Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Is This A Reactionless Drive?


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

#52 George1

George1

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 06 October 2019 - 07:03 AM

Hi guys,

1) Although seeming very simple (four simple components only) our zigzag conception must be evaluated ONLY by highly qualified experts in theortetical and applied mechanics who are familiar with the three Newton's laws and with basic mechanical terms like force, mass, linear and angular acceleration, inertia, torque, linear and angular momentum, kinetic and potential energy, power, friction, etc. (Exchemist, for example do you make difference between mechanical energy and mechanical power? Or in what units angular velocity is measured? I doubt that you are able to answer these (and similar) questions.)

2) Any other opinions different from the exchemist's one?



#53 GAHD

GAHD

    Eldritch Horror

  • Administrators
  • 2697 posts

Posted 06 October 2019 - 09:14 AM

If you "expert " is using Newton's laws instead of Euler's equations (and Young's and Hooke's and) you are asking to be reviewed by a teenager. No wonder your ideas are insane and your presentation is word salad. I'll tell you right now: your idea can't work because of friction, crystal stress, and if we get right down to it electron shells having a wobble.

Your equations you've quoted asking for help MEAN NOTHING without units attached to the variables: they are letters that may or may not be place holders for velocity, time, vectors, compression ratios, joules, BTU, Magnetic flux, EMF, or any other metric. 

Your posts are the kind of word salad used by self-important fools used to being the "smartest person in the room" simply by confusing the rest of the people rather than actually being smart. Perhaps you've managed to confuse yourself as well, since you're NOT LISTENING TO THE CLEAR WARNINGS THE ADMINISTRATION OF THIS SITE HAS PUT BEFORE YOUR EYES. Whoever told you you're smart, they're probably being too nice in the short term and it has lead to this travesty of being insisting they know things that they quite obviously do not. Define your units  instead of expecting an omniscient viewpoint from your readers (the failed sally-anne I pointed out earlier). Do it AFTER you get back from your suspension. I'm going to make sure you have time to THINK and gather your notes.



 



#54 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1024 posts

Posted 07 October 2019 - 10:20 AM

GAHD I don't mean to brown nose you but you are such a good moderator. I always get banned for going head to head with moderators and they ban me for life. You start off slowly and give people plenty of chances. There is no way to appeal past decisions and I'm really pissed I can't get back on the physicsforums.com and thescienceforum.com, ever, for as long as I live. Compared to other forums I've been banned from, I really did nothing to deserve these bans. Anywho, good job.



#55 VictorMedvil

VictorMedvil

    The Human Shadow

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1508 posts

Posted 09 October 2019 - 10:37 PM

GAHD I don't mean to brown nose you but you are such a good moderator. I always get banned for going head to head with moderators and they ban me for life. You start off slowly and give people plenty of chances. There is no way to appeal past decisions and I'm really pissed I can't get back on the physicsforums.com and thescienceforum.com, ever, for as long as I live. Compared to other forums I've been banned from, I really did nothing to deserve these bans. Anywho, good job.

You should go to www.scienceforums.net that was a fun experience until I got banned for punching a mod like a bunch of us all went over to scienceforums.net for awhile.


Edited by VictorMedvil, 09 October 2019 - 10:39 PM.