Inertial Propulsion Discussion: Energy Conservation

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of inertial propulsion and its implications for energy conservation. The original poster proposes a model utilizing gas with plasma or nanoparticles and superconductors to challenge the established principles of propulsion. However, the consensus among participants is that the first law of thermodynamics cannot be violated, regardless of the proposed mechanisms or materials. The discussion emphasizes the importance of adhering to established physics principles when exploring innovative propulsion ideas.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the first law of thermodynamics
  • Familiarity with propulsion systems and their mechanics
  • Knowledge of superconductors and their properties
  • Basic principles of angular momentum and motion
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the first law of thermodynamics and its implications in physics
  • Explore the properties and applications of superconductors in propulsion
  • Investigate existing propulsion systems and their limitations
  • Learn about advanced materials such as diamagnetic materials and their uses in engineering
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, aerospace engineers, and anyone interested in advanced propulsion concepts and the fundamental laws of physics.

Gitirana
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
In the follow link we are having a discussion about inertial propulsion: http://www.gyroscopes.org/forum/questions.asp?id=994

Bellow I transcript an open question that I’d like to share with you:

The question is: How will be the energy conservation in the following experiment:

“These experiment model is only for model test proposition because the model that I though probably will use gas with plasma or nano particles with super conductor.

All propulsion systems are based in the rule that to move in one direction we need to push mass in another direction in a linear system, it’s avoid the inertial propulsion.

What I though? Why the propelled mass need to follow in a linear direction? Why we cannot use particles or small pieces that after fired assume a behavior like a boomerang returning for its starting point? And in order to have a null effect of this principle may we shut the small pieces in the opposite directions with one mass using the other as a support to be fired?

Then I though: And if we use disks made by diamagnetic material allowing the floatation without any contact. One disk turning in an opposite direction of other. The disks may have teeth like small ramps. When one of disk touches the other, due the high rotation the teeth send them for opposite directions. A mechanical device may be used in each disk to change its form when this shut happens; we may change the disk form to allow it turn out of mass center helping to create the angular trajectory.

What do we will have: 2 masses propelled one against to other moving with its inertial energy in an angular (non linear trajectory), for same side and inside of an box or chamber. But instead of these 2 disks return for its start point, in the middle way they will collide with chamber wall transferring its energy.

The big jump will be the usage of superconductor material to break the physical connection. The disks that will float free may be accelerate magnetically without physical contact. To feed the system again, the disk may loose its diamagnetic condition by using a laser and falling in feedback mechanisms.

I’m trying to identify if with this new materials I found a breach in the energy conservation rule or if I’ missing some thing!

Again thank you from a friend in the other side of planet!”
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Gitirana said:
I’m trying to identify if with this new materials I found a breach in the energy conservation rule or if I’ missing some thing!

You cannot break the first law of thermodynamics, no matter how many hi-tech devices or how much techno-jargon you use. Sorry.
 
Welcome to PF, Gitirana. Please reread the PF guidelines: we deal only in real physics here. Claims that explicitly violate such well established principles as the first law of thermodynamics are crackpottery and not allowed here.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K