Inertial impulse space drive

[vril-ya]

newtons 3rd law states that for every action there is equal and opposite reaction. modern science falsely assumed that it applies to acting against another body only.

many attempts have been made by many inventors to make so called "reactionless drive". you may have heared of dean drive, cook drive etc. these devices do work but they produce very little thurst or weight loss.

one key thing they all missed is an importance of simple inertial impulse. imagine yourself in a small boat. your hands and feet are tied, how do you move? naturally, you will jerk your body forward and come to sudden stops so that moment of inertia transfers to the boat and it moves forward.

modern science will tell you this is due to "friction" which is totally ridiculous as this phenomena is independent of the enviroment.

take a perfectly sealed tube in space and within it a strong spring coil taut from one side to another. when fired the spring transfers it's elastic-potential energy to the tubes inner wall and the tube accelerates forward at a great speed. this can also be demonstrated down here on earth quite easily. what's great about this system is that it has a capability to lift itself against gravity and when two of such springs are incorporated into the same system and fired in succession, first impulse will launch the system off the ground and the second one fired an instant later will make it accelerate IN THE MID AIR. and there you have a simple and undeniable proof of reactionless drive "impossible" according to the scientific dogma. each spring can be fired with a remote radio control. here's a simple diagram of my design.



this is pure mechanical drive and is not meant to be built into large scale craft as there are more advanced methods based on electrostatic/electromagnetic propulsion, but is a proof of concept of a reactionless drive. how could something so simple have been overlooked for so long escapes me. satellite equipped with such drive could accelerate at 1G by firing pairs of springs in succession reaching moon in 3 hours or mars in 36 hours.

[Norval]

one key thing they all missed is an importance of simple inertial impulse. imagine yourself in a small boat. your hands and feet are tied, how do you move? naturally, you will jerk your body forward and come to sudden stops so that moment of inertia transfers to the boat and it moves forward.

I boat almost every day, I live on a boat.

You are incorrect in your assessment.

[vril-ya]

[snip.]

I boat almost every day, I live on a boat.

You are incorrect in your assessment.

[Wrabbit2000]

I see the point you're making here and I understand the basics of the physics you are describing with it. I just don't see how it relates to or eventually produces propulsion?

A boat is in constant contact with the surface and subsurface water, and you're in constant contact with the boat as the extension of the closed system. I may be all wrong too, but it does seem that your idea could work in a boat for the example you use. If a human could get the reciprocal timing perfect to have each action feed off the last and generate a hair more energy into the end result. It does seem (albeit beyond what I think people could physically do for the precision required) like it would do something in the end.

In space though? This is where I am lost. I imagine a person on I.S.S. and away from any wall or other outside object while totally at rest and a full stop. Just floating mid-compartment and clear of all other things. Now, what could he or she do that would accomplish more than a form of personal exercise in mid-air? Anything done in generating kinetic energy would be missing the outside object to interact with and gain reaction from, wouldn't it?

[vril-ya]

I see the point you're making here and I understand the basics of the physics you are describing with it. I just don't see how it relates to or eventually produces propulsion?

maybe you should re-read the post.

A boat is in constant contact with the surface and subsurface water, and you're in constant contact with the boat as the extension of the closed system. I may be all wrong too, but it does seem that your idea could work in a boat for the example you use. If a human could get the reciprocal timing perfect to have each action feed off the last and generate a hair more energy into the end result. It does seem (albeit beyond what I think people could physically do for the precision required) like it would do something in the end.

it's not that it "could work", it works as it is a basic natural phenomena. furthermore, there is no need for "reciprocal timing perfect to have each action feed off the last and generate a hair more energy into the end result". each impulse is separate action and each impulse makes the boat (or cart, or spacecraft) go forward. lengths of the periods between the impulses are irrelevant and are completely arbitrary. (lesser the gaps, smoother the acceleration).

In space though? This is where I am lost. I imagine a person on I.S.S. and away from any wall or other outside object while totally at rest and a full stop. Just floating mid-compartment and clear of all other things. Now, what could he or she do that would accomplish more than a form of personal exercise in mid-air? Anything done in generating kinetic energy would be missing the outside object to interact with and gain reaction from, wouldn't it?

that's the whole point, you don't need to push against anything. wherever you twitch your body and come to sudden stop you will move in that direction, even in free space. in that example, if you didn't come to sudden stop, that twitch would make you rotate around your center of mass, but as you didn't let that happen, inertia is transfered into linear motion. or in the example i gave above, let's say this tube is floating inside ISS and inside it's whole length is a strong taut spring. imagine the force you invested into stretching that spring is now stored as a elastic potential energy inside that spring. tube is freely floating, no movement whatsoever. than, you fire the spring, it hits the inner wall of the tube and it blasts off like a bullet. and that's the answer to your first question.

[Back]

Sorry but I don't see it working.

Nothing said about the recoil.

Bless
Back

[Wrabbit2000]

I appreciate the time you took to reply in detail. I suppose I really hadn't understood your point here, and so I'll move along.

It will be interesting to see what the final and functional systems turn out to be, if they come out of development within our lifetimes. I believe we're still stuck on chemical rocket propulsion and derivatives of it, so I'm not holding my breath to see them personally. Who knows tho... My son may see that answer in his lifetime.

[vril-ya]

[ snip] if by "recoil" you mean fireing back of the spring, that is totally negligible compared to the inertia transformed into forward motion of the system. i gave you explanations and practical examples, anything further is like teaching physics to a mule. now think about it a little, or try it yourself. you should realize you had completely wrong conception about the laws of physics.

Sorry but I don't see it working.

Nothing said about the recoil.

Bless
Back

you have a pm.

[vril-ya]

[snip.] look, i am sure you have some kind of spring and a closed container like a bottle. mount the spring inside the bottle and stretch it. then fire the spring and observe what happens. if you are still unable to understand, don't even try. it is pointless.

I appreciate the time you took to reply in detail. I suppose I really hadn't understood your point here, and so I'll move along.

It will be interesting to see what the final and functional systems turn out to be, if they come out of development within our lifetimes. I believe we're still stuck on chemical rocket propulsion and derivatives of it, so I'm not holding my breath to see them personally. Who knows tho... My son may see that answer in his lifetime.

[Ellirium113]

Vril-Ya...While you may have a complete understanding of how this works you do NOT need to resort to insulting remarks when people question you. Providing some EVIDENCE might be more worth while to help aid your explanation. Please try and maintain a respectful presence here so that it might work to your benefit.

Cheers.

[zorgon]

newtons 3rd law states that for every action there is equal and opposite reaction. modern science falsely assumed that it applies to acting against another body only.

Not so sure about that because back in physics class in high school we were shown that a mere flash light pointed away from an astronaut would eventually propel the astronaut at light speed (given that the flashlight never ran out and the astronaut could live that long. Point was just the cat of shining that light in one direction would have the opposite reaction of pushing the astronaut.

Would take a long time because of the mass difference but on paper given those parameters  it works

[zorgon]

You are incorrect in your assessment.

Actually he is correct  The problem is that the weight of the boat and friction of the water is a large number compared to the amount of force exerted by your step  So YES it does move but you cannot notice it

Try standing in the back of a canoe and running to shore.  Tell me what happens   

[zorgon]

Mechanical Space Drive US Patents
( Inertial Drives )

Inertial drives, impulse engines, centrifugal & centripetal propulsion, momentum transfer, motion rectifiers, non-linear propulsion, translational force generators, gyroscopic propulsion, directional force generators, & reaction motors, &c: various names for "bootstrap" methods & apparati that impart motion to a vehicle without reaction with the environment.

http://www.rexresearch.com/inertial/inertial.htm

[Pimander]

Would take a long time because of the mass difference but on paper given those parameters  it works

It would take an infinite amount of time.

[Norval]

Actually he is correct  The problem is that the weight of the boat and friction of the water is a large number compared to the amount of force exerted by your step  So YES it does move but you cannot notice it

Try standing in the back of a canoe and running to shore.  Tell me what happens   

As I stated, he is incorrect in what he stated.

What happens? That is a given, who ever tries that gets very wet.