I Is it possible to "violate" momentum at the expense of more energy?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gggnano
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Momentum
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of creating unidirectional movement in a closed cylinder by applying force to a gas or solid ball, drawing parallels to the EmDrive concept. It questions whether continuous energy input can overcome momentum, suggesting that while theoretically possible, it may require increasingly more energy, making it impractical. The conversation highlights the limitations of momentum conservation, stating that any force applied will result in an equal and opposite reaction, maintaining the center of mass. Ultimately, the consensus leans toward the impossibility of achieving perpetual motion or effective propulsion with this method. The thread concludes with a note that discussions on EmDrive are prohibited in the forum.
gggnano
Messages
43
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
Produce thrust in a closed chamber when the opposite momentum is compensated with more energy?
This is in fact a shamelessly simple question to a point the reason it puzzles me is because it's too simple:

So basically you have a closed empty/hollow cylinder filled with either gas or even an ordinary solid ball...and then on the left side of the cylinder you put a force on the "fuel" (gas/ball...) so that it moves to the other side and hits it producing movement. Now, since the ball will come back once it hits the right side then can you produce movement ONLY in one direction for as long as you increase the energy from the left side that pushes the ball?

In fact this idea is very similar to the "emdrive" concept:

http://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/EmDrive.jpg

Yet I am not sure if the "emdrive" design realizes they will need more and more energy to battle the bouncing wave so perpetuum mobile is impossible?

And if this is possible at tall then you may say it's useless since you need more and more energy to combat momentum yet notice how if you have strong amount of heat but limited amount of fuel this is very useful. For example: you can use million degrees hot nuclear reaction in a rocket but you cannot find fuel in the cosmos to recharge the rocket...well it's not easy...thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can do anything you want if you have a sufficient supply of ""s.

Other than that, from what I can parse, you might consider that "putting a force" on the inside component to make it go to the right will cause the outside component to go to the left. No matter what you do, the centre-of-mass stays in the same place.

(If I remember, correctly) the Em drive is supposed to use some abstract group property of EMR ; the illustration you've linked to simply shows a fancier version of what you've got... which doesn't work.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Ibix
Thread 'Why higher speeds need more power if backward force is the same?'
Power = Force v Speed Power of my horse = 104kgx9.81m/s^2 x 0.732m/s = 1HP =746W Force/tension in rope stay the same if horse run at 0.73m/s or at 15m/s, so why then horse need to be more powerfull to pull at higher speed even if backward force at him(rope tension) stay the same? I understand that if I increase weight, it is hrader for horse to pull at higher speed because now is backward force increased, but don't understand why is harder to pull at higher speed if weight(backward force)...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
5K
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
8K
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K