Calculating Force and Energy Requirements for a Reactionless Drive in Space

  • Thread starter Thread starter MIKESMIND
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Mass Space
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the force and energy required to move a hypothetical 40 billion ton rock to a speed of one mile per hour using a reactionless drive, which operates without equal and opposite force. Newton's second law indicates that the net force needed depends on the desired acceleration, while impulse, defined as force multiplied by time, is crucial for determining momentum changes. To achieve the specified velocity, approximately 3.624×10^12 Joules of energy would be needed, equating to a change in momentum of 1.622×10^{13} Newton seconds. The conversation highlights the complexities of reactionless drives, suggesting that they may not align with Newtonian physics, as they could theoretically require no energy at all. Overall, the feasibility of such a drive remains highly speculative and challenges established physical laws.
MIKESMIND
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
If I have a drive that works in space without the need of any out side contact.
In other words there is no equal and opposite force. How many pounds of force would I need to move a 40 billion ton rock to a speed of one mile an hour? If there is a program to work it out that would be great as well.
Also what would be the best high temp and high strain insulators? I would like something what would work with molten copper or aluminum.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
MIKESMIND said:
If I have a drive that works in space without the need of any out side contact.
In other words there is no equal and opposite force.
Oh really?
How many pounds of force would I need to move a 40 billion ton rock to a speed of one mile an hour?
Newton's 2nd law will tell you the net force needed to produce a given acceleration.
 
I'm not sure how your hypothetical drive is supposed to work so I won't address that.

Use as much or as little force as you want. The more force you use, the less time it will take to achieve your desired change in velocity.

What's important is the amount of energy needed, or impulse- which is more convenient in this case.

An impulse (I), which is Force • time, will result in an equivalent change in momentum (mass • velocity). Both are measured in units of Newton seconds:

Ft = m\Delta v​

The total change in velocity is 0.447 m/s. Multiply that by the mass of your 40 billion ton rock (3.629×10^13 kg) to get the change in momentum:

Ft = 1.622×10^{13} N s​

From here, you can either pick the amount of force to use and solve for t, or choose an arbitrary time in seconds and solve for F which is measured in Newtons.

In terms of energy, you'll need 3.624×10^12 Joules to change the velocity by .447 m/s (1 mile/hour).

E = \frac{I^2}{2m}​
 
Thank You
I did a bit of fast math and that would come out about a 150000 pounds of h and the o2 to burn it minus boiler and electrical loss for each mile an hour of change sound right?
 
MIKESMIND said:
Thank You
I did a bit of fast math and that would come out about a 150000 pounds of h and the o2 to burn it minus boiler and electrical loss for each mile an hour of change sound right?

How did you come up with that figure?

You have postulated a reactionless drive. A reactionless drive need not require any energy at all. The figure of 3.624×10^12 Joules would imply that the reaction mass is infinitely large and is at rest in your chosen reference frame.

Choose a different referrence frame and the energy delta changes. That's one reason why reactionless drives do not fit well with Newton's laws.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top