Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: servo1969

I believe it is possible, does not violate the laws of motion or thermodynamics, and is relatively straight forward. Does that make me a barking moonbat?


14 posted on 08/01/2014 4:52:26 PM PDT by lafroste (matthewharbert.wix.com/matthew-harbert)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: lafroste; servo1969; MeganC
I believe it is possible, does not violate the laws of motion or thermodynamics, and is relatively straight forward. Does that make me a barking moonbat?

No, it makes you correct. The author of this blog-post is confused.

The law of conservation of momentum in three dimensions only holds approximately, because classical physics is only an approximation. In relativistic physics, conservation of momentum hold exactly, and is four dimensional. The fourth component of momentum is energy, and the laws of conservation of energy and conservation of momentum are one law in relativity.

In Lorentz invariant terms: pμpμ = m2. [in a system of units where ħ = c = 1.]

In practical units and more familiar terms: ]

As long as you can convert some mass -- usually binding energy from a chemical or nuclear bond -- into momentum/energy, you don't need "reactive mass." The article has been wrong since 1906.

There is nothing new here. Please move along.

27 posted on 08/01/2014 5:27:03 PM PDT by FredZarguna (Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson