search with his name, that is all.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 06:31:56 PM
My name and what else?  He aided and extended the smear campaign by dragging it onto this forum.


Now, if you'll excuse me, I have some weapons development I probably should be working on.  I already have a thread where I posted the preliminary discussion.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on March 31, 2021, 09:15:30 PM
Here's one last thing: that wasn't a first level search link he posted; he had to dig for it.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on March 31, 2021, 09:30:03 PM
Mr.Volland,the search machine gave the information,without the need for deeper digging !
Theme : jerry volland (inertial) propulsion

Your stress and experience with Murakami is from 2013,we have now 2021 !
You should have learned from this 'old' battle/discussion ,un-/fruitable results !
Did Murakami have had success with his findings ? Doubts !
Did You have (had ) success with your findings ? You only can decide about !

Sincere
OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on March 31, 2021, 10:26:49 PM
Enough dramas, stay on subject. If there are no mods around someone has to say it.

Hardly anything describes the basic principle as this, watch at 0.25x

https://youtu.be/VZqwvGhoHKU?list=PLS6CmWwu5VGmA6hJQQTsIfcipS3ROGgyZ&t=220

Short impulse of centrifugal force lifts whole trap about 30cm before it falls back.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Thaelin on April 01, 2021, 11:09:17 AM
  OK, got my good chuckle for the day.  ;D   Said I have to sign in to verify my age to watch a mouse trap.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 01:24:04 PM
You better be over 18 to see a real mouse trap, boi.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 02:49:51 PM
Mr.Volland,the search machine gave the information,without the need for deeper digging !
Theme : jerry volland (inertial) propulsion

Your stress and experience with Murakami is from 2013,we have now 2021 !
You should have learned from this 'old' battle/discussion ,un-/fruitable results !
Did Murakami have had success with his findings ? Doubts !
Did You have (had ) success with your findings ? You only can decide about !

Sincere
OCWL


I've had a lot of success, even if I was banned from showing most of them at energetic forum.


Watch this video of an electromagnet repelling a steel cone, then consider what would happen if a coil were wrapped around the cone.


https://youtu.be/_wzrAFAz0eQ (https://youtu.be/_wzrAFAz0eQ)


I've had a lot of other results as well, which I intended to post at this forum.  But I had to 'audition' you guys first, to see if there's an adversarial attitude.  Now if I post anything it'll be with limited information.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: ramset on April 01, 2021, 03:07:08 PM
Sir
Not sure if you are aware


Here Stefan has set up section for open source builders


Was abused by a few ( non open source agenda), However still available...


You would be free to have control of topic ( keep signal to noise in control)
You would be moderator of your own section!( lock topic .. remove noise .. unlock etc
most of all
Teach !!
Regardless your decision on above...
Thanks for sharing.
With Gratitude
Chet K
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on April 01, 2021, 03:10:47 PM
But this is less mechano-kinetical propulsion !

EMD thruster is for me an other class !
A coil around the cone ? Amplyfing or neutralizing the entering force !
An appropriate solution for the bomb squad and/or interplanetary flight and braking

Sincere
OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 03:19:43 PM
According to this video Grey (also) used PLASTIC cores.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQHUZITimUI
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 03:20:12 PM
A coil around the cone would repel both the Plasmoid and the other coil, just as in Gray's motor.  Repelling the Plasmoid between the coils maintains torque production as the coils move apart.


Gray said for space propulsion "Send positive rays through a superconductive grid".
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on April 01, 2021, 03:24:25 PM
Mach-/Woodward effect engine ?
Here I would compare with T.T.Brown his electro-gravitational experiment and results ! Related : lifter

And related Mr Gray his statement : without con-texte no meaning !
Superconduction : ultra low/no resistance
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 03:27:43 PM
As far as propulsion is concerned all i saw or heard Grey achived is electromagnets with plastic cores repelling or regular electromagnets repelling with far greater power than power used with help of cap discharges through a special perforated sparkgap.

There is not even a reference that he achieved degravitation or anything alike.

He seems to have tapped into cold electricity which is part of the negative spectrum and closely related to energy of levitation or antigravity (etheric flow returning from earth to space), but he apparently did not learn to direct the force in a manner to degravitate objects like for example Skalnin did.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 03:45:18 PM
Gray also used a stair step waveform with increasing voltage, to extend the CEMF/Plasmoid production time.  Compare this with Murakami's 9 ns drop off waveform.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 03:53:33 PM
Many ways to skin the cat, no need for stepping voltage disruptive discharges or special sparkgaps...here is Schwartz's solid state cold electricity generator.

He is known to have lied before about his rods containing 73-74 elements to confuse

the public but i believe he tells the truth that these use aluminum-bismuth plates with

very thin coils between. Activated by 5 "secret frequencies" it gives lots of power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsJwRznsf4o

Output is DC with small AC noise.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 04:01:01 PM
Mach-/Woodward effect engine ?
Here I would compare with T.T.Brown his electro-gravitational experiment and results ! Related : lifter

And related Mr Gray his statement : without con-texte no meaning !
Superconduction : ultra low/no resistance


Gray's Radiant Energy rays aren't related to the Mach/Woodward effect.  With regards to that effect, it's been reported in the past few months that vibrating the piezoelectric array (adding an external force) produces a considerable increase in the output.  But still not enough to be practical.


Gray mentioned that when he started developing his technology his intention was to perfect Tesla's Radiant Energy.  That's what the positive rays are. But at a much lower voltage and frequency than Tesla was using.  I've developed a circuit which does this very thing, but this isn't the right thread to start posting that kind of information. And it may not even be the right forum.  Admin seems to be ignoring my defamation complaint.  And the Troll is still jabbering.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 04:18:17 PM
Radiant phenomena is part of what might be termed neutral spectrum, spectrum to which
belong gravity and antigravity, thoughts, vitality and similar subtler phenomena.
Energy from the sun traverses interplanetary space in form of neutral bubbles, you
can see these as circles on an oscilloscope (as proven by Zirbes). This neutral
energy hits our magnetic field and atmosphere and part of it is slowed down, as bubbles
are slowed down they merge with other bubbles of similar size and form herzian waves
(light and heat). As it's been known since forever reverse process applies, bucking
coils, neutralization of herzian waves produces scalar aka neutral waves.
What really happens is merging of electricity (male) and magnetism (female) to
produce life or resonating EM field or gravity field, however you call it.
So, this neutral energy coming from the sun....
Part of it we feel as gravity (and superimposed reflected antigravity)
and rest just passes through earth (like neutrinos).
Just like there is positive phenomena of light, heat and gravity so are there negative
phenomena of darkness, cold and levity. One is coming from the sun, other returns at 1/3
higher frequency. Your atomic speed determines which one you resist. Balance the two
and you will be fixed in air. Nothing new or mysterious about radiant energy, it's just
another spectrum of longitudinal electromagnetic waves where we find subtler
phenomena.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 04:34:24 PM
I forgot to say that using Gray's Positive Rays might provide advantage with Brown's Lifter systems, at least within the atmosphere.  I've said all along that straight HV pulses isn't the best approach.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 04:42:04 PM
@lancalV
Thanks for the corollary idea.  Now that I can make the longitudinal sparks I may check to see what they do with lifter electrodes.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 04:54:31 PM
No such thing as positive ray except in a sense of neutral
rays being positive and negative, negative governing the levitation,
not positive.

Neutral rays can change weight of matter permanently,
make it permanently hot or cold etc. More here

http://svpwiki.com/pdffiles/hollingshead-original.pdf

ALL great suppressed scientists like Keely, Hollingshead etc
ALL contactee cases
ALL communications with discarnated humans

agree ALWAYS on one thing, light and heat are created locally
in atmospheres.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 05:20:53 PM
Further consideration shows the positive sparks shooting outwards, perpendicular to the electrodes, may not work with a lifter.  Movement is always towards the wider part of the field, regardless of polarity.  So the wire would have to be on the bottom, rather than the top.  (Still something to test).  However, the rays might work with Brown's emDrive-like electrokinetic thruster, with the conical dielectric inside the tapered chamber.


I never did buy into the electrogravitics claims.  Nothing in his configuration resembles the gravity shielding electrodes I've seen. (Or the principle). Also, the fact that a candle flame placed near a lifter will invert shows that the system is simply reacting against the local environment.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 05:28:36 PM
Sir
Not sure if you are aware


Here Stefan has set up section for open source builders


Was abused by a few ( non open source agenda), However still available...


You would be free to have control of topic ( keep signal to noise in control)
You would be moderator of your own section!( lock topic .. remove noise .. unlock etc
most of all
Teach !!
Regardless your decision on above...
Thanks for sharing.
With Gratitude
Chet K


Thanks, Chet.


I'll look into that.  Filtering the noise would make a difference.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 05:39:04 PM
I never did buy into the electrogravitics claims.

https://youtu.be/9rd-iQhhr3o?t=567

https://youtu.be/pPYCKySAePQ&t=177
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 05:44:36 PM
Further consideration shows the positive sparks shooting outwards, perpendicular to the electrodes, may not work with a lifter.  Movement is always towards the wider part of the field, regardless of polarity.  So the wire would have to be on the bottom, rather than the top.  (Still something to test).  However, the rays might work with Brown's emDrive-like electrokinetic thruster, with the conical dielectric inside the tapered chamber.


I never did buy into the electrogravitics claims.  Nothing in his configuration resembles the gravity shielding electrodes I've seen. (Or the principle). Also, the fact that a candle flame placed near a lifter will invert shows that the system is simply reacting against the local environment.


I should have said "the magnetostatic principle".
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: ramset on April 01, 2021, 05:51:01 PM
Also one comment
Only Stefan can remove timed out posts
He is very busy atm unlike other forums with many helpers....
He runs this alone and huge struggle do to Covid in his country ( and most others)
—//—-

Having libel or Slander written for any purpose is big no no


I will send him a note !
And I do recommend you start moderated bench if hosting builds
Or ?


Shame to read smart fellows get twisted up


We need good discussion, however empirical evidence which can be replicated
Is priceless


And do not underestimate resources of this open source community ( what we can experiment on(university level etc))


Sorry for interrupting


Chet K
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 06:02:51 PM

I should have said "the magnetostatic principle".


I still didn't get the right word.  I'm referring to a field produced by rotating a ring shaped electret, with a nearby field shape defining electrode. (This will provide lift but - on its own - no mobility).
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 06:03:02 PM
There is no need for special moderated threads, maybe rather a place where gold
nuggets from all threads are collected in one well organized place. But who's gonna
do that, no one. It has to be this way, the hard way, scattered info, who is sincere,
let him dig and connect the dots.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 06:19:33 PM
I'm going to time out at this point and start working on an opening post in the self moderated builder's section.  As usual, posting pictures and editing text will take a while, especially since all of my files aren't on the same computer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 01, 2021, 06:44:18 PM
@nix85:
You're not going to hitch your wagon to my star, following along behind me, misdirecting attention away from everything I say.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 01, 2021, 07:14:21 PM
@nix85:
You're not going to hitch your wagon to my star, following along behind me, misdirecting attention away from everything I say.

Hitch my wagon to your star? You think you're in a reality show?

"Following along behind you" Rather soaring above you,
someone has to police the validity of your (or anyone's) posts.

Everything i said in last few posts i said before on this forum, if it has
any relation to you, it is to correct the misinformation you post, not to
"misdirect attention", from inertial propulsion to radiant energy.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on April 02, 2021, 01:29:26 PM
#555 : search machine ' electrohydrodynamics'
And yes,the electrogravity devices changes ambiental air condition : ozone-generation,ionizer !

When You both,Mr.Volland and nix85,invest less time in ambivalent provoke and dispute more about experience results and physical/technical divergences/differences  all members here would gain more than by this actual ego-battle !

Outside earth technology interests me only to discover a cheap way to explore asteroids like ' 16 Psyche' for cheap and easy mining from on earth now rare minerals,growing consumer/user  number related .

Aluminium,by the first production,was expensive like gold ,probably in some years gold will be as cheap as aluminium : 1 US$/Kg fob asteroid(belt)  ship !?
Beyond silver-dependent photo-voltaic cells to gold-coated nantenna technology !

The space engine : " Mittel/Instrument zum Zweck",not the priority/target ,but an important tool !

NASA(+ d-/arpa)  and ESA ' space program' development observation !

Sincere
OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 02, 2021, 04:59:12 PM
@lancalV:
You make some good points about the space resources. This is related to my own ambitious with my company, InterPlanetary Express.  But keep in mind that the light of ego blinds the forehead to the paradigm and limits understanding.  Why do you suggest that defending my reputation is ego driven?  Am I supposed to be so meek that I'll tolerate being kicked around by anyone who chooses to do so? Would that characteristic survive in the business world?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on April 02, 2021, 05:58:43 PM
Jerry Volland ,' .. since 1965 ...'

+ radaris : Nonorbital
+ linkedin : Dolan Springs ,AZ ( zona arida)

Hello Mister Jerry Lee Volland,age 71



3 minutes short net-diving ! Profiling !


You have ever the right to defend Yourself or other !

Sincere
OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 02, 2021, 06:25:32 PM

Thanks for that.  But Arizona is Ariz ona, a common name in South America.


On LinkedIn, I'm currently discussing the Navy's gravity shielding, faster than light vehicle patent.  (That's on the Advanced Propulsion group).


Here's the link to the thread where I posted my circuit on this forum, in 2007.  (reply #22, pg. 2).  The image link is now broken, and that was before I understood how Gray 'split the positive', with photographic documentation.


http://www.overunity.com/126/eds-design/msg26446/#msg26446 (http://www.overunity.com/126/eds-design/msg26446/#msg26446)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 02, 2021, 06:53:49 PM
At home, I'm currently building Tesla's Flying Stove motor.  Other people who've tried apparently can't read what Tesla plainly stated in his description.  (The device doesn't 'rotate').


And I'm also replicating Gray's free energy circuit - based on photographs.  This doesn't require his Tube; the Tube is a HV version which imparts a HV potential to a heavy LV current.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 02, 2021, 07:49:35 PM
My first build, back in '65, wasn't successful because the counter rotating weights slipped out of synchronization, due to the fan belt drive system.  It takes time, and work, to develope skill in this art.  You can't just figure something out and expect it to work, unless you understand  EVERY force which might appear.  And all of the relevant Laws of physics and Principles of nature.  Consider, for example, the closing of a hinge.  Which vector does it produce and is that the only thing it does?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 02, 2021, 08:10:55 PM
And you can't analyze a diagram on a piece of paper without considering that everything will change when the paper itself moves due to Inertial reaction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 02, 2021, 09:02:36 PM
I'm deleting this post.  I just noticed that someone else is posting formulas and I don't want to give the impression that I think I'm bigger than anyone else.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 03, 2021, 12:50:29 AM
All the key points you need to make it happen are available online, scattered and
most often in very obscure sources but still available. If you really really want it,
you will invest great time and energy to put it all together, hows and whys.
If not, you're gonna wait for your flying car for a while except if you count Lilium Jet
as a flying car.

Yesterday i been listening to David Sereda inverview,
not that i take him seriously or his magic wands, but he mentioned interesting
reports of man made saucers usually 3 feet wide appearing all over US just about time
of Roswell crash. He refers to one report i cannot find, about a kid  in California
who put two aluminum plates back to back in shape of a saucer with some V shaped
cavities on the inside and a radio emitter, the thing allegedly flew around and got very
hot before it crashed.

I found another one in Illnois in which woman found this disc in her front yard. It was wood plater, silver plate, a spark plug, a timer and old brass tube and it said "russia". Maybe a joke, maybe not, it does have a good combination of components.

FBI

https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2010/april/ufos_040610/the-fbi-and-ufos-flying-flapjacks-saucers-and-saw-blades
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 03, 2021, 01:31:50 PM
Good discussion! Let me join it! :)
-----------------------------
We (our multinational team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
-----------------------------
1) Please consider carefully and thoroughly the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aW2ffyvdhjk
-----------------------------
2) The link above describes our first technology breakthrough.
---------------------------
3) The link above describes some simple experiments, which break (a) the law of conservation of mechanical energy and (b) the law of conservation of linear momentum. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want. Any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.
---------------------------
4) We (our multinational team) are open to collaboration of mutual benefit (a) for a further perfection and development of our technology breakthroughs and/or (b) for a  production of our technology breakthroughs on a large industrial scale.
---------------------------
5) We would like to ask you to popularize the link above as much as possible in internet (and anywhere else and in any possible way).
---------------------------
Let us push forward together the technology progress!
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Sincerely yours,
George1
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 03, 2021, 05:19:31 PM
here is a great FAILED replication of tsiriggakis inertial design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN4Vj3RCtjo

obviously centrifugal force is always up but this clearly does not
work, as if reference frames get confused when you use double
rotation (arm and the frame it's attached on are both rotating).
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 03, 2021, 06:35:03 PM
just to add about the polish guy with ferrofluid drone from few pages back
when i corresponded with him few years ago and showed him my double
pendulum inertial design he was convinced it wont work, well he was right
about that one...but key point being he said

"we tried everything"

which means they tried various other inertial designs before they got to
ferrofluid one which they got lucky with.

he is of course wrong that that's the only approach that works

regarding his design, these 3 things in the center are clearly
electromagnets, why 3, why such shape, hm

logically, 1 electromagnet should be enough to prevent ferrofluid
on the left side from escaping so ferrofluid from opposite wheel can
enter there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIri1tTuaqU
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 05, 2021, 04:54:16 AM
Here's an interesting video about someone who said that his neighbor was a thief:
https://youtu.be/KqiUtIilnrc
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 05, 2021, 12:12:50 PM
We (our multinational team) have created 11 (eleven) technology breakthroughs.
-----------------------------
1) Please consider carefully and thoroughly the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-----------------------------
2) The link above describes our first technology breakthrough.
---------------------------
3) The link above describes some simple experiments, which break (a) the law of conservation of mechanical energy and (b) the law of conservation of linear momentum. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want. Any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.
---------------------------
4) We (our multinational team) are open to collaboration of mutual benefit (a) for a further perfection and development of our technology breakthroughs and/or (b) for a  production of our technology breakthroughs on a large industrial scale.
---------------------------
5) We would like to ask you to popularize the link above as much as possible in internet (and anywhere else and in any possible way).
---------------------------
LET US PUSH FORWARD THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Sincerely yours,
George1
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 05, 2021, 02:21:28 PM
i must agree with the moral, let's say i rushed to call you a thief
based just on claims of aaron. anyone can say anything about
anyone, how many were burned this way. so i take that back
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 05, 2021, 02:30:19 PM
Thank you. Aaron's attitude is well known in our community, and his forum has gone downhill.
Now I can move forward.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 05, 2021, 05:54:16 PM
if any of you has a mousetrap at home, you can repeat this simple inertial experiment
just hang the trap on a thread so it hanging on its side. then release it,
it should accelerate to one side and up without reaction. if you do it, ofc, film it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZqwvGhoHKU&t=220s
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 06, 2021, 02:13:44 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
----------------------------
The link above clearly shows how a few simple experiments, carried out in your garage, (1) can be the basis for designing of a simple mechanical reactionless drive machine and (2) can solve your personal energy problems (as well as the energy problems of the world as whole).
-----------------------------
Let us popularize the link above as much as possible in internet (and anywhere else and in any other way).
LET US PUSH FORWARD TOGETHER THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS!


   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 08, 2021, 01:32:42 PM
EXPERIMENTALLY PROVED reactionless drive and perpetual motion are described in the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
The link above describes a few simple reactionless drive and perpetual motion experiments. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
Looking forward to your opinions, recommendations, questions.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 08, 2021, 11:14:51 PM
this is not the best thread for this but it's ok. i mentioned this superposition OU
principle before, there was a study in russia that claimed experimental confirmation
principle is logical, energy content of the wave is amplitude squared
if we add two same waves together, that is, superimpose them,
amplitude will be double, but energy is ampiltude SQUARED
so energy is now x2 squared or x4

here is a copy past of whole article from keelynet
https://keelynet.wordpress.com/category/gravity-control/page/4/

Free energy from wave-fields
Posted by keelynet on September 9, 2010

There is an engineer in Hungary Janos Vajda who dedicated his whole life to the science, specifically to the microwave technology. He worked with radio locators mainly for the military forces, and had several inventions in the field of microwave technology.

Since many of his measurements proved that the energy preservation thesis is not generally valid in wave-fields, he started to seriously research this “unbelievable” phenomena also from theoretical point of view, to see where is the mistake in the official scientific approach that upholds the validity of energy preservation under all circumstances.

The title of the study written by Janos Vajda is “Violation of The Energy Thesis in Wave-Fields “. Since primarily it was meant for the people of science – as an exact scientific paper – it contains a lot of equations, which might discourage many people from reading it (since for its understanding the knowledge of higher mathematics is required).

But even if you can not understand the mathematical demonstration now, it is worth saving the complete study to your computer for later reference, as it has great scientific significance which will become evident only later. You can use it as a scientific evidence about the invalidity of the energy preservation in wave-fields, and as a firm base that justifies and urges further investigations in the field of free energy research. It is enough to read the explanations and very important conclusions (leaving the mathematics aside) in the study, to get a picture about the essence of the discovery.

Mr. Vajda has invented a free energy device based on these principles and a patent application has been filed (Title: APPARATUS FOR GENERATING AND UTILIZING SURPLUS ENERGY BY MEANS OF ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES, Number: P9601424, Application filed: 05/28/1996). If anyone wishes to invest into the full development and utilization of that invention, (or into book-format publishing of his study) please contact us.

The basic principle of deriving free energy from wave-fields can be understood even without higher mathematics. If we would have to summarize the essence of Mr. Vajda’s discovery in few sentences without maths, the following explanation could be given:

When two waves with identical polarization, frequency, phase and amplitude propagate in the same direction and meet (and merge) in free space, then their amplitudes will add together and the amplitude of the resultant wave will be double that of a single input wave. This physical phenomenon is called superposition or interference of the waves, when (under the above conditions) the amplitude of the resultant wave is calculated by simply adding together the amplitudes of the incoming waves.

The energy content of a wave is directly proportional with the square of its amplitude. This fact has a profound impact on the energy balance of the wave-fields.

Calculating the energy balance of the above example, we get that if two units of energy enter the system, then the energy of the output resultant wave will be (calculated as the square of the resultant’s amplitude, that is) four times that of one single input wave (and not only double). As we see, two units of energy enter the system and four units leave, that means we have gained two times more energy then what we have feed into it. If we take two units of energy from the output and feed it back into the input, then there are still two units remaining for utilization and the process can go on continuously.

A further question is that if an excess of energy appears, or an existing energy disappears as the result of the interference of waves, then from where does it come from, or to where does it disappear? In the case of longitudinal waves propagating in a medium one might imagine that the excess of energy is derived from the heat of the medium and the energy that disappears is transformed into heat (although this is not the complete truth).

But the case of electromagnetic waves is a bit more mysterious. If we stick to the idea that when the electromagnetic waves propagate in vacuum, in that empty space there is no medium, then there is certainly no explanation for the question. But if we suppose that there is a medium that fills even the vacuum, which might be called ether (it does not have to be a static medium), then we get some base for the explanation.

If we make a positive feedback, then the initial external energy source can be disconnected from the apparatus without stopping the generation of free energy. Naturally the divider and regulator should feed back enough energy to continuously keep up the process and also to cover the losses in the feedback loop. The schematic illustration of the process is shown in fig. 2.


Although at first sight the less than 50% of energy gain of the interference chamber seems to be unimpressive in our example, with such an arrangement the maximum available output energy is limited only by the energy conducting capacity of the parts.

After starting the device the input energy source can be disconnected, and the energy generation process will be self-sustaining. During the startup process the regulator feeds back more energy to the input then what has started the amplification cycle.

Consequently the amplitude and energy of the wave circulating in the system will continuously increase from few watts of the starting input to the several kW to be utilized at the output. Since there is no further need for input energy, the coefficient of performance of the device will be infinite. The level of output energy can be adjusted through the regulator, and it does not depend on the strength of the starting energy source.

While few watts of input power can start the process, the device can provide several kW of power continuously at the output, even with the external starter energy source disconnected. Using sound waves in practice it might be difficult to achieve noteworthy outputs, since the practical limit of energy density is quite low in such arrangements. But using electromagnetic microwaves it is possible to make very efficient, relatively cheap and compact devices, without any moving parts.

The output of such generators can vary from several kW to the range of GW depending on the size and types of the components. As you can see, this is a real free energy principle that works, and it has been confirmed by measurements and scientific analysis.

It is based on the law of interference and on the equations for calculating the energy density of a wave, that are already accepted by science. No new theory has been created, only the existing knowledge clarified and interpreted in the correct way, and its possible new applications suggested. / In 2009, Dr. Janos Vajda, Founding father of Energetics in wave fields, passed away in Budapest, Hungary.

Please note that these over unity devices almost all of them work based on constructive interference. This means that you emit EM pulses from a minimum of 2 places and phase their interference in a way (superimpose) that excessive energy is extracted from the ether during the interference called interferometry.

Basically, this means that there is no free energy since the device simply “nicks” (extracts) energy from the sorrunding environment by applying constructive interferometry in 3D space.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 09, 2021, 02:24:51 AM
also

A quote from April 1993 Extraordinary Science;

"There is a second kind of RF (radio frequency) produced which appears as a stair-step waveform. The frequency of this RF energy seems to be related to the time required for the energy pulse to travel through the entire length of the copper coil. The second kind of RF is somewhat mysterious and is, as yet, largely undefined.

According to oscilloscope measurements made by Dr. Hastings and Mr. Hartwell, the generation process appears to operate in a laser-like fashion in that the wave front of the energy produced seems to BOUNCE back and forth through the length of the coil winding, with the amplitude of the energy pulse GAINING additional energy with EACH BOUNCE through the coil."
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 09, 2021, 02:55:44 AM
with bit of googling a good old magazine

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Extraordinary-Science-Issue-4-1994.pdf
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 10, 2021, 02:06:53 PM
Hi nix85,
1) Thanks a lot for your enthusiasm! And thanks a lot for the interesting texts and links that you have sent to me. Please give me some time to consider them carefully.
2) Did you carry out in your garage the simple experiments described in the link below?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
Looking forward to your answer.       
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 10, 2021, 02:14:04 PM
EXPERIMENTALLY PROVED reactionless drive and perpetual motion are described in the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
The link above describes a few simple reactionless drive and perpetual motion experiments. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
Looking forward to your comments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 10, 2021, 02:47:53 PM
you're welcome. i watched your vid but have not tried it
not sure why you expect propulsion that way
if you tried it i'd love to see a vid
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 10, 2021, 03:53:33 PM
To nix85.
--------------------------
The experiments described in the link manifest (1) a violation of the law of coservation of linear momentum and (2) a violation of the law of coservation of mechanical energy. These two violations can be used as a basis for design and construction of a simple reactionless drive device. THIS IS EVIDENT! (And I am even slightly surprised :) by your question "....why you expect propulsion that way....")
Looking forward to your answer.
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 10, 2021, 04:00:02 PM
i am surprized that you are surprized
there is no reason that design should produce linear thrust
if you think it should explain it clearly

more so, there is no simpler design for inertial propulsion
than rotation of unbalanced mass
as i described already so many times

here is a pracital example of linear acceleration
by keeping oscillation on one side

https://youtu.be/bReKEKpoyjo

can your device do this?
i'd love to see it :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 10, 2021, 04:07:44 PM
But nix85, you are not reading carefully my posts. We are talking about different things.
But let me test you a little. :) Can you formulate for me the exact definition of the law of conservation of linear momentum? :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 10, 2021, 04:53:45 PM
little advice, when you use so many smilies all the time
it doesn't make you look bright, but suit yourself

let me quote you

"EXPERIMENTALLY PROVED reactionless drive and
perpetual motion are described in the link below:"

so, i read your post carefully. how exactly is that
weight falling along curved sidewalls design
supposed to fulfill your claims for

a) reactionless drive
b) perpetual motion

as for conservation of momentum, i discussed this
many times before on this forum, and again,
every device propelling itself without acting
against any outside force is violating
conservation of momentum and thus
conservation of energy, two deeply
correlated terms.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 12, 2021, 02:50:16 AM
i didn't mean anything offensive, it's just that so much smileys can be
interpreted as trolling or shallow.

as for your idea, i really don't see how is that supposed to be inertial
propulsion or anything. maybe you can elaborate.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 13, 2021, 05:40:54 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
You wrote: "....as for your idea, i really don't see how is that supposed to be inertial propulsion or anything...". In such a case you are simply an absolute ignoramus and an absolute amateur in the field of theoretical and applied mechanics. You have firstly to educate seriously yourself in the field of theoretical and applied mechanics and just then to take part in this discussion. I will not discuss reactionless drive with you anymore. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 13, 2021, 05:45:16 PM
EXPERIMENTALLY PROVED reactionless drive and perpetual motion are described in the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
The link above describes a few simple reactionless drive and perpetual motion experiments. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
----------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE. The technology information described in the link above must be evaluated (SOLELY AND ONLY!) by highly qualified experts (Ph.D.) in theoretical and applied mechanics. Otherwise nothing will come of it. 
----------------------
Looking forward to your comments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 14, 2021, 09:48:32 AM
either i really am

"absolute ignoramus and an absolute amateur in the field
of theoretical and applied mechanics"

or you are a clown with internet access you should not have been given

something tells me the latter is the case
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 14, 2021, 04:42:50 PM
The link below describes a few simple experiments, which break the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
And here is the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
---------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 1. It is highly recommendable that the above mentioned experiments  are evaluated and realized by a highly qualified expert (Ph.D.) in theoretical and applied mechanics.  Otherwise nothing will come of it (most probably).
----------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 2. The key question in the above mentioned experiments is how to reduce standard friction (where necessary) to a certain minimum limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) is small enough and can be neglected. The answer is simple. You can use for example permanent magnet slides as shown in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A . (Permanent magnet slides reduce friction practically to zero and the measuring devices do not register any force of friction.) Aternatively you can use hundreds of other methods for reducing of friction (as much as necessary) as modern technologies allow this feat. We live in 21st century after all.
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments after repeating the above mentioned simple experiments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 14, 2021, 05:13:37 PM
to counterweight the misinformation, i'll just repeat once again
any unbalanced weight that rotates convert centrifugal force into
linear acceleration. simple as that
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 18, 2021, 03:31:22 PM
To nix85.
---------------------------------
I do not argue about this. You are right. Accepted.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 18, 2021, 03:32:20 PM
The link below describes a few simple experiments, which break the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
And here is the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
---------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 1. It is highly recommendable that the above mentioned experiments  are evaluated and realized by a highly qualified expert (Ph.D.) in theoretical and applied mechanics.  Otherwise nothing will come of it (most probably).
----------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 2. The key question in the above mentioned experiments is how to reduce standard friction (where necessary) to a certain minimum limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) is small enough and can be neglected. The answer is simple. You can use for example permanent magnet slides as shown in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A . (Permanent magnet slides reduce friction practically to zero and the measuring devices do not register any force of friction.) Aternatively you can use hundreds of other methods for reducing of friction (as much as necessary) as modern technologies allow this feat. We live in 21st century after all.
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments after repeating the above mentioned simple experiments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 24, 2021, 01:06:21 PM
The link below describes a few simple experiments, which break the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
And here is the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
---------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 1. It is highly recommendable that the above mentioned experiments  are evaluated and realized by a highly qualified expert (Ph.D.) in theoretical and applied mechanics.  Otherwise nothing will come of it (most probably).
----------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 2. The key question in the above mentioned experiments is how to reduce standard friction (where necessary) to a certain minimum limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) is small enough and can be neglected. The answer is simple. You can use for example permanent magnet slides as shown in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A . (Permanent magnet slides reduce friction practically to zero and the measuring devices do not register any force of friction.) Aternatively you can use hundreds of other methods for reducing of friction (as much as necessary) as modern technologies allow this feat. We live in 21st century after all.
----------------------------------------
DEEP SILENCE AGAIN?
WHAT HAPPENS HERE IN THIS FORUM?
WHERE IS THE PASSION FOR NEW TECHNOLOGIES?
WHERE IS THE "TESLA" PIONEER SPIRIT AND ENTHUSIASM?
LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR ANSWER.     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 26, 2021, 12:21:14 PM
Still no comments related to the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe  ?
---------------------------------------------
Isn't there at least one brave person here in this forum who dares to say that the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum are not correct? 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 26, 2021, 08:55:12 PM
So what's his plan? Point the two systems in opposite directions, with the plungers in the middle, then push the plungers apart, expecting more reaction force on one side, due to frictional heat on the other? How does this violate any Principles of Nature?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on April 29, 2021, 09:08:37 AM
To Jerry Volland.
------------------------------
Hi Jerry,
Thank you for your post.
------------------------------
1) Well, the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe  describes clearly a simple experiment, which unambiguously violates the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy. In one word, you simply measure heights, velocities and masses and after that you simply calculate (this is the method) the related potential and kinetic energies, and the related linear momentums, respectively. And after that you simply compare the numerical results.
------------------------------
2) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum directly leads to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a simple reactionless drive machine. (Please ask an expert (Ph.D.) in theoretical and applied mechanics to consider carefully and thoroughly the link above. And after that ask him/her to explain to you the essence of our experimental approach.)
------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 29, 2021, 04:19:50 PM
Sorry, but I have no answer to the same claim I've already rejected.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 29, 2021, 11:40:13 PM
as long as unbalanced mass oscillates within 180 degrees or less
system accelerates linearly, that is all

https://youtu.be/JGLrVgYdpRw?t=340
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 03:49:17 AM
The question is if there's a violation of Scientific principle, not if there is a resultant movement.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 01:57:43 PM
technically, if you accelerate the system by any means totally within the system
you are violating conservation of momentum and energy
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 05:22:43 PM
Not all movements are cases of acceleration. For instance, a center of gravity shift followed by a stop.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 06:09:42 PM
oh please, it is clear what is meant, linear acceleration, not wobbling in place
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 06:13:52 PM
as long as the arm oscillates whole system accelerates
do u understand what this simplest of all principles means for satellites
drone to mars in a day or two instead of half year easily
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 06:39:33 PM
Don't forget, I invented the Autopult, a machine which throws itself. Why wouldn't I understand the applications?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 06:41:09 PM
my post was not directed to you but everyone including you
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 07:05:05 PM
forget mars, space plane/station that can change orbit at will to any height and direction
around earth.

all this is possible with a device a child can basically make. simple arm with magnet
and two electromagnets on the sides to sustain the oscillation and bit of solar power

how ironic is the human blindness, infinite, endless blindness
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 07:23:26 PM
I'm not going to forget about Mars. That's why I spent so much time learning the simplest principle for lift off.


Blindness is a refusal to see non planar effects. Which is off topic to this thread. Still, I'm not one of those who are blind.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 07:54:57 PM
again you take things literally and personally and misinterpret them
i was just pointing out the possibilities of such simple method of propulsion

when you refer to "non planar effects" you must be clear about what exactly you mean

you were blind to this simplest yet very powerful principle, principle that needs no complex contraptions of questionable functionality, but extremely simple yet undeniable
method for producing continuous linear thrust in any medium

it's fine, virtually everyone is
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 08:27:22 PM
Quote: "You were blind to this simplest yet very powerful principle"

Do you mean, like, me personally?
 
And I get the impression that you think the system under consideration will not be brought to a stop by resetting the plungers. Care to elaborate?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 08:44:02 PM
BTW, I do have a life outside the Forum, and now that I'm part of the new X-Prize competition, I need to spend less time jabbering and more time working on the new carbon sequestration project. If I can show significant progress after one year, I'll get a million dollar Milestone Award. (Grand Prize: $50 Million).


But I'll still check in, to see if I can provide any help which might be appreciated.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 09:38:02 PM
of course it won't come to a stop, as long as the arm oscillates whole system accelerates.
well, you were blind to this basic principle of keeping oscillation within 180 degrees.
you questioned it since i first mentioned it. that is fine, cause i was once blind to it
too and thinking in overly complicated terms myself. 99,99% inertial tinkerers still are.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 09:58:09 PM
circa in 2014 i came up with concept similar to this one and thought no one else did, then i saw this and other videos and much older designs going all the way to tesla's stove
how ashamed i was and still am a bit. it's always like that, we think we invented something only to find it's been done long time ago

it was not exactly like this, i sketched it roughly below so you get an idea

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhGcvuFj_bI
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 10:21:56 PM
Still hung up on your 'kinetic energy' system? I've seen a dozen patents like that and every one of them require "skill in the art", an additional force application, to make them work. When I built something like that and put it on a platform with four corner suspension lines, all that happened was the platform kept moving in a small circle.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 10:41:05 PM
my system? it's not my system, it's a simple natural principle
and it's not energy but propulsion system.

your device may just wobble, but this principle works
constant linear acceleration as long as pendulum oscillates

https://youtu.be/JGLrVgYdpRw?t=423
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on April 30, 2021, 11:06:20 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECYLHiXvrBQ
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on April 30, 2021, 11:48:21 PM
my system? it's not my system, it's a simple natural principle
and it's not energy but propulsion system.

your device may just wobble, but this principle works
constant linear acceleration as long as pendulum oscillates

https://youtu.be/JGLrVgYdpRw?t=423 (https://youtu.be/JGLrVgYdpRw?t=423)


The video plainly said "kinetic energy" and "percussion masses". Now you're saying "pendulum oscillates". Sounds like a Plumb Bob vibratng back and forth.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 01, 2021, 01:00:30 AM

The video plainly said "kinetic energy" and "percussion masses". Now you're saying "pendulum oscillates". Sounds like a Plumb Bob vibratng back and forth.

what does it matter what video title says, we are talking about propulsion

pendulum is just a reference to oscillating arm, not hanging pendulum obviously
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 01, 2021, 01:36:14 AM
You can make this work with a suspension line. Just tie the top of the line to some tram track wheels. My actual experiments have shown that the device will swing forwards, pulling the tram wheels. Then, when it swings back, it only goes back to bottom dead center, without affecting the wheels. With repetition, it will pull the top wheels in a unidirectional distance. But this start/stop doesn't produce acceleration. It's referred to in the industry as "ooching", something which isn't assigned much value. You'll never get to 650 million miles per hour using something like this, no matter how 'simple' it is.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 01, 2021, 02:29:16 AM
you are totally missing the point, this has nothing to do with hanging

and yes, you can theoretically get to near light speed with this simple principle

but why go to such extremes, its enough to say 3h to moon at 1g
with half way deceleration can be easily accomplished

in fact you could have a spacecraft that could constantly cruise around
the moon and earth as a hotel with minimum energy for inertial
drives provided by OU magnetic generator or solar panels
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 01, 2021, 02:49:56 AM
and then there is this craziness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bD5TLlNXd1Y
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 01, 2021, 11:41:14 AM
The link below describes a few simple experiments, which break the law of conservation of mechanical energy and the law of conservation of linear momentum. You can easily carry out these simple experiments in your garage as many times as you want.
And here is the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe
---------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 1. It is highly recommendable that the above mentioned experiments  are evaluated and realized by a highly qualified expert (Ph.D.) in theoretical and applied mechanics.  Otherwise nothing will come of it (most probably).
----------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE 2. The key question in the above mentioned experiments is how to reduce standard friction (where necessary) to a certain minimum limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) is small enough and can be neglected. The answer is simple. You can use for example permanent magnet slides as shown in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A . (Permanent magnet slides reduce friction practically to zero and the measuring devices do not register any force of friction.) Aternatively you can use hundreds of other methods for reducing of friction (as much as necessary) as modern technologies allow this feat. We live in 21st century after all.
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments after repeating the above mentioned simple experiments.
SIMPLY CARRY OUT THE EXPERIMENTS! WHERE ARE THE SKILLFUL EXPERIMENTORS HERE IN THIS FORUM?!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 05, 2021, 03:32:30 AM
gyradoscope

http://www.rexresearch.com/holmesgyr/holmesgyr.htm
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 05, 2021, 09:51:22 AM
Please look again at the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
--------------------------
1) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum, which is described in the link above, can be used for a substantial decreasing of the recoil of any standard firearm as this does not influence in any way this standard firearm's range. (Besides in principle it is possible to use the new mechanical effect several times in a row thus reducing the recoil practically to zero.)
--------------------------
2) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum, which is described in the link above, can be used for designing of an entirely new kind of a shock-absorber. The latter can be installed on any vehicle thus saving human lives and/or preventing injuries.
--------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 06, 2021, 01:57:35 PM
...
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 06, 2021, 08:26:56 PM
@nix85:


The device in your drawing - operating as a subsystem - will produce vertical acceleration, provided the subsystem is moved side to side, in synch with its operation,  with two steps in each direction.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 06, 2021, 11:40:22 PM
@nix85:


The device in your drawing - operating as a subsystem - will produce vertical acceleration, provided the subsystem is moved side to side, in synch with its operation,  with two steps in each direction.

it is not clear what you mean by two step in each direction and in synch with its operation.

there is no need for two steps in each direction nor synching except syncthing
of two counterrotating arms but that is sure not what you meant.

keep in mind, one guy built my wider previously shown design
and it did not work. it did jump in the air but bounced back down.

(shown below)

so i narrowed the walls to reduce the y reaction.

when there is just one arm, back reaction of the spring on the side wall
is trying to rotate the frame which obviously acts to prevent forward
acceleration.

i believe if he built two so they operate in counterrotation, backtorque
would be canceled and pure upward thrust would result

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 12:58:30 AM
When the weight curves to the right, pull the device to the left, just enough that the weight actually moves straight down a little. While the weight moves back to center, pull the device to the left some more. Then reverse the direction of the pulls on the other side. The straight down movements do not produce a centrifugal reaction, but pulling the weight through a longer than normal curve does.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 01:30:48 AM
there is no need to pull the device to the left or right.
besides what would you pull it against, the whole
point is that it is reactionless.

pull on the side wall produces back torque
which wants to rotate the frame
two arms in counterrotation cancel it

that's all
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 02:38:55 AM
That's all? I thought you said your version didn't work.


And keep in mind that the centrifugal reaction force will be felt at the tie off point of the linear actuator, rather than the bottom of the swing arm. So the direction of thrust will be upwards at an angle, which changes direction from one side to the other.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 02:49:42 AM
don't you read what i write. i said it bounced back cause of counter torque.
if counter torque is canceled it should produce pure linear thrust.

linear actuator? i'll assume you mean side walls. no, centrifugal force
is felt at the axis of rotation, of course.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 03:45:47 AM
Just to clear this up a bit, you don't even need the side arms; just attach the springs directly to the base, on each side. Then pull the base horizontally. Better yet, replace the springs with solenoid's or the like. As the weight is pulled through a longer curve (relative to the linear actuator's tie off point), Conservation of Momentum will cause it to slow down. So torque has to be added to the swing arm, to keep it from slowing down. Twinning the sub assemblies will allow each to provide a reaction force against the other. And twinning will combine the output vectors into a single upwards force.

edit: And you can get by with a single horizontal pull in each direction, just enough to get the downwards movement, before the spring pulls it back. But you'll get more output force using two pulls each way. /edit

That's it from my end. I think anyone who needs to know will get the message.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 12:14:08 PM
"just attach the springs directly to the base, on each side" is an old abandoned idea
of mine. there is no benefit from it, you get the same counter rotation of the frame
it is essentially the same as side walls.

when frame is narrow then also back torque is less

but best combination is pulling against side walls with two arms
in counterrotation, so that back torque is canceled.

"Conservation of Momentum will cause it to slow down" no, friction will
and there is no need to add torque, this is a simple demonstration device

i thought of that and there are various ways to add torque to such system
including linear arm on offset rotor, electromagnets etc.

one good spring pull has enough energy to lift the device few meters in the air
maybe more
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: kolbacict on May 07, 2021, 12:28:34 PM
For some reason, it do not oscillate for me.
does not oscillate on its own. >:(
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 07, 2021, 01:01:27 PM
A good discussion occurs here! Thanks a lot for it! Let me join this discussion too!
--------------------------
Please look again at the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
--------------------------
1) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum, which is described in the link above, can be used for a substantial decreasing of the recoil of any standard firearm as this does not influence in any way this standard firearm's range. (Besides in principle it is possible to use the new mechanical effect several times in a row thus reducing the recoil practically to zero.)
--------------------------
2) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum, which is described in the link above, can be used for designing of an entirely new kind of a shock-absorber. The latter can be installed on any vehicle thus saving human lives and/or preventing injuries.
--------------------------
3) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum, which is described in the link above, can be used for designing of a reactionless drive devices of various kinds.
--------------------------
4) The violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy, which is described in the link above, can be used for designing of a perpetual motion machines of various kinds. 
--------------------------
Note. Extremely important seems to be item 2. The new mechanical principle (described in the link above), if used in any standard vehicle, CAN SAVE HUMAN LIVES AND/OR PREVENT INJURIES!
--------------------------
Looking forward to your comments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 01:21:21 PM
kolbacict why the counterbalance, it should not be there.

how do you mean no oscillation

it should be double arm, each with two springs against side walls, fired in counterrotation.

like two of these in parallel
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: kolbacict on May 07, 2021, 02:48:43 PM
it was just an old device with a steel ball rolling along a chute. It was a pity to break off the chute. I took pains, I did it before. I thought it would not hurt. And this was done in haste.
If necessary, we will redo it. Well, it oscillate, of course. 10-20 damped oscillations.
What should be?  :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 03:24:38 PM
again, two arms in counterrotation
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 06:20:28 PM
Here's another thing: pulling a weight to the side while it travels upwards through a curve is the same principle behind Tesla's Flying Stove. Various builder's of that device have found that the weights' travel alone does not produce lift.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 07:10:04 PM
it's not the same, tesla stove reminds me a lot of tsirigakis design which also
does not work. i think that this double rotation that results in irregular path
confuses the inertial frames.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN4Vj3RCtjo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcT863rxo-o

in this spring design pull to the side is not because there needs to be pull to the side
but that is simply a way of imparting torque.

all inertial devices rely on centrifugal pull, that is all they necessarily have in common
there is infinity of ways this pull can be made asymmetrical, many of which
reduce the radius in a way that completely or almost completely cancels
out the desired forward pull. some don't and those work powerfully.

this however, is the most simplistic of all, just an almost bare basic principal

only thing that differs it from completely bare principle is the springs.

for that there would have to be some kind of prime mover at the axis
to accelerate/decelerate the two arms in counterrotation.

maybe i'm wrong about this spring scheme, but i doubt i am
i'm quite sure once countertorque is canceled, powerful linear
acceleration will result. we'll see if someone makes it

there have to be two arms in counterrotation for valid experiment

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: kolbacict on May 07, 2021, 08:07:07 PM
https://youtu.be/c3I2zeoUbzg
 (https://youtu.be/c3I2zeoUbzg)
Isn't that what we're talking about?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 08:16:12 PM
interesting but not exactly, i doubt if there is any centrifugal
force on the pivot due to the free end bending
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 08:43:05 PM
That Tesla's Stove video is defective because he's spinning the mechanism, rather than pulling it around in an "orbit", which is what Tesla said to do. If it spins, the active weights are the same distance from the center and produce canceling forces. Also, the orbit has to be in step with the rotation, not at a 2 to 1 ratio.

Tesla: "Both the center of mass and the center of gravity orbit around the same point". The center of mass never changes position if all you do is spin the mechanism.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 08:48:23 PM
where did tesla say orbit, not rotation? i don't think he said that.
and no, weights are not same distance from center of rotation
as clearly shown in the video and screenshot below.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 09:06:32 PM
Tesla said "orbit" in the patent, or his notebook drawing.


The active weights are the ones moving from the horizontal to the vertical (the red one and the opposite one) while they're being pulled to the side. If the weights' anchor points are at the same distance from the center, one shaft will move up while the opposite shaft moves down. If one weight's anchor point is closer to the center, the orbital movement will pull that weight to the side more slowly than the compound movement of the opposing weight. Then, the shaft which is closer to center (of the orbit) will move down a smaller amount than the other one moves up. This will result in a net overall lift.


The weights still have to be pulled to the side as they curve upwards.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 09:28:23 PM
you are misinterpreting the patent. if he said orbit he meant arms
"orbiting" the center of rotation as clearly implied in the drawing.

again, masses are not same distance from the center of rotation
as evident in the screenshot. while one arm is exactly in the center
and therefore has 0 centrifugal force opposite one is max out and
has max force.

just like tsirigakis it appears it should work
direction of centrifugal force in both designs is
really all to one side, but it doesn't work

why, it's not clear. only thing that comes to mind
that this kind of irregular path somehow confuses
the inertial frames
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 09:52:49 PM
The mass action points have to have different distances from the center of the orbit. Otherwise, it won't work, as various people have shown.

I corrected my misstatement. The principle I'm discussing is still valid. You have to pull the mass to the side while it curves upwards. Otherwise, it won't work. Unless YOU say it will?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 10:04:57 PM
"mass action points have to have different distances from the center of the orbit"

masses DO have different distances from the center of the orbit, very much so,
as clearly seen in the screenshot.

this approach is unnecessarily complicated and debunked, not worth mentioning anymore.

"You have to pull the mass to the side while it curves upwards."

just no

there are better and simpler approaches, water based one i disclosed just one example
there are even better ones, i am not telling exactly everything, do your research, people

let's for now focus on the basic principle
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 10:06:32 PM
Speaking of saying something, it doesn't matter what I say, you're going to argue. And I'M the one who has built over a hundred machines, having found out what works and what doesn't, in the real world.


Good luck getting someone to build your idea. I'm moving on. This is one field which doesn't deserve my mentorship.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 10:29:25 PM
i'm not arguing with you, i'm just pointing out when you say something not true

over 100 machines you say and yet you don't really have anything to show
but short video in which your device jerked itself bit up and down.

i'm not downplaying your efforts, all honest effort is valuable and commendable!

couple of americans have been flying in a disc with water based inertial drive
in the 1990s (according to report from keelynet.com), same venturi principle
based drive i independently rediscovered and shared here.

and after that i found even better approach that works, it's out there, if
you dig for it. no reaction whatsoever, capable of high rpm..but i'm not disclosing
everything yet.

with no intent to boast, i understand this on bit deeper level.
that much about "mentorship".

also, i recognize the need for people to understand the simple basic principle.
how many people dabble in inertial propulsion and still don't get it, almost
none get it.

hopefully someone builds it, it will either make great news here or be another
failure, if it fails, which i doubt it will, i'll easily find another way to impart
momentum to those counterrotating arms.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 10:41:49 PM
And the guy with the biggest mouth always has the followers, even with no practical experience in the field.


The machines I have sitting around which work have considerable financial value, so I'm not going to disclose them.


And yes, I am a student of the Art. Are you?

PS: I corrected my statement to say the shaft collars can't have the same distance from the center. Did you miss that part?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 11:05:38 PM

@nix85


The video I did put up shows the machine "jerking itself up" THEN moving forwards, with nothing to push off against. There's no need for you to minimize my achievement by leaving out the part about the horizontal movement.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 11:05:50 PM
speaking of biggest mouth, you might look at your own posts.

i don't have any followers, i'm just another member of the forum

i am a builder. i been building for years and i am building right now.

not gonna show your machines cause they have financial value? ahaam, sure

let me be clear, this is not and cannot be an ego thing. i invested most of
my time in gravity and OU, but i did invest A LOT of time and energy into
inertial propulsion too.

and i have no problem admitting that last principle i referred to in last post,
which is superior to anything i ever seen is totally not my idea and i was like
how in the world did i not figure this myself.

i have suffered the ego/pride enough to know it leads nowhere (hopefully)

also, i am student of art, i don't like to classify myself as an artists but i been
called that, i did write many songs in my life on a guitar mostly, i also work with
design. i don't see what that has to do with anything.

anyone who excels in anything in my book is a master and artist of that particular thing
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 07, 2021, 11:13:12 PM
Actually, I said "the" Art, meaning the Art of Inertial Propulsion. And do you really believe that a working Inertial Reaction Propeller doesn't have financial value?


At this point, I'm going to let you have the last word.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 07, 2021, 11:42:12 PM
that is most likely a troll question implying i did not study "art" (physics)
of inertial propulsion and there is a great irony considering he is the one
who did not study it, and if he did, he did not get it.
...
sure there might be money in it, but i do not pursue it for that reason
i didn't ask for last word, you are free to participate as much as you like
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 09, 2021, 11:18:37 AM
Isn't there at least one brave member here in this forum who would dare to say that the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY puts the basis of a new technology revolution?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 09, 2021, 05:15:07 PM

I don't see what courage has to do with your thought experiment.  But here's an experiment I did do, back in the 1990s:


I took a hinge and put a weight on the ends of the leaves, with a spring rigged to hold the hinge closed.  Then I put the fulcrum against the table and opened the hinge.  When I let go, the hinge swung closed, then jumped upwards a couple of inches.  Then I just held the hinge in the air, opened it, and then dropped it, allowing the hinge to close.  It did not move upwards at all.  So I put it on a tether, horizontally.  When I opened it and let it swing shut, the hinge swung backwards a little bit, on the tether. Then, after it closed, it moved back to its starting point and stopped.  It seems to me that flapping a hinge isn't going to move you around the solar system, even if the weights are moving in curved trajectories.


Now, if I put a mass behind the hinge, coupled with a brake, is something different going to happen, or is the back and forth movement just going to be a little slower, followed by the hinge stopping in its original position?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 12, 2021, 02:59:02 PM
Here are our last REAL experimental results.
1) Please look again at the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=330s
2) From 3:45 to 3:48 we have Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg and V1 = 0.1 m/s. (Please consider only the "upper" zigzag device.)
3) From 3:59 to 4:01 we have Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg, V2 = 0.06 m/s and  V3 = 0.01 m/s. (Please consider only the "upper" zigzag device.)
4) (1 kg) x (0.1 m/s) = ((1kg) x (0.06 m/s)) + ((4kg) x (0.01 m/s)). The last equality unambiguously shows the validity of the law of conservation of linear momentum in this particular case.
5) (0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.06 m/s) x (0.06 m/s)) + ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.01 m/s) x (0.01 m/s)). The last inequality unambiguously shows the invalidity of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case. 
6) How to reduce friction inside the zigzag channels? The answer is simple -- by using permanent magnet slides. (There are literally hundreds of permanent magnet slide designs in YouTube and in Google.) Please look at the links below for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQH2UhHss6c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXQqfIb-NXc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ4VGJCZUYE
7) The permanent magnet slide design:
a) reduces friction (and the related generated heat) practically to zero;
b) reduces the experimental error (due to friction and to the related generated heat) practically to zero.
8) And if the above mentioned experimental error is practically equal to zero, then this experimental error can be neglected (as it is much smaller than 1 %).
9) Alternatively you can use electrostatic levitation, rolling friction instead of sliding friction, etc. Besides modern tribology (this is the science, which focuses on sliding/friction phenomena) suggests a great variety of high-tech materials and/or lubricants' which are also able to reduce sliding friction (and the related generated heat) practically to zero.
10) In one word, you can carry out easily the above mentioned experiments in your garage or in any standard school laboratory (or by using any other simple DIY (DoItYourself) methods).
Looking forward to your comments.
---------------------------------
P. S. The above yellow head with the black spectacles must be read as number 8. (The system generates some permanent defect.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 12, 2021, 03:01:41 PM
The yellow head with the black spectacles from our last post must be read as number 8. (The system generates some permanent defect.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 12, 2021, 04:06:31 PM
In free space, a mass moving against a curved track will cause the track to move in such a way that allows the mass to move in a straight line.


No further comments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 12, 2021, 04:24:45 PM
To  Jerry Volland.
-----------------------------
You are simply an absolute amateur in the field of theoretical and applied mechanics for sure. You do not actually understand what are you talking about. Firstly educate seriously yourself in the field of theoretical and applied mechanics and just then take part in this discussion. Because otherwise you resemble a clown!   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 13, 2021, 01:53:00 AM
A Master of the martial arts was taking his afternoon nap, sleeping on a bamboo mat in the corner of his dojo, when a student burst in, with some news he just had to tell the Master. So he rushed over to wake the Master, whereupon the Master picked up a stick and whomped the daylights out of the student, without even waking up. The moral of the story: let sleeping Masters lie.


It is not for me to wake you up before you're ready.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on May 13, 2021, 02:34:06 AM
@George1

There you go abusing the members again.  Not good. Chill out.
.. ... .. .. ...
@Jerry Volland

Please excuse George he's a youngster.
                  but
Speaking of clowns..

Did you hear the one about the two cannibals ?

One walks up and asks the other "what's you cooking ?"

The other replies "clown"
Then passing a big spoon full,  asks " this taste funny to you ?"
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on May 14, 2021, 08:02:37 PM

@ Jerry Volland

Nicely said / thank you !
... ... .. ...
Better late than never.

Please understand, my clown joke was in no way intended
as insult to or in regard to you.

          with respect
                    floor
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 14, 2021, 08:44:10 PM
@floor,


My situation, on the home front, is so serious I don't have time for extraneous humor.


But it seems to me that you just killed this thread.


Getting to be a habit?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on May 14, 2021, 09:21:39 PM
Yes, I've noticed.  You think your time is more valuable than other peoples, do you ?
                          I am sorry for your troubles.
No advice for you my brother.  Your cup is too full right now.

   peace be with you
              floor
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 15, 2021, 12:32:03 AM
Someone calls me a clown, what do you do? Respectfully say "there aren't any clowns on this forum, only dedicated researchers", or throw in a 'clown' joke, signifying it's ok to talk about clowns?


And my time IS more valuable than some others', because I'm at a more advanced level, with multiple projects. The same time it took me to post my Ed Gray thread WOULD have allowed me to finish my new commutator. By the time my 'two week notice' was up, something else came up which has to be dealt with. So the commutator is still just sitting there, half finished. And I can't help but resent that; forum participation is not to my advantage.


It's just that this forum isn't the right place to post information which isn't available anywhere else on the Internet. And I don't have to "pour some water out of my glass before I can receive new water". I have other ways to extend my paradigm.


And how many people here believe every word of Aaron Murakami's "smear campaign", without giving me any chance to respond?


Later days.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on May 15, 2021, 03:15:58 AM
I don't even know who Aaron Murakami is, nor really any thing about that.
Maybe vaguely so ?  I'm not really sure though.  But I don't think so.
I do the O.U. forum and no others.

I do know from personal experience, what its like to be sieged 
by a troll or group of trolls, so on...

Some times I'm too defensive, too much on the guard, hyper sensitive
about my projects. 

I think I dished out some blow back / the residue still on me,  from
some of  my own past and unpleasant internet encounters.

Please accept my apology
   again
     respectfully
        floor
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 15, 2021, 12:13:55 PM
To Jerry Volland.
------------------------------
First of all please excuse me, if I have insulted you. I am really sorry about this!
Nobody presses you to accept anything. You could carry out the experiments, if you like. (But if you decide to experiment, then please follow strictly the instructions in the video.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 15, 2021, 03:24:44 PM
to counteract the immense disinformation and unnecessary derailing drama
let's just repeat the key point

if you are floating in space and you swing a mass in front of you

you will accelerate linearly + you will start to spin around your own axis

if you swing two same masses in opposite directions

you will experience pure linear acceleration

you can LITERALLY swim in space
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on May 15, 2021, 03:34:11 PM
to counteract the immense disinformation and unnecessary derailing drama
let's just repeat the key point

if you are floating in space and you swing a mass in front of you

you will accelerate linearly + you will start to spin around your own axis

if you swing two same masses in opposite directions

you will experience pure linear acceleration

you can LITERALLY swim in space


it depends from "space"-definition :


I.S.S.- outer board repair/work  the astronauts ever fixed by line and/or magnet boots !


                                                           Not in space reality !
https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/181634/image// (https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/181634/image//)


                 Beside strong and radical radio-active radiation ! Included https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray)


                 Space/Cosmos average temperature (?) :
                  https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weltraum
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 15, 2021, 03:38:43 PM
so what if astronauts are tied up or attached to hull by magnetic boots

if their rope broke and they had no little thrusters on the suit,

they would accept their faith and die...when actually they

could swim back to the station if they only knew they could

and who is talking about radiation, why you post unrelated stuff
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on May 15, 2021, 03:44:47 PM


could swim back to the station if they only knew they could ;D

https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.05972 (https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.05972)


and who is talking about radiation, why you post unrelated stuff


https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/181634/image// (https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/181634/image//)


their suit ! their Oxygen tank ! .........






Pardon,but Your given image remembers me https://www.rubylane.com/item/827205-19April052/Amazing-Sea-Monkeys-sea-monkey-Mom (https://www.rubylane.com/item/827205-19April052/Amazing-Sea-Monkeys-sea-monkey-Mom)


reclam in the End-70´ !


Kinderkram !

 A little complicated -the right mix  on earth/in space -the breathing : 


 https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.blauhoehle.org/index.php/technik (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.blauhoehle.org/index.php/technik)


and how fast the human body shall swim back to I.S.S. ?


https://www.google.com/search?q=iss+geschwindigkeit&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=iss+geschwindigkeit&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l4j0i22i30l5.9187j1j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 (https://www.google.com/search?q=iss+geschwindigkeit&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=iss+geschwindigkeit&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l4j0i22i30l5.9187j1j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)


                                         7,66 km/s the station mass velocity
                             
                                                         lecture for pupils :
https://www.dpg-physik.de/veroeffentlichungen/publikationen/broschueren-buecher/schulheft_mit-astronauten-ins-weltall-2.pdf (https://www.dpg-physik.de/veroeffentlichungen/publikationen/broschueren-buecher/schulheft_mit-astronauten-ins-weltall-2.pdf)

Together with its solar modules, the ISS is as big as a soccer field: about 80 by 100 meters.
Its mass is almost 500 tons, the interior corresponds to the volume of two passenger aircraft


And this 27 000 Km per hour I.S.S. velocity only as "artificial moon" from an 100 000 Km per hour velocity moving Éarth
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.geo.de/wissen/weltall/18177-rtkl-endlich-verstehen-warum-merken-wir-nichts-davon-dass-die-erde-mit-mehr-als (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.geo.de/wissen/weltall/18177-rtkl-endlich-verstehen-warum-merken-wir-nichts-davon-dass-die-erde-mit-mehr-als)


                                                                                  ;D


                                              velocity by gravity but without air resistance :


https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.swr.de/wissen/1000-antworten/wissenschaft-und-forschung/1000-antworten-1384.html%23:~:text%3DGravitationskraft%2520und%2520Luftwiderstand%26text%3DDas%2520bedeutet%253A%2520Ohne%2520Luftwiderstand%2520w%25C3%25BCrden,km%252Fh%2520und%2520so%2520weiter (https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.swr.de/wissen/1000-antworten/wissenschaft-und-forschung/1000-antworten-1384.html%23:~:text%3DGravitationskraft%2520und%2520Luftwiderstand%26text%3DDas%2520bedeutet%253A%2520Ohne%2520Luftwiderstand%2520w%25C3%25BCrden,km%252Fh%2520und%2520so%2520weiter).




That means: Without air resistance, we would be 9.81 m / s per second in free fall - that's the equivalent of 35 km / h - faster: after two seconds we fall at 70 km / h, after 3 seconds at 105 km / h and so on further. After a minute we would have a speed of 2,100 kilometers per hour - so we would have broken the sound barrier long ago.

           and these all realities compared with nix85 his


STILLLEBEN https://overunity.com/17817/is-this-a-reactionless-drive-or-a-perpetual-motion-machine/dlattach/attach/181634/image//


                                         ;)  man koennte dieses auch als "Naive (Weltenraum)Malerei " titulieren
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 16, 2021, 12:46:56 PM
Here are our last REAL experimental results.
1) Please look again at the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=330s
2) From 3:45 to 3:48 we have Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg and V1 = 0.1 m/s. (Please consider only the "upper" zigzag device.)
3) From 3:59 to 4:01 we have Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg, V2 = 0.06 m/s and  V3 = 0.01 m/s. (Please consider only the "upper" zigzag device.)
4) (1 kg) x (0.1 m/s) = ((1kg) x (0.06 m/s)) + ((4kg) x (0.01 m/s)). The last equality unambiguously shows the validity of the law of conservation of linear momentum in this particular case.
5) (0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.06 m/s) x (0.06 m/s)) + ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.01 m/s) x (0.01 m/s)). The last inequality unambiguously shows the invalidity of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
6) How to reduce friction inside the zigzag channels? The answer is simple -- by using permanent magnet slides. (There are literally hundreds of permanent magnet slide designs in YouTube and in Google.) Please look at the links below for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQH2UhHss6c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXQqfIb-NXc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ4VGJCZUYE
7) The permanent magnet slide design:
a) reduces friction (and the related generated heat) practically to zero;
b) reduces the experimental error (due to friction and to the related generated heat) practically to zero.
8) And if the above mentioned experimental error is practically equal to zero, then this experimental error can be neglected (as it is much smaller than 1 %).
9) Alternatively you can use electrostatic levitation, rolling friction instead of sliding friction, etc. Besides modern tribology (this is the science, which focuses on sliding/friction phenomena) suggests a great variety of high-tech materials and/or lubricants' which are also able to reduce sliding friction (and the related generated heat) practically to zero.
10) In one word, you can carry out easily the above mentioned experiments in your garage or in any standard school laboratory (or by using any other simple DIY (DoItYourself) methods).
Looking forward to your comments.
---------------------------------
P. S. The above yellow head with the black spectacles must be read as number 8. (The system generates some permanent defect.)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 17, 2021, 12:33:05 AM
interesting patent, but not clear if he tested this
or exactly how it's supposed to work

for example figure 2 below, he has this arm to
divert water from the bottom part and create
imbalance of centrifugal force

but diverted water will push down on the arm
so this doesnt seem right

figure 5 with slanted parabolic dish appears to
be different, along the lines of water principle i
shared. its not clear if these two are the same
thing or what

https://patents.google.com/patent/US3979961
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 17, 2021, 03:07:53 PM
To nix85.
---------------------------
My respect to your enthusiam and diligence! This is the way for pushing forward the technology progress!
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on May 17, 2021, 03:23:25 PM
To nix85.
---------------------------
My respect to your enthusiam and diligence! This is the way for pushing forward the technology progress!
Regards,

Yes ! I agree !
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 17, 2021, 03:38:48 PM
Please look again at our post of May 16, 2021, 12:46:56 PM.
----------------------------------------
1) 0.1 kg.m/s = 0.1 kg.m/s. The last equality shows the validity of the law of conservation of linear momentum in this particular case.
2) 0.005 J > 0.002 J. The last inequality shows the invalidity of the law of mechanical energy in this particular case.
3) Modern (and even not so modern) technologies allow reducing of friction to a certain value/limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) becomes negligible (less than 1 %).
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 17, 2021, 06:57:20 PM
Thank you both.

Yesterday i figured my idea with springs is flawed for the reason
i suspected.

If you have two balls on arms joined at a pivot and you got a spring
connecting two balls, balls are gonna clash together in a straight line
pushing the pivot downward.

Guy who built it said it jumped in the air but then bounced back down.
So obviously there is centrifugal pull but also this effect canceling it.

Springs were just an idea to simplify demonstration of the basic principle
which stands perfectly.

Basic principle, again, refers to accelerating/decelerating counterrotating
unbalanced masses on the axis.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 18, 2021, 09:18:59 AM
To nix85.
--------------------------
This rotation-based principle obviously has many variations. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 18, 2021, 09:23:26 AM
The text below is a copy of our post of May 17, 2021, 03:38:48 PM.   
----------------------------------------
1) 0.1 kg.m/s = 0.1 kg.m/s. The last equality shows the validity of the law of conservation of linear momentum in this particular case.
2) 0.005 J > 0.002 J. The last inequality shows the invalidity of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
3) Modern (and even not so modern) technologies allow reducing of friction to a certain value/limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) becomes negligible (less than 1 %).
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 18, 2021, 11:27:25 AM
Of course there are. Point being, in Shipov device for example
clearly there is acceleration to one side but then he allows
masses to go beyond 180° and of course it curbs itself.
If he curbed the masses at the axis before they crossed
180° there would be no back reaction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WoZPvL-9oI
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 18, 2021, 07:17:06 PM
Thank you both.

Yesterday i figured my idea with springs is flawed for the reason
i suspected.

If you have two balls on arms joined at a pivot and you got a spring
connecting two balls, balls are gonna clash together in a straight line
pushing the pivot downward.

Guy who built it said it jumped in the air but then bounced back down.
So obviously there is centrifugal pull but also this effect canceling it.

Springs were just an idea to simplify demonstration of the basic principle
which stands perfectly.

Basic principle, again, refers to accelerating/decelerating counterrotating
unbalanced masses on the axis.



nix85:


Thank you for considering my experiment, but the arrow in your drawing is backwards.  As the hinge opens, the pivot moves upwards. Then, the instant the hinge stops, the pivot moves back downwards an equal amount. Due to Conservation of Momentum, the mechanism itself will move however it has to for the masses to move in a straight line, rather than in a curved path. (In the absence of torque input).


So what will happen if the operation is motorized?


And, of course, there are other ways to use a hinge.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 18, 2021, 07:19:15 PM
For convience, here's a copy of your drawing:
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 18, 2021, 08:09:42 PM

nix85:


Thank you for considering my experiment, but the arrow in your drawing is backwards.  As the hinge opens, the pivot moves upwards. Then, the instant the hinge stops, the pivot moves back downwards an equal amount. Due to Conservation of Momentum, the mechanism itself will move however it has to for the masses to move in a straight line, rather than in a curved path. (In the absence of torque input).


So what will happen if the operation is motorized?


And, of course, there are other ways to use a hinge.

I was not referring to you but another guy who built my design, of which
i posted a photo few pages back, and my design is quite different from yours.

Springs can be utilized but it is advisable to avoid them cause they are not
needed.

There are better ways.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 19, 2021, 09:50:31 AM
To nix85.
-------------------------------
Interesting, very interesting!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 19, 2021, 09:52:52 AM
The text below is a copy of our post of May 17, 2021, 03:38:48 PM.   
----------------------------------------
1) 0.1 kg.m/s = 0.1 kg.m/s. The last equality shows the validity of the law of conservation of linear momentum in this particular case.
2) 0.005 J > 0.002 J. The last inequality shows the invalidity of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
3) Modern (and even not so modern) technologies allow reducing of friction to a certain value/limit, beyond which the experimental error (due to friction) becomes negligible (less than 1 %).
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 19, 2021, 05:31:11 PM
...
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 20, 2021, 09:33:17 AM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
One question, if possible.
Until now your posts describe rotational systems, consisting of solid bodies and liquids. What would happen if we use gases (air for example) or dust, which rotate in some manner? Curious to know.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards, 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 20, 2021, 09:46:29 AM
Please have a look again at the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&ab_channel=PeterAxe and at the related comments section. In this comments section an egghead-wiseacre, whose pseudonim is Dark Light 2.1, does his/her best to reject obvious truths. This person Dark Light 2.1 is a real clown! Please follow this discussion, if you like. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 20, 2021, 02:06:34 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
One question, if possible.
Until now your posts describe rotational systems, consisting of solid bodies and liquids. What would happen if we use gases (air for example) or dust, which rotate in some manner? Curious to know.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,

It depends on what you ate, bean gas gives best centrifugal pull.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 20, 2021, 05:31:14 PM
Two of the devices in my recent pictures worked as expected. The second version of the Spinning Hinges produced torque impulses which caused the central motor to speed up and slow down. The third version of this system did, in fact, drag itself off to the side, in constantly changing directions. (Not exactly what I was hoping for).
Here's the key to succeeding in this field:
1. Come up with an idea.
2. Build it.
3. Turn it on and see what it does.
4. Figure out WHY it does what it does.
5. If necessary, modify and repeat.
6. At some point, work on a different idea.
Here's how to NOT succeed:
1. Come up with an idea.
2. Draw it, as fancy as you like.
3. Publish, proclaiming it WILL work.
4. Ignore, argue with, or ridicule Peer Review.
5. Stick with your idea.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 21, 2021, 09:42:49 AM
To nix85.
---------------------------
Good comment! :) I appreciate your sense of humour! :)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 21, 2021, 09:53:47 AM
To Jerry Volland.
---------------------------------
You wrote: "Two of the devices in my recent pictures worked as expected." Would you be so polite to remind me in which of your posts these two devices were described? (Because your dialogue with nix85 (as well as with other colleagues) here bombed me with a lot of information (this is not a reproach!) and I forgot in which of your posts these two devices were descrbed. I am sorry for this.)   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 21, 2021, 10:05:46 AM
1) Please have a look at the two links below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPqEEZa2Gis&ab_channel=IthacaCollegePhysicsIthacaCollegePhysics
2) The second link suggests another possible method (among many others) for reducing of friction (inside the zigzag channels in the first link above) practically to zero. The key component of this method is liquid nitrogen. The latter however proved to be extremely cheap -- only $ 2.00 per liter.
------------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments. 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 21, 2021, 01:34:47 PM
George, stop the disinformation.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 21, 2021, 01:36:54 PM
As for reducing friction, electropolished stainless steel
+ low viscosity grease is the best.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 21, 2021, 04:33:32 PM
[/color][/font][/size]
To Jerry Volland.[/color][/font][/size]
---------------------------------[/color][/font][/size]
You wrote: "Two of the devices in my recent pictures worked as expected." Would you be so polite to remind me in which of your posts these two devices were described? (Because your dialogue with nix85 (as well as with other colleagues) here bombed me with a lot of information (this is not a reproach!) and I forgot in which of your posts these two devices were descrbed. I am sorry for this.) [/color][/font][/size]
[/quote]


Hey George, Thanks for taking an interest in my work.  The Hinge Machine relates to my conversation with nix about using springs.  He said someone built his basic idea about a weighted arm flopping back and forth between two springs.  That guy reported a torque effect, and I recognized that the weighted arm was pulling - through the spring - against one side of the frame, and that this caused the bottom corner to lift up, then drop back down when the torque impulse ended.  I hope you remember this, as it would be time consuming to find the specific message.


At that point in our discussion (which wasn't intended to "bomb" your thread), I pointed out that when a mass with a curved trajectory moves against a spring, the resulting centrifugal reaction force is felt at the spring's tie off point.  (The spring is what's pulling the mass, not the pivot).  My Hinge Machine, which I built and tested myself, embodies, and proves this basic, fundamental principle:  *as long as the hinges are moving against springs* all centrifugal force is directed to the sides, and there is no forwards or reverse movement at all, as there would be if the centripetal pull were still coming from the shafts, rather than from the springs.  Furthermore, while the masses are moving through the longer trajectories, at the ends of the moving hinges, Conservation of Momentum requires the rotational speed to slow down, and that's exactly what happens during my machine's operation.  So this is one way to produce a braking force on the backside.  The remainder of that machine's operation hasn't been discussed on this forum.


Like I said, I wasn't intending to bomb your thread.  You seemed to tolerate nix's unrelated postings, without complaint, so I merely joined in with his discussion, when I saw an error in his presumptions.


My third picture shows a counter rotating concentric shaft mechanism which I presented, without discussing its operation, or application, saying only that "there are other ways to flap a hinge".  (From a recent message.)  Something I didn't do was disagree with his assertion that springs are unnecessary, even "unadvisable"; for some purposes, a spring is essential.


Again, thanks for your interest.


_________________________

Earth for Earthlings!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 21, 2021, 04:54:54 PM
It is not just back torque. He said device jumped in the air then back down.

Back torque can just lift one side and sink the other, NOT propel whole device up.

But this configuration is no good for reason already illustrated. Two points connected
by a spring will clash in straight line pushing the pivot down.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 21, 2021, 05:06:31 PM
There is a workaround, using springs in different way.
Key being that springs here act purely in horizontal way.

Again, this is just for demonstration of the basic principle
which can be demonstrated without springs as well acting
on the axis.

This is of course not a solution for actual propulsion system.
There are better solutions, i already shared water one,
you did not recognize it. There is an even better one,
not mine idea, i am not sharing that one.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 21, 2021, 10:56:51 PM
Hi George, I need some advice.
You recently suggested using air for an Internal Propulsion system. I've done some work along these lines, using a high power 'smoke ring' vortex blaster. Obviously, the ring impact momentum is going to equal the launch recoil. However, my vortex explodes on impact, then blasts outwards. So I was wondering if an angled deflection ring around the perimeter, redirecting the blast downwards, would produce lift in an enclosed container, such as a balloon?


Here's my video:
https://youtu.be/AKYK0_NfFLc
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 22, 2021, 11:59:55 AM
What I'm thinking is that after the blast is deflected downwards, producing lift, the downwards momentum will be attenuated through elastic scattering.


Any comments?  Or should I just abandon the idea?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 22, 2021, 06:20:32 PM
@George1:
All righty then, no advice. I'm turning it back over to you. But don't forget, using gas was YOUR idea; it's not like I tried to hijack your thread or something.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 26, 2021, 02:20:23 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
1) You wrote: "George, stop the disinformation! As for reducing friction, electropolished stainless steel+ low viscosity grease is the best."
2) But dear nix85, I am not trying to disinform anybody! We are only considering different possible methods for reducing of friction! And yes, I perfectly agree with you that "electropolished stainless steel+ low viscosity grease" is an excellent solution! I am not arguing with you! :)   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 26, 2021, 02:21:46 PM
To Jerry Volland.
-------------------------------------
Hi there,
1) I could not answer you immediately because I was fully occupied with some experiments of ours.
2) It would be a pleasure for my colleagues and me to work together. Please give me some time to consider carefully your last posts.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 26, 2021, 02:26:48 PM
To those members of this forum who would like to carry out the experiments as described in the link  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  and in the related posts of ours in this forum.
-----------------------------------
Let me share with you some experimental experience of ours.
-----------------------------------
1) Disadvantages of the experiment in PART 1 and in PART 2.
1A) Comparatively short time intervals due to g = 9.81 m/s2. These comparatively short time intervals are not easy to be measured experimentally.
1B) Comparatively high downward variable velocities due to g = 9.81 m/s2. These comparatively high downward variable velocities are not easy to be measured experimentally.
1C) Comparatively large sizes of the experimental device. The blue component's free fall initial height has to be at least 2 meters long as a minimum. Otherwise it is comparatively difficult to measure experimentally the time intervals and the downward variable velocities mentioned in the above items 1A and 1B. (The bigger the initial free fall height, the easier the experimental measurement of the related time intervals and downward velocities.)
-----------------------------------
2) Advantages of the experiment in PART 1 and in PART 2.
2A) A comparatively small number of moving objects. These are only three in number -- the two couples blue rod-blue ball and the T-shaped blue component. (The Π-shaped black component is motionless.)
2B) A comparatively easy practical realization of the experimental device due to previous item 2A.
-------------------------------
3) Advantages of the experiment in PART 3.
3A) Comparatively long time intervals in the absence of g = 9.81 m/s2. These comparatively long time intervals are comparatively easy to be measured experimentally.
3B) Comparatively low horizontal constant velocities in the absence of g = 9.81 m/s2. These comparatively low horizontal constant velocities are comparatively easy to be measured experimentally.
3C) Comparatively small sizes of the experimental device.
----------------------------------- 
4) Disadvantages of the experiment in PART 3.
4A) A comparatively large number of moving objects. These are four in number -- the two couples blue rod-blue ball, the T-shaped blue component and the Π-shaped black component.
4B) A comparatively difficult practical realization of the experimental device due to previous item 4A.
-----------------------------------
5) Taking into considerations all pros and cons of the experimental situation we (our team) tend to conclude that it is much better to focus on the experiment described in PART 3 of the video. Because longer time intervals and lower horizontal constant velocities (if compared to shorter time intervals and higher downward variable velocities) are much easier to be registered and measured experimentally.
-----------------------------------
Looking forward to your comments.   
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 28, 2021, 09:15:29 AM
To Jerry Volland.
---------------------------------
Your last video is very interesting. Some more details about your experiment? (If this is not a commercial and technology secret of yours, of course.) The problem (not unsolvable, of course) is that the fluid mechanics is a quite sophisticated field of knowledge, which is mostly based on theoretical models and too much mathematics. Do you have some calculations/equations or you rely mostly on intuition? (I am not against intuition. The latter gives many times much better results than mathematics.)
Looking forward to your answer.     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 28, 2021, 09:18:25 AM
Please have a look again at the link  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  and in the related posts of ours in this forum.
Can we accept the simple obvious fact that the law of conservation of mechanical energy is not correct in this particular case?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 28, 2021, 04:10:34 PM
To Jerry Volland.
---------------------------------
Your last video is very interesting. Some more details about your experiment? (If this is not a commercial and technology secret of yours, of course.) The problem (not unsolvable, of course) is that the fluid mechanics is a quite sophisticated field of knowledge, which is mostly based on theoretical models and too much mathematics. Do you have some calculations/equations or you rely mostly on intuition? (I am not against intuition. The latter gives many times much better results than mathematics.)
Looking forward to your answer.     


Your question is actually directed @TommeyLReed. Why did you invoke my name?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 29, 2021, 12:48:42 AM
George you still did not explain how is your body falling through curved pipe
experiment related to inertial propulsion.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 30, 2021, 01:12:32 PM
To Jerry Volland.
---------------------------------
Yes, I see, you are right, it's my fault. I will write to this guy and will ask him to give some more details related to his experiment.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 30, 2021, 01:18:32 PM
To nix85.
------------------------------------
But nix85,dear colleague, it seems to me that you have never read the explanatory texts in our video! Please make some efforts and read carefully and thoroughly (and several times, if necessary) the explanatory texts in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  and the related posts of ours here in this forum! Please!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 30, 2021, 01:21:18 PM
Has anybody carried out already the experiments described in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ? V2 = ? V3 = ?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 30, 2021, 01:36:28 PM
I seen the video, it was not clear exactly what you're trying to achieve.

Is it hard to put it in few words, what did you imagine to achieve.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 30, 2021, 01:58:50 PM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
V2 = ? V3 = ? Answer these two simple questions.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 30, 2021, 02:06:50 PM
Wuut
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 31, 2021, 09:30:16 AM
To nix85.
-----------------------------
V2 = ? V3 = ? Answer these two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 2nd time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 31, 2021, 01:42:35 PM
Explain in one sentence what that weight falling
down the curved sides has to do with inertial propulsion
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on May 31, 2021, 03:49:52 PM
To nix85.
----------------------------
Are you really so ignorant or you deliberately imitate ignorance? If the first one is true, then SIT DOWN AND READ CAREFULLY AT LEAST 50 TIMES IN A ROW SOME BEGINNER'S GUIDE/MANUAL IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED MECHANICS! AND JUST AFTER THAT TAKE PART IN THIS DISCUSSION!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 31, 2021, 07:41:37 PM
Wuuuuuuuuuuuuuut
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 31, 2021, 08:01:05 PM
Floor has some nice drawings on his thread.  I wonder if he's going to BUILD it, or is it, like this thread, just "theoretical"?

Speaking of Peer Review, George1 seems to think that only someone with a PhD is qualified to discuss his idea.  So HE has a PhD?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 31, 2021, 09:12:39 PM
@George
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on May 31, 2021, 10:15:24 PM
Let's talk numbers.  What's up with the grade school level mathematics on this thread?  There are some pretty heavy weight equations dealing with Inertial Drives.
And someone seems to think that magnetic force decreases linearly with distance, rather than with the inverse square?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: nix85 on May 31, 2021, 10:20:15 PM
Magnetic dipole forces fall off with square when close to the magnet and transition to cube at greater distances.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 01, 2021, 08:41:58 AM
Ok, ok, let us start from the very beginning and let us follow a step-by-step procedure.
--------------------------------------------
STEP 1.
1) Please consider carefully and thoroughly the animation/simulation and the related explanatory text in PART 1.
2) The left blue T-shaped component falls downward much more slowly than the right blue T-shaped component. Experimentally proved many times. Friction inside the zigzag channels (left device) as well as inside the straight-line channels (right device) is negligible.
-------------------------------------------
STEP 2.
1) Please consider carefully and thoroughly the animation/simulation and the related explanatory text in PART 2.
2) The experiment is just the same as in item 2 of previous STEP 1 with the only difference that in the zone of the segment "s" the straight-line channels' inner surfaces are made rough. And this roughness generates friction. And this friction slows down the free falling of the right blue T-shaped component.
3) The value of friction is chosen in such a manner that the two blue components touch the ground simultaneously. Experimentally proved many times.
--------------------------------------------
STEP 3.
It more than evident from previous STEP 1 and STEP 2 that the zigzags generate mechanical effect, (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat.
--------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE. The masses of the couples blue rod-blue ball are much smaller (but not equal to zero) than the masses of the T-shaped blue componnets.
--------------------------------------------
Let us stop the explanations for the present. Do you have any questions related to the above STEP 1, STEP 2 and STEP 3? Please ask your questions, if any. I am ready to answer.

 
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 01, 2021, 12:51:55 PM
Dr. C.P. Kouropolous is an expert in the field of Inertial Drive analysis.  Why don't you send your link to him and respectfully ask his opinion?  I'm sure he'll conclude that you're not trying to advance Science.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 02, 2021, 10:25:37 AM
To Jerry Volland.
----------------------------------
I cannot understand actually what exactly do you want. You asked me at first to start explanations related to the zigzag principle. Ok, my previous post was full of explanations related to this zigzag principle. But now you are obviously neglecting my previous post explanations and you are sending me to some Dr. C.P. Kouropolous. (Who is that guy, how to contact him and WHY ARE YOU SO SURE THAT HE WOULD REJECT OUR ZIGZAG PRINCIPLE?) Because this is not a constructive discussion as you are talking only because of talking itself.
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 03, 2021, 08:58:32 AM
He's a high level Scientist who's really into math.  He had a free on line ebook called "Several Inertial Drives".  He can look at your math and recognize a set of equations for each of your factors, plus possibly suggest one or more additional factors to consider.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 03, 2021, 10:31:08 AM
To Jerry Volland.
------------------------------
Are you sure that this man and his ebook do really exist? (Hope you are not trying to cheat us. :)) Give me some contact link and/or some contact email address! Where does this man work? In which university/college/institute? What is his scientific title?
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 03, 2021, 10:35:11 AM
Any other comments related to the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY   ?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 03, 2021, 01:14:50 PM
To Jerry Volland.
------------------------------
Are you sure that this man and his ebook do really exist? (Hope you are not trying to cheat us. :) ) Give me some contact link and/or some contact email address! Where does this man work? In which university/college/institute? What is his scientific title?
Looking forward to your answer.


Talking to you, the only one I'm cheating is myself.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 03, 2021, 02:06:52 PM
To Jerry Volland.
----------------------------------
Firstly, you reject our zigzag concept without any reasonable and qualified arguments. Secondly, you want from me to explain our point of view, but after that you neglect my explantions and you do not read my explanations at all. After that you mention some professor, but you do not give me any contact link to this professor. Actually what exactly do you want? Can you explain to all of us here in this forum?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 03, 2021, 05:01:19 PM
ARRAY
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 04, 2021, 11:08:34 AM
To Jerry Volland.
-------------------------------------
You simply need to see your doctor. Urgently!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 04, 2021, 11:11:10 AM
V2 = ? V3 = ? If friction is negligible, then what would be the values of V2 and V3? Please refer again to the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 07, 2021, 01:27:49 PM
A hot discussion occurs in https://centerforinquiry.org/forums/topic/how-to-interpret-these-curious-real-experimental-results/page/6/
A gang of professional cheaters and manipulators do their best to reject simple obvious truths. Please follow the above mentioned discussion, if you like.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 08, 2021, 11:09:26 AM
V2 = ? V3 = ? If friction is negligible, then what would be the values of V2 and V3? In other words, how many meters per second would V2 be equal to? And the same for V3: how many meters per second would V3 be equal to? Please refer again to the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 09, 2021, 12:59:29 AM
To Jerry Volland.
-------------------------------------
You simply need to see your doctor. Urgently!


Hi George; you can use my first name too.


I don't need to pester the good Doctor to see on my own that you're dissipating substantial [size=78%]energy in the form of torque impulses.  Every time the roller starts being forced around a corner.  So see how much that is, subtract it from the available push energy, then base your velocity estimate on the remainder energy.[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]I popped in at this Inertial Drive forum because you are using the "Reactionless drive" phrase.  This is a suppressionistic term.  Put into our vernacular as an intended impediment in this field.  I've been fighting this for twenty years now.  Try to say something encouraging on some given forum,, and someone will will start waving their hands yelling "Reactionless Drives aware impossible".  This is also part of the vernacular and is used to redirect attention away from some reported effect.  So I'm changing Reactionless drive to Reaction Machine.  (To compete with  a Reaction Motor).[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]Something else I don't like is the 'planted' trolls misapproate the Principle of Conservation of Momentum, saying that if something moves, then it's not conserving energy.  So I'm saying a primemover will adjust it's track length by posing itself through whatever trajectory is needed to maintain it's underlying momentum.[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]And now they're trying to associate "Perpetual Motion" into the vernacular, for everyone to know even better that it's "impossible".[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
[size=78%]I joined this forum because I have an agenda.  Just like everyone else.  I intend to provide personal mobility to the workers and residents on Mars.  I haven't decided about this planet, due to what the guy said about Absorber Theory holding that all longitudinal movements impact the future time cone, pushing the future back.  Is tyrant and distopia a future which needs to be pushed back and side stepped, or mechanisms to prevent us from reaching a future full of glory?[/size]
[size=78%]
[/size]
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 09, 2021, 11:33:58 AM
To Jerry Volland.
=======================================
Hi Jerry,
Don't be so nervous, my friend! :) It could be harmful to your health! :)
But you did not answer my two simple questions again.
-------------------------------
1) For the present we are talking SOLELY AND ONLY about velocities. For the present we are not talking about energies or about whatever else.
2) Consider carefully and thoroughly again the link  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
3) Assume that Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg and V1 = 1 m/s.
4) Now simply answer my first question: How many meters per second would V2 be equal to?
5) And after that answer my second question: How many meters per second would V3 be equal to?
-------------------------------
Looking forward to your two answers for the Nth time. :)


Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 09, 2021, 03:31:21 PM
Velocity is determined by the amount of accelerating energy and the amount of mass it acts upon.  But let's ignore the kinetic velocity; forget about energy.  The correct answer IS:. Watch the hypnotic zig-zag again. . . You're getting sleepy. . .Watch the zig-zag.. . . You're starting to believe. . .The velocities are always the same. . .Believe. . .Watch the zig-zag one more time. . .It is Reactionless. . . ALL drives are impossible


Velocity doesn't remain constant.  (It changes every time you whip around a curve).  If you don't keep adding Torque, torque is going to drag the curving speed down.  And I mean right away.  Forced torquing is an excellent braking system.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 09, 2021, 07:09:40 PM
And don't forget, every time the push slows down while you're torquing around inside a bump, that's followed by speeding up as you sling around on the outside of the next bump.  So the torque velocity constantly goes up and down.  Except torque doesn't have velocity.  It has magnitude.  In this case, a vibrating magnitude.  And the energy contained in this magnitude must be subtracted from the available plunger force, before you can derive the plunger's action force.  And, for the nth time, there's no such thing as a Reactionless action component.  Now watch the zig-zag again.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 09, 2021, 07:44:19 PM
And when you wake up in the morning you realize it was all a bunch of oblong bull shit.  There's no such thing as a Reactionless drive.  You don't even have a drive, just a science busting Action Strip, waiting for something to act against.  But even if it does, NOoo, there won't be any reaction.  Now rewind, step out in some direction, and move forward.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 10, 2021, 01:25:58 PM
To Jerry Volland.
======================================
Are you illiterate? Are you familiar with English alphabet? Simply answer my two questions.
Question 1: How many meters per second is V2 equal to?
Question 2: How many meters per second is V3 equal to?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your two answers for the 20th time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 10, 2021, 05:15:21 PM
Ignore, Dispute and Ridicule.

Actually, I'm NOT illiterate; I do know the difference between a shock absorber ('SA') and a Centrifugal Reaction Thruster. ('CRT')


What's up with your persecution complex, claiming you asked a question 20 times without one single answer?


Perhaps you should discuss my latest responce?  (The velocity is not constant). You DO want a responce?  Are you going to watch the zig-zag again?  Try to pinpoint the exact moment in the video where it jags?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 10, 2021, 06:20:12 PM
I figured out the perspective on Wheeler's Absorber Theory.
The universe is expanding at every point.  Therefore, the future is upcoming.  (Through the planet's central gravitational reference point).  So all we have to do is direct our longitudinal movements upwards.  For instance, we can skip up and coast down.  As long as the moves point away from the future, the longitudinal forces could actually pull the future towards the observer.  As a bonus, the past imperfect time cone might be pushed away, even as an imperfect Absorber.
Some of our negative traits do need to be pushed into the past.
edit:  The past is over.  So we need to aim all longitudinal movements as much  upwards as we can.  Maybe use a small jet for velocity and the Centrifugal unit strictly for lift?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 10, 2021, 09:46:26 PM
If V3 is the straight line plunger's velocity, then


V3=0 meters per second, which is 0 M*sec-1


You have to hold the thingy to push the plunger in.  Thereful, the plunger is vibrating, not moving.  It has a rate and a magnitude, but no 'velocity'.


Maybe you have to hold the SA too?  Remember, V2 does not have a constant velocity.  IF it HAS velocity.



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 11, 2021, 02:52:26 PM
To Jerry Volland.
============================
1) Your last post is full of absurd and senseless claims. For example you wrote: "V2 does not have a constant velocity.  IF it HAS velocity." The last sentence is a striking nonsense. V2 DOES NOT HAVE A VELOCITY! V2 IS VELOCITY ITSELF, YOU IGNORAMUS! What are you talking about? Have you ever read the explanatory texts of our first video? 
--------------------------------------------------
2) At first I thought that you were only an aggressive and ambitious ignoramus. BUT THE SITUATION PROVED TO BE MUCH WORSE -- YOU WROTE THAT V3 = 0 METERS PER SECOND!!!! SHOCKING!!!! YOU REALLY NEED TO SEE YOUR DOCTOR! URGENTLY! I AM SERIOUS! YOU HAVE A TREMENDOUS COGNITIVE PROBLEM! YOU OBVIOUSLY SUFFER FROM SOME KIND OF A SEVERE MENTAL DISORDER! YOU HAVE TO START URGENT TREATMENT IMMEDIATELY! 

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 11, 2021, 05:04:22 PM
Good Morning George.  What's up with the abusive personality symptoms?  Are you subcociously 'projecting' a need for therapy?

By the way,  do you have any plans to reduce your invention to practice?  A new shock absorber might be useful.  At what point will you decide what the distance of travel is?  How about the time of travel?  Is "1kg" all you know about it?  How much force is applied?  What's the typical torque radius of the  zig-zag  segment?  And  what does a brake next to a shock absorber DO??


Looking forwards to your responce.  (Based on the questions I just asked).

P.S.:  THIS is the forum I'm reading, not YouTube.  Put your specs right here.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on June 11, 2021, 05:08:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JB4RMIWroMY


Happy Sabado,aeh ::) ,weekend and sunny days wishing (if not desert-common ;D )


Shalom,shalom aleikum


Oxala


OCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 12, 2021, 10:03:57 AM
To lancaIV.
---------------------------------
Hi lancaIV,
Nice video! Thank you for it! It is always a pleasure to correspond with you! :)
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 12, 2021, 10:25:26 AM
To Jerry Volland.
====================
1) Ah, this is already another song! :) Your last post is reasonable and smart. Please give me some time to consider it carefully. I will write to you in the nearest future.
-----------------------------------
2) By the way, why don't you make a simple wire model of the zigzag device (PART 3 of our first video) and experiment on your kitchen table? Reduce friction as much as possible by using in the beginning an ordinary soap mash for example. Try different shapes and number of zigzags. It will be interesting for you, I am sure. One of our first zigzag-concept-related experiments many years ago was just of that kind  -- wire zigzag (and other forms of) frames, which were sliding over a horizontal kitchen table.       
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 12, 2021, 06:05:16 PM
And don't forget the coefficient of friction on the side with the straight line plunger.  Of course, this can be adjusted so the frictional force on one side matches the torque resistance on the other, enabling both plungers to travel at the same rate.


Now tell me again how this is supposed to be a Space Drive. Or is your real purpose nothing more than to 'show' a violation of some Law of Thermodynamics?  (Making this a click bait thread).
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 14, 2021, 02:37:08 PM
To Jerry Volland (and to all other members of this forum, who are interested in our zigzag concept).
------------------------------------
1) Please look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Please focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.
5) Vb’ =  pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8) Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
--------------------------------------
Please ask your questions, if any. We are ready to answer.

Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 14, 2021, 02:40:21 PM
The yellow head with the black spectacles in our last post must be replaced by number 8 followed by the bracket symbol ")". The system keeps generating some constant defect related to the writing of number eight.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 14, 2021, 04:00:51 PM
Click bait.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 15, 2021, 05:38:30 AM
If you hold a brake housing in one hand and push the plunger with your other hand, you'll have to hold just as hard as you push.  Any heat from friction is caused by pushing from BOTH directions.  And the same is true of torque resistance.


You can't move a space ship by pushing against a brake.  Or a shock absorber.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on June 15, 2021, 06:43:29 AM
" .....You can't moving a space ship by pushing against a brake ...."
Hello,Mister Volland !

Taking a/each  " brake" as resistance

On street a brake= generator  as energy recuperator

In space,low gravity and density,"Gedankenexperiment" similar light-sail/light-pressure-drive :
the hydrostatic paradoxon model,~ 3-ways-valve~ T ,vertical to  horizontal position or 360° positioning flexible ,as drive ?
SincereOCWL
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 15, 2021, 07:47:10 AM
" .....You can't moving a space ship by pushing against a brake ...."
Hello,Mister Volland !

Taking a/each  " brake" as resistance

On street a brake= generator  as energy recuperator

In space,low gravity and density,"Gedankenexperiment" similar light-sail/light-pressure-drive :
the hydrostatic paradoxon model,~ 3-ways-valve~ T ,vertical to  horizontal position or 360° positioning flexible ,as drive ?
SincereOCWL


The easiest drive is to tip the plane of rotation, with a mass on a spoke turning 360°.  With the mass straight out in front, suddenly tip the top of the shaft towards the mass.  This moves the mass downwards, and the space ship upwards.  Then slowly tip the shaft back up as the mass moves 90° to the side.  This pulls the mass's inertial trajectory downwards, producing upwards centrifugal reaction.  Repeat the quick down tip and slow tip back up every 90°.  This does produce some vibration, which can be dampened, like a bouncing car.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 15, 2021, 08:16:45 AM
With a T valve, the force of the water coming out the pipe is cancelled when it hits the top, inside.  Changing the direction to the side produces torque.  So there is no thrust at all, with the top on the T.
And the light sail has an external force, from light's tiny momentum.  (It is possible to make a crystal move towards a light inside the ship, but that is proprietary).
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on June 15, 2021, 09:58:53 AM
But by writing about hydro- also in mind aero- and in space an electro-gravity static (" paradox") T-model
like Thomas Townsend Brown his motionless "pump" !

And by T : this can also be unlinear=  curvativ,like an umbrella !

And yes,clearly there has by the space ship light-sail to be an external light source ,or we use piezo-/pyro-cristals their Klirrfactor ( or Zt/Q ratio )  !

Sincere
OCWL

p.s.: inventor : Herbert Leupold Applicant : US Army theme/Title or abstract : magic ring
      the light foil here the outer ring ~ riplet-foil with triboelectric function

    ( like p-n or double-band-/foils capacitor )e-gun like revolving space drive ship/shuttle
A "round sphere" ,drop like ,with soap-bubble-like "second skin" ?


On Earth : gun/ballistic munition push/impulse for-/backward forces
In "Space":        !?

p.s.II : Do we need " physical spaceships/shuttle" ?
            Klaus Rassbach DE4215818 New matter creation

         Start-havn    matter/materia -2-light creation
         beamed to Target-/Ziel-havn  and light-2-matter/materia recreation


       Real materia or virtual-e-clones ( humans/things  holographical Copy)

       Real-Time and Real-Space to Hyper-Time and Hyper-Space


      How many faults can we do to change the society "body orientation" to "personality/memoriam orientation" ?
                                                                                                          not : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_diamond (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_diamond)
                                                                                                          but : the individuum liveliness



      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjP9IFx9H1Y (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjP9IFx9H1Y)


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AEm301_EHQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AEm301_EHQ)  Eigenfear ,Eigenpain ,Eigenjoy,Eigenproperty
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 15, 2021, 11:32:00 AM
To lancaIV.
-------------------------------
Hi there,
Please give me some time to consider carefully your posts. I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 15, 2021, 11:38:05 AM
To JerryVolland.
--------------------------
I see. I will explain.
Firstly, do you accept the validity of the text of our post of June 14, 2021, 02:37:08 PM? Do you have any objections?
Looking forward to your answer.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 15, 2021, 02:19:53 PM
To JerryVolland.
--------------------------
I see. I will explain.
Firstly, do you accept the validity of the text of our post of June 14, 2021, 02:37:08 PM? Do you have any objections?
Looking forward to your answer.
I don't accept the validity of what you've said in this topic.  You can't push a rod against a brake pad without also pushing the brake pad against the rod.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 15, 2021, 06:21:34 PM
@lancalV:


T.T.Brown used electrokinetic energy, not electrogravitic.  I have a picture somewhere of a candle next to a lifter.  The flame is blowing off to the side and straight down, as a reaction to the hv Field's penetrating presence.  (The field IS the presence).  With electrogravitic energy, the flame would stretch upwards instead.


And do we really need a space ship?  Not if we could just teleport to a distant planet.  Out in interplanetary vacuum, I'd still want a ship.  WITH mobility.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: lancaIV on June 16, 2021, 10:44:23 AM
@lancalV:


T.T.Brown used electrokinetic energy, not electrogravitic.  I have a picture somewhere of a candle next to a lifter.  The flame is blowing off to the side and straight down, as a reaction to the hv Field's penetrating presence.  (The field IS the presence).  With electrogravitic energy, the flame would stretch upwards instead.


And do we really need a space ship?  Not if we could just teleport to a distant planet.  Out in interplanetary vacuum, I'd still want a ship.  WITH mobility.


http://www.rexresearch.com/thornson/thornson.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/thornson/thornson.htm)
and followed by search machine : " Mach-Lorentz thruster" ?

included : https://www.iasf-milano.inaf.it/Astro-Siesta/astro_danielep_2.pdf (https://www.iasf-milano.inaf.it/Astro-Siesta/astro_danielep_2.pdf)

https://www.google.com/search?q=Mach-Lorentz+thruster&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=Mach-Lorentz+thruster&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30.9953j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 (https://www.google.com/search?q=Mach-Lorentz+thruster&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=Mach-Lorentz+thruster&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i22i30.9953j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

and a german inventor named Erich Mehnert his applied ideas
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=erich+mehnert&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=erich+mehnert&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search)

and Max Mueller Friedrich
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=max+mueller+friedrich&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=max+mueller+friedrich&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search)


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=DE&NR=2335220A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19750130&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/mosaics?CC=DE&NR=2335220A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19750130&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP)





Related the Leupold/US Army " magic ring " Klaus Rassbach his " ring device"


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=5&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19820715&CC=DE&NR=3048277A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=5&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19820715&CC=DE&NR=3048277A1&KC=A1)


and Martin Hauck his magnet ring array



https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=65&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19910411&CC=DE&NR=3928644A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=65&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19910411&CC=DE&NR=3928644A1&KC=A1)


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=64&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19900816&CC=DE&NR=3939081A1&KC=A1 (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=64&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19900816&CC=DE&NR=3939081A1&KC=A1)


file:///C:/Users/beatr/Downloads/ThermIonic%20Overunity%20Generator%20Arthur%20Sadaly.pdf
https://overunity.com/15667/thermionic-overunity-generator-my-gift-to-the-world/ (https://overunity.com/15667/thermionic-overunity-generator-my-gift-to-the-world/)

Thermionic to iono-thermic or iono-kinetical thruster


http://www.rexresearch.com/atmoselx/atmoselx.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/atmoselx/atmoselx.htm)


http://www.rexresearch.com/dudley/dudley.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/dudley/dudley.htm)


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_thruster)  ion-wind-pressure


Tesla multi discs turbine  to Tesla multi bifiliar coils turbine


 https://www.google.com/search?q=tesla+multibifiliar+coils&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=tesla+multibifiliar+coils&aqs=chrome..69i57.12545j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 (https://www.google.com/search?q=tesla+multibifiliar+coils&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=tesla+multibifiliar+coils&aqs=chrome..69i57.12545j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)


seriell and or parallel


https://www.google.com/search?q=iono-wind&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=iono-wind&aqs=chrome..69i57.4994j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 (https://www.google.com/search?q=iono-wind&rlz=1C1AVFC_enPT930PT930&oq=iono-wind&aqs=chrome..69i57.4994j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)


On-board Nitrogen-to-Lithium reformer and low lithium consume https://alfven.princeton.edu/research/lfa ?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 17, 2021, 03:01:12 PM
Ok, ok, I will explain again. :)
==========================
1) Please look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Please focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
============================
Everything seems to be clear now, doesn't it? Each item of the text above (items 1 - 15) is correct, isn't it?
But please ask questions, if any. We are ready to answer.
Regards,
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 18, 2021, 02:11:16 PM
Looking forward to your comments, related to our previous post.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 18, 2021, 07:24:42 PM
@lancalV:
I get my flexible drive shafts from junk gasoline weed eaters.


@George1:
One question! 
Why do you use velocity in your calculations?  To a non illiterate, the term velocity implies an ongoing coasting.  Your plungers travel a short distance, then stop.  If you hold the casing, you can pull the plungers back out.  In and out.  This is a vibration, NOT perpetual motion.
Just because you can push something across the table with a stick doesn't mean you have a space drive.  But you could have a space drive component. 
And get rid of the brake.  Use a spring impact, or something more unyielding.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 18, 2021, 08:56:35 PM
Next,


Are you planning to have a roller ball in each nook of the squiggle strip channel?
You've discovered an effective torque generator, which can be used as a paddle or something else.
Now, come to a complete stop, step out, then move in some direction.
I discovered something too: Torque Acceleration - using torque to produce acceleration.
Where's the torque?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 18, 2021, 10:49:30 PM
Maxing out the roller balls will reduce the magnitude of the plunger vibration.  Just enough to roll the balls back and forth in their cells.  Producing torque in both directions.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 19, 2021, 10:54:17 AM
To JerryVolland.
----------------------------
Hi there,
1) Well, you have generated some really interesting ideas! My respect to your inventiveness! Good! But please give me some time to consider carefully and thoroughly your suggestions. Need some time. Really.
2) For the present I would like to ask you again to focus solely and only on the "X effect". Do you accept the validity of the "X effect"? (The latter has has been proved experimentally many (may be thousands of) times.)
Looking forward to your answer.
     
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 19, 2021, 10:33:42 PM
I'm not going to focus on some designated part of your klick bait presentation.  You do not have a space drive, and you do not have a perpetual motion system.  Continuing to rewind and repeat without end will cost you underserved attention.  You have to step back and look from a different perspective.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 19, 2021, 11:38:18 PM
Now imagine it's on a Plumb Bob and SEE the Plumb Bob vibrating.  What amount of coasting velocity does it have?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 19, 2021, 11:59:48 PM
"He who has the greatest potential to produce Change will attract the greatest opposition."  And that isn't George[size=78%]1.[/size]
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 21, 2021, 02:06:31 PM
To JerryVolland.
======================
But you are not reading my posts at all! This is not a dialogue! This is your monologue!
======================
Please read carefully the text below and please answer the question at the end of the text below. Please!
======================
1) Please look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Please focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
============================
DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST ANY OF THE ABOVE ITEMS 1 - 15? YES OR NO? ONLY ONE WORD -- EITHER "YES" OR "NO"!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 21, 2021, 07:57:51 PM
Answering your question requires three words:
No sustainable velocity.


*****
Jerry Volland has left the room.
What a waist of discussion time..
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 22, 2021, 12:00:13 PM
To JerryVolland.
=======================
You are simply afraid of truth. You are simply rejecting obvious physical reality.
Consider carefully and thoroughly again our post of June 21, 2021, 02:06:31 PM.
I am asking you my direct and clear question for the 2nd time: DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST ANY OF ITEMS 1 - 15? YES OR NO?
Looking forward to your answer for the 2nd time. (ONLY ONE WORD -- EITHER "YES" OR "NO"!) 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 23, 2021, 02:40:22 PM
To all sceptics :) here in this forum.
======================
Please always keep in mind our post of June 21, 2021, 02:06:31 PM.
Asking my direct and clear question for the 3rd time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 15? Yes or no?
Looking forward to your answer for the 3rd time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 25, 2021, 02:32:53 PM
Please always keep in mind our post of June 21, 2021, 02:06:31 PM.
Asking my direct and clear question for the 4th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 15? Yes or no?
Looking forward to your answer for the 4th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 25, 2021, 08:04:02 PM
Popping in one last time: I still think my suggestion to maximize the torque is a valid idea.  Of course, this would also maximize motor coil heating.  Driving torque produces a lot of waste heat, somewhere or else.


@George1: don't count yourself into Oblivion.  If you even read what I said, trying to impart understanding to a Robot brain, you can see how foolish you act, having to ask if I object to some part of your premise.


Over and Out.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on June 26, 2021, 06:42:15 AM
                             click bait
si !
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 26, 2021, 09:44:03 AM
To JerryyVolland and Floor.
---------------------------------------
You are both either stubborn ignoramuses or paid agents of the official science mafia, who try to manipulate the audience in a clumsy and unskillful manner by using only one absurd and insane arguement, whose essence is "This is impossible, because it is impossible and that's all!" Congratulations! An iron-made argument! You both are among the next Nobel prize winners for sure! In one word, it is evident for all members of this forum that you are simply two unworthy persons! Shame on you!
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 5th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 15 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 5th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 5th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 15? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 5th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)

 



Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on June 26, 2021, 11:44:20 PM
Second and final warning George2
or I'm telling my mom on you !
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 28, 2021, 09:48:53 AM
To Floor.
---------------------------------------
It is more than evident already for any honest member of good will in this forum that you are simply a paid agent of the official science mafia! How much do they pay you?   Shame on you!
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 6th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 6th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=> 
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 6th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 6th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on June 29, 2021, 01:36:58 AM
This is starting to look like the forum is being attacked by a worm virus. It seems more than just spam
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 29, 2021, 10:02:47 AM
To JerryVolland.
===================
NO, THIS IS NEITHER A WORM VIRUS NOR A SPAM! YOU ARE SIMPLY A PAID AGENT OF THE OFFICIAL SCIENCE MAFIA, WHO TRIES TO MANIPULATE THE AUDIENCE  AGAIN IN A CLUMSY AND UNSKILLFUL MANNER! TAKE SOME BEGINNER'S MANIPULATION TECHNIQUES GUIDE AND STUDY IT CAREFULLY! BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU SIMPLY RESEMBLE A CLOWN!
===================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 7th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 7th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 7th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 7th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on June 30, 2021, 10:26:48 AM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 8th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 8th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 8th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 8th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 02, 2021, 08:56:19 AM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 9th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 9th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 9th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 9th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 03, 2021, 09:46:31 AM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 10th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 10th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 10th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 10th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 05, 2021, 10:50:11 AM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 11th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 11th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 11th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 11th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 06, 2021, 01:45:14 PM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 12th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 12th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 12th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 12th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 07, 2021, 02:43:38 PM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 13th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 13th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))   <=>     
<=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 13th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 13th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 08, 2021, 11:15:10 AM
To JerryVolland and to Floor.
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 14th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 14th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))   <=>     
<=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 14th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 14th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on July 13, 2021, 11:29:53 PM
I already answered your question.  (You said "Ok, ok.  But let's forget about that for the moment, then repeat the question, claiming it's still unanswered.). However, so you'll slack off on constantly reinializing your topic, I'll meet your demand for further discussion.  But you'll have to promise that this answer will not be unheard.
My one word answer to your first question is "yes", I do see some issues with your claim.
In the mean time, I took some amount of time to advise you that you're dealing with a torque effect.  And what do you do?  Let's just call it some kind of Factor-x and be mysterious about it.  Can't deal with those equations? 
(No you're welcome without a thank you.)
Your second question is my reasoning?  (Not to be unheard.) (Or, ignore.  Then worm your time line towards the convergent future unassisted.)
The track is exerting an equal force against the roller balls as the counter force from the plunger.  That approach will not produce external velocity.  And the plunger does not have unilateral velocity.  It has a vibration.  The equations are not the same as the ones you're thinking about.
Your thought experiment neither destroys nor embraces Science.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 14, 2021, 03:23:57 PM
To JerryVolland.
============================
DON'T BEAT ABOUT THE BUSH, YOU OLD CHEATER! AND STOP BEHAVING LIKE A CLOWN! ARE YOU ILLITERATE? ANSWER MY QUESTION!
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 15th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of items 1 - 16 below? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 15th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
============================
============================
1) Look again at PART 3 of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY&t=24s  . Focus on the “upper” zigzag case.
2) Ma = 1 kg.
3) Mb = 4 kg.
------------------------------------
4) Va’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 1 m/s = const.; Va’ = V1.
5) Vb’ = pre-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0 m/s; the black component is motionless.
------------------------------------
6) Va” = during-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
7) Vb” = during-zig-zag velocity of the black component = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
8/ Vy = during-zig-zag velocity of each couple blue rod-blue ball along the Y-axis = variable and comparatively difficult (but not impossible) to calculate.
------------------------------------
9) Va”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the blue component = 0.6 m/s = const.; Va”’ = V2.
10) Vb”’ = post-zig-zag velocity of the black component = 0.1 m/s = const.; Vb”’ = V3.
------------------------------------
11) According to the third Newton’s law and to the related law of conservation of linear momentum we can write down the equalities
((Ma) x (Va’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb’)) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))      <=>
<=>  ((Ma) x (Va’)) + 0 =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (Ma) x (Va’) =  ((Ma) x (Va”’)) +  ((Mb) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (1 kg) x (1 m/s) = ((1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((4 kg) x (0.1 m/s))     <=>
<=>  1 kg.m/s = 1 kg.m/s.
12) In one word, the values of Va”, Vb” and Vy are actually of no interest to us.  Actually only the values of Va’, Va”’ and Vb”’ are of interest to us as these three values determine the validity of the third Newton’s law and the related law of conservation of linear momentum.
13) The mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball is much smaller than the mass of the blue T-shaped component. For example if Ma=1kg, then the mass of each couple blue rod-blue ball must be equal to, let’s say, 0.0001 kg (and even smaller).
14) In our numerous real experiments we strongly reduce friction and the mean experimental values of  Va”’ and Vb”’ are equal to 0.5999992 m/s and to 0.0999997 m/s, respectively, that is, Va”’ = 0.5999992 m/s and  Vb”’ =  0.0999997 m/s. The latter clearly shows that the experimental error (due to friction) is much smaller than 1 % and this experimental error is perfectly acceptable.
15) Let me remind only again (it is written in the explanatory text of the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  ) that the zigzags generate a mechanical effect (let us call this mechanical effect the "X effect"), (a) which is absolutely identical and equivalent to friction and (b) which does not generate heat. (We take gravity and friction out of equation and consideration.) And really even if the mean experimental value of force of friction inside the zigzag channels is equal to 0.0000001 N (our last experimental result), then the "X effect" still remains and can be clearly observed as in PART 3 of the link above.
16) And now we can easily calculate the pre-zig-zag and post-zig-zag kinetic energies of the bodies, taking part in the experiment. That is, we can write down the inequalities
(0.5) x (Ma) x (Va’) x (Va’) >  ((0.5) x (Ma) x (Va”’) x (Va”’)) +  ((0.5) x (Mb) x (Vb”’) x (Vb”’))       <=>
<=>  (0.5) x (1 kg) x (1 m/s) x (1 m/s) > ((0.5) x (1 kg) x (0.6 m/s)x (0.6 m/s)) +  ((0.5) x (4 kg) x (0.1 m/s) x (0.1 m/s))   <=>     
<=>   0.5 J > 0.2 J
The last three inequalities unambiguously show a severe violation of the law of conservation of mechanical energy in this particular case.
============================
============================
Asking my direct and clear question for the 15th consecutive time: Do you have any objections against any of the above items 1 - 16? Yes or no? (If yes, then specify exactly which item you do not agree with and why.)
Looking forward to your answer for the 15th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 14, 2021, 04:04:12 PM
To JerryVolland.
======================
Asking my direct and clear (slightly modified) question for the 16th consecutive time: If Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg, V1 = 1 m/s and Ffr = 0.0000001 N (and even smaller), then do you accept the simple obvious fact that V2 = 0.6 m/s and V3 = 0.1 m/s? Yes or no? (If no, then what would be the true values of V2 and V3 (according to you)?)
---------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer for the 16th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
 
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on July 14, 2021, 04:24:15 PM
To JerryVolland.
============================
DON'T BEAT ABOUT THE BUSH, YOU OLD CHEATER! AND STOP BEHAVING LIKE A CLOWN! ARE YOU ILLITERATE? ANSWER MY QUESTION!
============================


Something's wrong with a forum which allows this kind of behavior.

There's a lot of legitimate stuff in this field which could have been discussed.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on July 14, 2021, 10:36:02 PM
@George1:


What does my age have to do with anything?


And why do you think I cheated you by not providing Dr. Kouropoulos' email for you to spam?  If you don't have enough common sense to know where to find his email link, perhaps you don't deserve to contact someone with his stature?


And is there such a thing as a one-sided flame war?  I think it's just defamation on your part.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on July 15, 2021, 04:44:03 AM
@Everyone:


Why am I required to put up with verbal abuse, just to participate in a discussion?  No one else seems to face that stipulation.  Does this question 'disrespect' the forum's moderators?  I was banned from Heretical Buldiers for stating a similar complaint.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on July 15, 2021, 08:37:04 AM
To JerryVolland.
======================
Asking my direct and clear (slightly modified) question for the 16th consecutive time: If Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg, V1 = 1 m/s and Ffr = 0.0000001 N (and even smaller), then do you accept the simple obvious fact that V2 = 0.6 m/s and V3 = 0.1 m/s? Yes or no? (If no, then what would be the true values of V2 and V3 (according to you)?)
---------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer for the 16th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
 


I've already told you a number of times that I don't accept that V2 is a velocity.  You yourself said it varies, but now claim it's a fixed value?

Discuss my answer, or I'm going to write you off as non communicative.  (How sad, one of the last remaining 'good' forums, dominated by a Troll.)

And what right do you have to demand that I limit my answer to a single syllable?
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 15, 2021, 03:13:14 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
I demand that you limit your answer to a single syllable in order to avoid your regular distorting of my words and your regular manipulation attempts. The last example of this manipulative practice of yours is your claim that we have claimed that V2 is not a constant. But this is not true -- it is clearly explained everywhere in our posts as well as in the explanatory texts of our video that V2 and V3 are constant after the blue balls exit the zig-zag channels. Stop distorting my words!) 
========================
So in order to avoid your regular distorting of my words I am asking my direct and clear (slightly modified) question for the 17th consecutive time: If Ma = 1 kg, Mb = 4 kg, V1 = 1 m/s = const and Ffr = 0.0000001 N (and even smaller and can be decreased as much as you want), then do you accept the simple obvious fact that V2 = 0.6 m/s = const and V3 = 0.1 m/s = const? Yes or no?
-------------------------------------------
(If no, then what would be the true values of V2 and V3 (according to you)? HOW MANY METERS PER SECOND WOULD V2 BE EQUAL TO? HOW MANY METERS PER SECOND WOULD V3 BE EQUAL TO?)
-------------------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer for the 17th consecutive time. (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Jerry Volland on July 15, 2021, 06:18:31 PM
George 1:


It's axiomatic that a society will get the kind of Space Drive it deserves.  YOUR 'society' will get nothing but a scam.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 16, 2021, 01:15:49 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
I am not sure who is the scammer here in this forum!
Stop distorting my words and stop imitating ignorance and lack of understanding thus trying to manipulate the audience in a clumsy and unskillfull manner!
-------------------------------------------
CONSIDER CAREFULLY AND THOROUGHLY AGAIN (AND MANY TIMES, IF NECESSARY!) THE LINK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY  !
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
SIMPLY ANSWER MY TWO SIMPLE QUESTIONS!
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 19, 2021, 10:03:13 AM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 21, 2021, 01:37:14 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 3rd time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 22, 2021, 12:34:08 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 4th time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 23, 2021, 03:50:46 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 5th time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 26, 2021, 01:29:50 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 6th time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 27, 2021, 02:48:41 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increase or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 7th time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 28, 2021, 01:18:12 PM
To JerryVolland.
========================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 8th time.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: Floor on July 28, 2021, 01:34:30 PM

IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

No it is not.
Title: Re: IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?
Post by: George1 on July 30, 2021, 02:41:32 PM
To those stubborn amateurs here in this forum, who simply reject obvious physical reality.
===================================================
Consider carefully and thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary!) the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX14NK8GrDY
-------------------------------------------
Ma = 1 kg
Mb = 4 kg
V1 = 1m/s = const
Ffr. = force of friction inside the zigzag channels = 0.0000001 N. (The latter can be further decreased as many times as you want.)   
N = number of zigzags = 10. (The value of N can be either increased or decreased as many times as you want.)
Shapes of the zigzags = sinusoids. (The latter can replaced by any other curve patterns.)
V2 = ? (How many meters per second is V2 equal to?)
V3 = ? (How many meters per second is V3 equal to?)
------------------------------------------
Simply answer the above two simple questions.
Looking forward to your two answers for the 9th time.