Posted on 04/29/2024 9:25:53 AM PDT by kawhill
Discovering a machine that could somehow produce thrust without releasing propellant would be a game-changer for human space travel. There’s just one problem—such a device would defy the laws of physics.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
A better discussion is taking place over here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=87aek326kmp0tamr8unnv8v9kj&topic=60131.0
😆😆😆
Not a physicist but Im pretty sure thats not true, they blow.
Jumping out of a window might work for a short time.
PM is no longer a reliable source for real science.
Bookmarking
Nothing defy the law of physic... well maybe black holes do.
https://phys.org/news/2021-06-physics-black-hole.html
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say nothing we know can defy the laws of physic.
“such a device would defy the laws of physics.”
Not at all. Such a device would cause us to reassess our understanding of the laws of physics.
Such things have happened before when reality informed us that our beliefs were misguided.
* The speed of sound was not a ‘sound barrier’.
* Microscopic life did indeed exist even if it could not be seen with the naked eye.
* Light doesn’t always travel in a straight line.
* Heavier-than-air aircraft are indeed possible.
* Objects of different weights fall at the same speed in a vacuum.
* You can split an atom.
* People could handle traveling faster than 60mph.
* Space flight is possible.
* Radio waves are real.
and etc.
If this is a real invention then it will no more defy the laws of physics than any other invention did. We’ll just have to take the new development into account is all.
Only when it has something solid between you and it.
3
Douglas Adams teaches us that flight is easy.
Simply throw yourself at the ground, and miss.
But it’s an effective tool for dealing with Communists. Pinochet proved that.
🚁
🤸♂️
This was shown to me many years ago when in meditation I asked how Jesus walked on water...
At least in concept, the claim of motion by electrostatic force can be explained by theory. Since gravity can be conceived of and analyzed mathematically as an electromagnetic force, it is at least plausible that some form of electrostatic force might also impart a gravitational effect and make for motion without propellant. Perhaps, in a small way, space itself is affected by the new device. Warped, if you like.
If so, we may be on the cusp of a new era of advances in physics. By the end of the 19th Century, classical physics had reconciled theory and real world phenomena and experimental results, leaving only a few small areas of uncertainty. So-called black body radiation was one of those puzzles, which Einstein brilliantly explained as due to light being both a particle and a wave.
Soon that insight was extended to other forms of energy and matter. It took decades to piece together quantum mechanics, with physics becoming a creative and exciting free for all struggle to align theory and experimental results.
Einstein of course also took on the puzzle of how light could be one speed and the implications of that for the nature of space and time. Einstein even laid out how his theory of relativity could be tested experimentally during an eclipse. His theory was soon proven accurate, making for one of the greatest called shots ever.
Yet Einstein famously struggled to reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity and rejected quantum entanglement as "spooky action at a distance." Now, quantum entanglement is being developed into the next great advance in computer processing.
For another possible breakthrough in physics, take a look at Andrea Rossi's claim for a practical device that supposedly produces electricity through some form of cold fusion, or Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) as its advocates usually prefer.
In my imagination, I can see Rossi's Ecats producing electricity to power electrostatic drive engines. That would soon have us zipping about in well, flying saucers and the like. That's impossible though, right?
Not much force, but enough to be useful for some purposes in long term space flight.
Obviously this technique is a result of physics, not some ridiculous "physics doesn't apply" scheme.
It depends on the circumstances. If your idea of an electrostatic drive engine is to have the electrostatic drive accelerate really small "vehicles" then sure, you can buy them right now. But you may need a microscope to see the "vehicle."
For a larger object it is hard to manage the electric field needed to suspend the object without breakdown of the air between the two sides of the electrostatic field region.
That's may be less of an issue in space, so an electrostatic hover board might be easier to build for use on the moon. Until you find out what the dust does.
We shall see. Supposedly, the US government has been trying to back engineer recovered UFOs for decades with minimal success. Then again, maybe they want us to think that their success has been minimal. In the meanwhile, I go into the backyard every time there is a launch from the Cape hoping to catch a glimpse of the rocket climbing to orbit.
Yep!
It’s not just a good idea.
It’s the law.
That special water is nothing. We already had more than one president that could turn gold into horse manure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.