Hi everyone!

If I told you I can make a ship that moves
in outerspace that has no "propellant" being used
and only uses electricity without forcing anything
out of the ship to make it move, would you believe me?

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

Spaceman wrote:
If I told you I can make a ship that moves
in outerspace that has no "propellant" being used
and only uses electricity without forcing anything
out of the ship to make it move, would you believe me?

Yes, but how would you control its direction?

johnny@. wrote:
Spaceman wrote:
If I told you I can make a ship that moves
in outerspace that has no "propellant" being used
and only uses electricity without forcing anything
out of the ship to make it move, would you believe me?

Yes, but how would you control its direction?

3 of the devices able to reverse thier operation,
or spin to angles needed or all work as one
directional force if you wanted a quicker acceleration.


--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

Spaceman wrote:
If I told you I can make a ship that moves
in outerspace that has no "propellant" being used
and only uses electricity without forcing anything
out of the ship to make it move, would you believe me?



I would say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Prove it. Building and demonstrating a scale model would be a great start.

Leopold Stotch wrote:
Spaceman wrote:
If I told you I can make a ship that moves
in outerspace that has no "propellant" being used
and only uses electricity without forcing anything
out of the ship to make it move, would you believe me?



I would say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Prove it. Building and demonstrating a scale model would be a great
start.

It is in the works,
I am struggling a bit with money right now but
all the thoughts about such are based upon factual
laws of physics and a silly little lego model proves
it can move on the surface of Earth so far..
Of course it might be a lot harder to get it to fly
in this gravity force down on the ground here.
but I already know I can make it move sideways
in any direction with a simple lego version I made.
I do think I may be able to get it to fly though if
I get some better materials and devices for it.


Anyways.
I don't think it is an extraodinary claim at all,
because I already know it works on the ground.
and in space...the freedom of motion is even better.

No silly zero point energy or any silly perpetual motion
nonsense either of course.



--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

Spaceman wrote:

Leopold Stotch wrote:
Spaceman wrote:
If I told you I can make a ship that moves
in outerspace that has no "propellant" being used
and only uses electricity without forcing anything
out of the ship to make it move, would you believe me?

[snip]

Anyways.
I don't think it is an extraodinary claim at all,
because I already know it works on the ground.
and in space...the freedom of motion is even better.


You might not think it extraordinary, but I'm pretty sure the rest of us
consider your claims to be so far out as to be worthless unless you have
some jaw-dropping proof. The Mach-Lorentz force experiments I've seen have
only developed miniscule forces that could easily be noise, but at least
that's bordering on a working prototype. Be sure to let us know when
you've topped that.

Mike Ross

wrote:
You might not think it extraordinary, but I'm pretty sure the rest of
us consider your claims to be so far out as to be worthless unless
you have some jaw-dropping proof. The Mach-Lorentz force experiments
I've seen have only developed miniscule forces that could easily be
noise, but at least that's bordering on a working prototype. Be sure
to let us know when you've topped that.

Well I might as well spill the beans right now and here since
I don't think I will have nice enough material to make it any
day soon and I would rather have it made sooner than later,
So here goes.
Maybe someone else has access to all sorts of good stuff to do this
and test it all further.

We will assume 0 gravity for this explanation although it will work
in gravity for at least side to side motion and maybe even upwards
and downwards motion also.
(You can place the object on a hanging string to
remove friction forces of the ground and see how it will move
without expulsion of any gas or material)

The inertial pulse engine part:
An electro magentic ring (MR) is set up to surround a mass of
magnetic material (MM).
The (MR) will want to center on (MM) when powered.
The (MR) is firmly attached to a frame that can be manipulated
to point in any direction(like a gyrocope dual ringed frame but not free
to move on it's own) and each ring is controlled by the pilot or computer
for direction of motion.
The (MM) must be able to slide with lubrication inside a tube that is
holding it inside the dual rings with enough freedom on either side
for it to move back or forth.

The other important part is that you will need to make a slower
return motion to move the (MM) where you want it so you can use an
forced air pressure system to push the mass slower than the (MR) would move
it. (or any other thoughts about a slower motion force for return)
You first move the (MM) away from the (MR being centered)
and then pulse your (MR).
The motion of the (MR) will move both the framing and the (MM)
as fast as it can in opposing directions and depending on the mass
differences the ship would move a certain amount and gain inertia.
Once you have this inertial motion, you will need to move the
(MM) back to the offset position using the forced air system
needed to again repeat the "pulse" but of course the (MM) must move
slower towards the reset position.
The valve for the air pump would of course have to
have a dual flow and single pumping system
(a large flow valve for the quick motion caused by the
(MR)(MM) quick force to allow the air to return,
and a smaller valve/pump to return it slower for the repeat pulse.

Once moving, the timing of such a cycle will start to
get faster and the faster motion of the ship will occur and in turn
will allow a slightly faster return motion to be allowed also.

So,
That is the basics of it all.
No outward expulsion of anything..
If I forgot anything please do tell, and I will explain
anything that has been forgotten or anything that is
not understood.

I hope that explains it enough.
If I had the best materials I can think of it would work
great in space. (and would come up with some nice speed
since it will end up being close to the magnetic pulse speed
if designed well enough.
But as batteries are pretty heavy, it is more an "outerspace"
only vehicle as of now.
But who knows if enough people improve it
it may even be abel to take off from earth with enough
technology advancement.

Maybe someone will make one that read this here.
If you do.. please give me a tiny bit of credit.


--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

"Spaceman" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:

Variation on a perpetual motion machine snipped.

Sorry, you've violated the laws of physics.

Doesn't matter how slowly you move your mass back all you're going to do is
make your "spaceship" rock back and forth.

Keep in mind, when the MM moves in one direction, the rest of your engine
will be moving in the opposite direction TOWARDS it.

i.e. if your MM is pulled from left-right, the MR (and attached stuff) will
move right-left.

And when your air pushes the MM back to the left, the MR will move back to
the right.

Result, no net movement.

You're far from the first to try to build this though.



--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
"Spaceman" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:

Variation on a perpetual motion machine snipped.

Perpetual motion?
It needs energy constantly to work.
apparently you did not even read it.
Nothing about perpetual motion at all.


Sorry, you've violated the laws of physics.

No, I actually used the laws of physics to my
advantage and did not violate any single one of them


Doesn't matter how slowly you move your mass back all you're going to
do is make your "spaceship" rock back and forth.

Wrong,
Once moving in one direction a slower motion will not
bring it back to the same point.
I see you never studied force vs speed differences?
A mass moving faster has more impact "force" than the same
mass moving slower.
KE differences simple as that.


Keep in mind, when the MM moves in one direction, the rest of your
engine will be moving in the opposite direction TOWARDS it.

Yes, it will.
That is why it moves at all.


i.e. if your MM is pulled from left-right, the MR (and attached
stuff) will move right-left.

And when your air pushes the MM back to the left, the MR will move
back to the right.

Not once the entire thing is moving in one direction fighting
the slower motion of the lesser force
than what moved it to begin with.


Result, no net movement.

Wrong.
a mechanical lego pendulum version I have can do such without the magnets
at all.
Swing the pendulum fast one way and slow the other way.
All that is needed is energy to make it work and the
differences in the kinetic energy harnessed each time.
If you think it is perpetual motion at all you have already
lost the thought of how it actually works.
Sorry you don't get it.

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman

"Spaceman" wrote in message
. ..
Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
"Spaceman" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:

Variation on a perpetual motion machine snipped.

Perpetual motion?
It needs energy constantly to work.
apparently you did not even read it.
Nothing about perpetual motion at all.

Yes, but it's creating energy outside the system.


Wrong,
Once moving in one direction a slower motion will not
bring it back to the same point.

Again, it doesn't matter how fast or slow either motion is relative to the
other.

I see you never studied force vs speed differences?
A mass moving faster has more impact "force" than the same
mass moving slower.
KE differences simple as that.


Keep in mind, when the MM moves in one direction, the rest of your
engine will be moving in the opposite direction TOWARDS it.

Yes, it will.
That is why it moves at all.


i.e. if your MM is pulled from left-right, the MR (and attached
stuff) will move right-left.


This is the key part here. Your Center of Mass hasn't moved at all.

And when your air pushes the MM back to the left, the MR will move
back to the right.

Not once the entire thing is moving in one direction fighting
the slower motion of the lesser force
than what moved it to begin with.

You're completely missing the point.

Consider a "1/2" cycle of your machine.

MR pulls MM towards it. The force felt by the magnet is the same as the
force felt by the MR/rest of machine.

While the MM will move in towards the MR, the rest will move in the opposite
direction. Hence NO net movement.

The "air" 1/2 of the cycle is a completely independent event. And does the
same thing in the opposite direction.



Result, no net movement.

Wrong.

No, wright.


a mechanical lego pendulum version I have can do such without the magnets
at all.
Swing the pendulum fast one way and slow the other way.
All that is needed is energy to make it work and the
differences in the kinetic energy harnessed each time.

Nope. What you're taking advantage of here is that the friction on your
table top is such that when the pendulum moves in one direction, that force
is greater than the force imparted by friction on your table top but when it
moves the other way, it's not. So in that case yes, this WILL work on a
table top. It won't work in space.


If you think it is perpetual motion at all you have already
lost the thought of how it actually works.
Sorry you don't get it.


Oh I get it quite well.

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman







--
Greg Moore
SQL Server DBA Consulting Remote and Onsite available!
Email: sql (at) greenms.com http://www.greenms.com/sqlserver.html