help explaining why this will or will not work


by mick10
Tags: explaining, work
mick10
mick10 is offline
#1
May12-13, 09:23 AM
P: 5
hi all, first time poster. i have been a physics hobbiest since my first physics course as part of my ME degree and spend many happy hours . . . . well . . . . thinking about things lol. actually it goes back further then that to a science fair day in first grade, i remember picking up some rocks on a table and realizing gravity, kinda been thinkn about it ever since lol. properties of mass and motion. anyway i have a friend that is trying to argue the validity of this thing


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNP5o...e_gdata_player

we've all seen these things come and go, hutshison affect, h20 powered cars etc. and this to me appears to be a very complexstiction or reactionless drive. i have a pretty good understanding of the laws of motion and my contention is this could never work. it looks very clever and compex but in its simplest definition you cannot throw a mass then take advantage of its innertia within a closeed system

i am having trouble explaining clearly to my friend why this will not work and could use some help in sorting out the details (unless of course im wrong and you guys think this could work lol . . . hey i am always willing to be wrong and learn something ) my thoughts are that he does not realize the center of gravity is not on the axis of the machine but somewhere within that mobius path that the mass disk takes. in its deffinition it seems to me like a very complex reverse version of a villard, leupold or davinci wheel and it is that shifted center of gravity that precludes those from working, the conservation of energy. no freelunch in physics as it were . . . .

thanks all and looking forward to your thoughts.


(mods if this is in the wrong section feel free to move, thanks)
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
Physicists design quantum switches which can be activated by single photons
'Dressed' laser aimed at clouds may be key to inducing rain, lightning
Higher-order nonlinear optical processes observed using the SACLA X-ray free-electron laser
Danger
Danger is offline
#2
May12-13, 09:32 AM
PF Gold
Danger's Avatar
P: 8,961
That is one of the most beautiful and elaborate displays of absolutely nothing that I've ever seen. Total BS.

Stay tuned to this channel for a more scientific answer from someone else.
Crazymechanic
Crazymechanic is offline
#3
May12-13, 09:55 AM
P: 853
looks like one of those projects where "clever" guys make a nice looking video and some plans and fake organizations then ask for serious funding from people who don't know much about physics promising a "new technology" that will save the world and aliens too and then they get away with their money just to buy another one of those cool looking mercedes cars to enjoy the last times of the "age of oil"

The video is similar to those "free energy" videos or in other words refer to what Danger already said it is BS.

256bits
256bits is online now
#4
May12-13, 10:10 AM
P: 1,263

help explaining why this will or will not work


Fantastic.
Another awesome video of what useless things some people do in their spare time.
I think I'll make one anyways when I finally get lots of spare time, but not just right now, cuz it looks neat, with lots of mechanical things going round and round to dazzle everyone.

What is it, by the way. Looks like a new type of outdoor free air clothes dryer, except the guy put it all in a bell housing to cover up his embarrassment of such a contraption.

Anyways, your friend should be explaining precisely why he thinks it should do what he thinks it supposed to do, without skipping any parts about friction and violating any laws of physics. When the explanation from him comes to the part about "...and here's the beauty and magic about it....", he pretty much has stated that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Since it is supposedly purported to be a PM machine your thread will most likely be zapped, terminated, eliminated, or just plain closed for discussion. sorry.
TurtleMeister
TurtleMeister is offline
#5
May12-13, 10:35 AM
P: 735
It's not a PM machine because most of these devices require an energy source to operate. It's a centrifugal propulsion system. Or in other words, inertial propulsion, reactionless thruster, Dean drive, ect... (a replacement for the rocket engine). Of course none of them will work because they all violate the third law of motion and the conservation of momentum.
mick10
mick10 is offline
#6
May12-13, 11:03 AM
P: 5
thanks all, yes it is a wonderous piece of animation and one of the most complex attempts to get around physics that I have ever seen lol. I have been arguing my point to my friend for the last couple days with no success but he also has no classical training technical education. truth be told I did not either till I went through the core courses in my degree. I have been trying to tell my friend in the simplest terms you cannot throw a mass and then take advantage of its inertia within the same closed system. you also cannot hide the laws of motion within its complexity.


very much looking forward to more of your thoughts on this. thanks for the input
mick10
mick10 is offline
#7
May12-13, 11:33 AM
P: 5
Incedentally my friend is actually involved with the inventor somehow. He did the animation and something to do with the transmition I guess, I didnt know a thing about it til he posted a link on Facebook. Been arguing my point ever since lol. He keeps claiming some fifth dimensional properties that i dont understand lol. Also keeps telling that i dont understand simple physics lol (sorry so many lols but I can't help it)

As we all know from one of the greatest physics quotes ever "its easy to be creative and its easy to be credible but its very difficult to be both"
Danger
Danger is offline
#8
May12-13, 11:53 AM
PF Gold
Danger's Avatar
P: 8,961
Quote Quote by mick10 View Post
Incedentally my friend is actually involved with the inventor somehow. He did the animation
He should harness his talents and go to work for Disney. Their concepts make a lot more sense than this crap.
And tell him from me that there's no such thing as a "fifth dimensional property". That exists only at Hogwarts.
mick10
mick10 is offline
#9
May12-13, 12:59 PM
P: 5
Been trying to but you know how people try to hide their lack of knowledge behind "this is to complex for you to understand". Its funny but very frustrating at the same time
Danger
Danger is offline
#10
May12-13, 01:38 PM
PF Gold
Danger's Avatar
P: 8,961
Quote Quote by mick10 View Post
Been trying to but you know how people try to hide their lack of knowledge behind "this is to complex for you to understand".
Just counter that the same way that I do. Tell him, "No, you're just too f'ing stupid to understand why it won't work."
a1call
a1call is offline
#11
May12-13, 01:45 PM
P: 11
The reason it won't work is because it would violate the law of preservation of momentum. That is sufficient proof.

However, to elaborate the main axis of rotation around which the 40 disks rotate is neutral. all 40 disk assemblies weigh the same and no net positive force vector exists (regardless of the imbalance of each disk assembly).
Danger
Danger is offline
#12
May12-13, 01:53 PM
PF Gold
Danger's Avatar
P: 8,961
Quote Quote by a1call View Post
The reason it won't work is because it would violate the law of preservation of momentum. That is sufficient proof.
He tried that. The twit diverted it by invoking the 5th Dimension (who, by the way, will probably want royalty payments for this).
sophiecentaur
sophiecentaur is online now
#13
May12-13, 04:40 PM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
sophiecentaur's Avatar
P: 11,370
The animation reminds me of tht old PM machine with the balls running in and out of curved spokes on a wheel. The outer balls are supposed to provide more 'leverage' than the inner balls. The fallacy is that there are more inner balls at any one time than outer balls.

Actually, the animation / simulation thing is introduced far too readily in many posts on PF - by people who really want to know about Science. The subject of this thread is only an extreme version.
It's so easy to draw a sky hook but so difficult to make one! I regularly fly in dreams - and I'm convinced about it at the time.
mick10
mick10 is offline
#14
May12-13, 04:57 PM
P: 5
Quote Quote by Danger View Post
He tried that. The twit diverted it by invoking the 5th Dimension (who, by the way, will probably want royalty payments for this).
Ya know come to think of it they did right that song "up up and away" maybe the answer lies within the harmonics of tune lol
Danger
Danger is offline
#15
May12-13, 05:12 PM
PF Gold
Danger's Avatar
P: 8,961
Quote Quote by mick10 View Post
Ya know come to think of it they did right that song "up up and away" maybe the answer lies within the harmonics of tune lol


Do me a huge favour here, please. Force him to read this thread so I can tell him to his face what a moron he is.
AlephZero
AlephZero is offline
#16
May12-13, 05:30 PM
Engineering
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 6,356
You could try some mental judo.

Tell him he's doing it wrong, and it will generate a sideways force not a force along the axis. When he wants to know why, just say "it's obvious from looking at your video"

(Of course it won't actually generate any force at all.)
berkeman
berkeman is offline
#17
May12-13, 06:53 PM
Mentor
berkeman's Avatar
P: 39,648
Thread closed.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Need help explaining what I've done Linear & Abstract Algebra 1
Explaining to a layperson General Discussion 12
Help explaining that perm. mag. motors don't work General Physics 39
Explaining photosynthesis Biology, Chemistry & Other Homework 0
Explaining variations Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics 3