M Drive reactionless drive invented by me

[M Drive Inventor]

Hey all. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. I just recently released a video of my reactionless drive invention, the M Drive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYliuFLMIHY

Tell me what you think. I'm interested in hearing everyone's opinion.

[TinselKoala]

What about your device is new, besides using an old skateboard as a chassis?

Shipov, Thornson, Cox, Dean, Kidd, Firmage, etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIt661hfr9c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9-wdV32hos

Have you ever thought about how an ice skater is able to move on the ice, since the rails of the skates against the ice make a great frictionless track? Your device is moving on its track by the same mechanisms.

To be "reactionless" there must be no pushing on the track, and your device definitely does push on the track, as you could demonstrate by putting the _track_ on another "frictionless" surface like another track or a 2-d system of balls on a flat plate. When your device lurches forward, the track it's on will be lurched backwards, thus demonstrating the reaction force between your device and its track.

[M Drive Inventor]

I've replied to your post in the youtube video and I'd appreciate it if you answer me there too. Either way I'll give a slightly different reply here.

I don't know what makes you say it pushes back on the track. The 8 bearings on the M Drive runs along both the ground on the track and the walls of the track. There's no traction to speak of, and if it was, it'd be equal in both directions, so it wouldn't favor any one direction.

As for Shipov and Thornon's devices, neither of them, nor any other reactionless drive I know of, achieves the kind of thrust the M Drive does. In fact, they both seem to come to a complete stop once they're turned off, something that doesn't happen with the M Drive, suggesting it's not a "stick-slip drive".

[TinselKoala]

I've replied to your post in the youtube video and I'd appreciate it if you answer me there too. Either way I'll give a slightly different reply here.

I don't know what makes you say it pushes back on the track.

Because that is the "standard" explanation for the forward motion, and Momentum is Conserved, after all. Until you can actually demonstrate that it doesn't push against the track, you are only assuming that it does not. Since nobody yet has been able to avoid Conservation of Momentum, the smart money says you haven't either, until you can provide evidence that directly speaks to the question.

The 8 bearings on the M Drive runs along both the ground on the track and the walls of the track. There's no traction to speak of,

That "to speak of" is pretty important in this context of a claim to overcome Conservation of Momentum. It cannot and must not be neglected. In an experiment I currently have running, I am dealing with differences in frictional "traction" or magnetic thrusts that come out to mere microJoules of kinetic energy. This is nothing "to speak of" but it would make the difference between a failure and a self-runner.

and if it was, it'd be equal in both directions, so it wouldn't favor any one direction.

This is clearly wrong, and I hope I don't have to explain why or how.

As for Shipov and Thornon's devices, neither of them, nor any other reactionless drive I know of, achieves the kind of thrust the M Drive does. In fact, they both seem to come to a complete stop once they're turned off, something that doesn't happen with the M Drive, suggesting it's not a "stick-slip drive".

What it suggests to me is a couple of things. First, your track might not be perfectly level, and second... once it's in motion on a _really frictionless_ smooth track, why would you expect it to stop at all, even after it's turned off? Your device comes to a complete stop too, eventually, doesn't it? Based on other things relating to structure and stability in your build, as shown in the video, I would suspect the track levelling might be an issue. You  might also be very surprised at how much "push" can be transmitted by the wires, even through wiring that seems pretty limp.

In a comment on the video I described a system that you could use to test the issue of reaction against the track. You can probably think of some as well. A simple test of this kind could be very informative. If your device pushes the track backwards at all ... then it's not reactionless, is it?

[M Drive Inventor]

This is clearly wrong, and I hope I don't have to explain why or how.

I don't mean to be picky, but seeing how the entire premise of your argument relies on that, I'm afraid I'm going to have to insist.

It just seems to me you're only assuming the bearings somehow "skates" along the tracks because they're unaligned(?). All the bearings are pointed forward and if the wagon tries to move back, it has the freedom to do so, meaning they don't have the ability to push the track backwards.

Besides, the clip shown at 1:55 demonstrates a long lasting acceleration, again suggesting it's not stick-slip.

However, I'll consider giving the track the ability to move back and forth as well. Hadn't thought of that before. As a side-note, look at the first clip again. Those red wood panels on the ground under the (first) M Drive weigh significantly less than the M Drive, and can slide along the floor of my apartment with relative ease, yet they don't move an inch backwards when the M Drive moves forward.

Thanks for all your input so far.