IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

[WaltzCee]

Very soon. Hopefully in a week or 2.

This is fantastic news.
I'll have to contact Forbes.

[Johndoe2]

If i told you the answer you would know its right. Thats really all i can say unfortunately. Bessler was right its amazingly simple and yet it was hundreds of years ahead of its time. In his day it very well have been misconstrued as black magic or witch craft.

[Robinhood46]

If i told you the answer you would know its right.

This sounds very promising.
So it's fingers crossed time for the whole of humanity that you don't get run over by a bus.
If all goes well you'll be rich and famous and humanity will have the answer, if not, we'll just wait another 300 years maybe.

[Johndoe2]

Im hoping to at least not get run over by a bus that will be a big plus for me!
Im also sure it wont be 300 more years.
As the saying goes “necessity is the mother of invention�
Soon we will be at the point of it being a necessity as the fossil fuel gravy train is not going to last forever.

[Robinhood46]

Soon we will be at the point of it being a necessity as the fossil fuel gravy train is not going to last forever.

When the quality of the air we are breathing starts killing millions of people every year will we be at the point you are refering to?
If so, maybe you should know that we are already there.

[WaltzCee]

Im hoping to at least not get run over by a bus that will be a big plus for me!

Thor willing, you won't get struck by lightning.

[Robinhood46]

The chances of him having the answer are pretty slim in my opinion.
I think to have the answer you need to understand the whole and correctly put everything into perspective. Someone who thinks the wellbeing of his wallet is more important, doesn't have what it takes to find the solution. I do hope i'm wrong.

[Johndoe2]

Millions of people are dying from air pollution every year?
I am not aware of this unless you count smoking cigarettes as air pollution
Even if true it only matters to US if it is happening in the US or other industrial “democratic� nations unfortunately..
Necessity is not a necessity if it is “them or they�.
This is not how i think but only global policy makers.

[Johndoe2]

Im pretty sure bessler was primarily motivated by self interest.
Communist and socialist ideologies appear statistically to be poor motivation.

[George1]

Hi eccentrically1,
Thank you for your reply.
There is some misunderstanding here and we are talking about different things.
1) Firstly, in this particular case I can't see the direct relation between electromagnetic forces (EM) and friction/generation of heat. Yes, theoretically friction is due to electromagnetic forces but friction/heat generation can be always decreased (in many ways and not only by using permanent magnet slides) to a certain limit which can make negligible the experimental error due to that same friction. Or may be you claim that permanent magnet slides generate some kind of heat or unknown waves? This seems to me strange. Please explain it, if possible.
2) Secondly, you practically claim that if you slide for example on a smooth inclined plane, then you do not exert force in downward vertical direction. But this is ridiculous! Please refer to basic manuals of theoretical and applied mechanics and study them carefully!
3) And thirdly, you did not understand well the relation between the three links. So please read and study carefully again the three links and then please connect them logically. And just then (and only then!) comment our conception.
Looking forward to your answer.
George

[eccentrically1]

Your experiment is in a force-less environment. No gravitational attraction, no EM forces. Hence, there is no way to initiate any motion in the blue component. Thus, there is no "sliding" down or up an inclined plane (zigzag channel), or sliding through the linear S section.

Here is a brief explanation of friction and EM forces and their relationship.

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia ... etic_force

https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Friction

Because calculating the force from every single individual charge on every other individual charge is ridiculously complicated, physicists have developed tools to simplify these calculations. These simplified calculations turn into the macroscopic, everyday phenomena listed below:

everyday forces like
tension and elasticity
friction (how a shoe moves a person forward)
normal force (how the shoe doesn't fall through the road that it's sitting on)
air drag
most of chemistry
keeping atoms together
chemical bonds between atoms to form molecules, like in combustion
keeping solids a particular shape
Sticky things like tape or tar sticking to surfaces
Magnets sticking artwork to a refrigerator
The force felt on electrons in a loop of wire when near a changing magnetic field. The electromagnetic force is very closely related to the electromotive force, which is what causes electric current to flow.

Maybe you'll see you can't have your cake and eat it too. Friction here (S section)but not there (zigzag).

[George1]

To eccentrically1
-----------------------
In your post before your last post you wrote: "You can choose a combination of forces, segments or zigzags to get those formulas, sure, but only in theory."
-----------------------
Therefore, firstly, as far as I can understand you are saying actually that you have no theoretical objections against the zigzag conception. Amd this is very good as we are talking only for a theory for the present. Did I understand correctly your point of view?
-----------------------
Secondly, a certain correct theory inevitably leads to a certain correct practice (to certain correct practical results). But you agree with the correct theory and do not agree with the related possible correct practical results. How's that? Would you be so polite to explain this in detail, if possible?
-----------------------
And thirdly, we are really a team, but I am the only English speaking member of the team.
-----------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George

[eccentrically1]

1. Yes, correct. Your thought experiment works. But in theory a gravity wheel would also prove the same laws incorrect. You don't have any objections to a gravity wheel working do you?
That's part of what most people (including your team) misunderstand about thermodynamics. The thermodynamic laws don't disprove perpetual motion or reactionless drives. They don't have that purpose. So imagining a hypothetical machine is the easy part. The laws only reflect what we observe. Nothing more or less. Once a physical machine is observed, the new laws would reflect that.

2. I've already explained over several posts why the theory doesn't agree with the predicted results. Because of absence and presence of friction at your discretion, mostly.

Also, you cherry picked my quote from that post. The first part challenged the basic assumption of all PM machines:

It isn't a reactionless drive or a PMM. How does the blue component start moving? You'd have to include that in your theory. How does the blue component get back through the segment S to reset for another cycle without cancelling the initial motion? Also important to your theory.

PM and reactionless drives possibility rely on such assumptions.

[George1]

Hi eccentrically1,
Thank you for your reply. You are really an educated person and it is a pleasure to have a discussion with you.
We (our team) gathered together and carefully considered our so far correspondence in this forum. And we concluded that it is actually our fault that we did not explain the things in a proper manner. So we decided to use another approach. We would use a step-by-step explaining procedure (step 1, step 2, step 3, ....etc.) as we would not procede to the next step without reaching an agreement on the present step. And here it is.
----------------------------
STEP 1.
Please look at the link https://www.knowledgeuniverseonline.com ... -plane.php
This is the basic example for a motion of a body on a smooth (friction is negligible) inclined plane. The drawing is very illustrative.
The the body moves without friction (as it is a matter of a smooth inclined plane) and the inclined plane is motionless and firmly attached to the ground. The body exerts a vertical downward force G on the inclined plane. At the same time however the inclined plane on its behalf exerts a vertical upward force -G on the body. Besides G=-G, that is, the two forces G and -G are opposite in direction and equal in magnitude.
Do you accept the validity of this STEP 1?
------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George

[eccentrically1]

That's what the formula is for the motion of a body on a smooth inclined plane in a gravitational field (the "g" part).

In your experiment, you've placed the body in gravity free conditions. There is no "(i) weight of the body acting vertically down".

So, for your experiment, this step is invalid. The body remains motionless. IOW, there is no "incline" in such deep space, all directions are moot. Down, or up, have no meaning.