B Would the following test be proof of a successful propulsion system?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter Fizzics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Box Propulsion
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the feasibility of a propulsion system contained within a sealed box, fixed to a swing or pendulum, that could propel itself forward without external assistance. Participants argue that while the apparatus might demonstrate movement, it does not provide evidence of a viable propulsion system for space travel, as it relies on mechanisms not applicable in a vacuum. The energy required for propulsion raises questions about how it would enter the sealed environment. The topic is linked to reactionless drives, which are prohibited in the forum. Consequently, the thread was closed for moderation due to its controversial nature.
Fizzics
Messages
27
Reaction score
1
If an apparatus was placed in a sealed box, and was then fixed to the seat of a childrens swing or a pendulum.

And then, if it could propel itself (total mass 10kg) forward approximately 5 inches with a single pulse independently of any outside assistance and also without repositioning any masses within the box.

This pulse could then be repeated an unlimited amount of times, also there would be no external influences such as a fan or wind.

Would this apparatus then be proof of a successful propulsion system that could be used in outer space?
 
  • Skeptical
  • Haha
Likes davenn, Vanadium 50 and PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
Fizzics said:
Would this apparatus then be proof of a successful propulsion system that could be used in outer space?
No.
It might move a swing, but that says nothing about space travel, where there is no rope or tensile force. The swing, and the tree that supports it, rotates with the Earth on its axis.

How would the energy required for a propulsion system enter the sealed box?
 
Thread prefix changed from "A" (graduate school level) to "B" (basic).
 
Thread closed temporarily for Moderation...
 
Fizzics said:
If an apparatus was placed in a sealed box, and was then fixed to the seat of a childrens swing or a pendulum.

And then, if it could propel itself (total mass 10kg) forward approximately 5 inches with a single pulse independently of any outside assistance and also without repositioning any masses within the box.

This pulse could then be repeated an unlimited amount of times, also there would be no external influences such as a fan or wind.

Would this apparatus then be proof of a successful propulsion system that could be used in outer space?
This appears to be an attempt to discuss Reactionless Drives. They are a Forbidden Topic per the PF Rules. The thread will remain closed.
PF Forbidden Topics said:
EMDrive and other reactionless drives
See https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/nasas-em-drive.884753/
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
48
Views
9K
Replies
4
Views
7K
Back
Top