'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours

[gravityblock]

If you wish to try and assert unaccepted ideas about physics then it is your burden to prove those ideas are correct.

The widely accepted ideas have all come from the same source, which is TPTB.  You should question this single source, since there is very strong evidence they don't have our best interest in mind.  You accepted the ideas being taught by TPTB (blind faith), so why didn't you place the burden on them to prove those ideas in which they are teaching?  The burden of proof is on me, but not on TPTB.....LOL.  Actually the burden of proof is on yourself and not anyone else.  Don't place your responsibility off onto someone else.  Also, stop projecting your faults and shortcomings off onto other people.

Gravock

[MarkE]

The widely accepted ideas have all come from the same source, which is TPTB.  You should question this single source, since there is very strong evidence they don't have our best interest in mind.  You accepted the ideas being taught by TPTB (blind faith), so why didn't you place the burden on them to prove those ideas in which they are teaching?  The burden of proof is on me, but not on TPTB.....LOL.  Actually the burden of proof is on yourself and not anyone else.  Don't place your responsibility off onto someone else.  Also, stop projecting your faults and shortcomings off onto other people.

Gravock

LOL.  Accepted science has a huge body of evidence backing it.  That is how it came to be accepted.  If you wish to offer credible challenge to that, then bring strong evidence of your own.  Crackpot conspiracy theories do not science make.

[minnie]

gravityblock I can see where you're coming from, now.
  You'll have to follow Theoriapophasis and write your own
books and put the wrong things right.
  Sometime in the future maybe a student will query your
work, who knows?
   I'm so fascinated with discovering this stuff, I'd never
  even heard of phonons 'till a few months ago.
    I had no idea how much more there was to be researched,
  there's still a long long way to go and unfortunately I won't
  last long enough to see much of it
             John.

[allcanadian]

@Gravityblock
Concerning the float in the tube video, it cannot work a shown because when the float reaches the top of the tube it must be removed. When we remove the float at the top there will be a void where the float was and this is the water which was displaced which must be replaced to make a continuous cycle. It is unworkable as shown in my opinion unless we can change the context of how and why cause and effect take place.


That being said a change in context may produce a change in the outcome so long as there is a meaningful change in the properties of the system. Which begs the question how do we change the system in a meaningful way?. Unfortunately most cannot even begin to grasp what is required because the solution must be different and it is often very abstract and non-intuitive.


So how do we remove the float at the top of the tube?, if we were in outer space where things have mass but no weight then we could easily remove the float and replace the water which was displaced with almost no work involved in the process. Thus it would seem obvious to me the property which we need to change in the system is the construct of weight which is actually quite easy.


Consider the properties of the system at ground level and then in outer space then reproduce the properties of outer space as needed at ground level. I will let this roll around in our minds for a while and see if anyone here can find the solution before I give it to you.


AC

[MarkE]

@Gravityblock
Concerning the float in the tube video, it cannot work a shown because when the float reaches the top of the tube it must be removed. When we remove the float at the top there will be a void where the float was and this is the water which was displaced which must be replaced to make a continuous cycle. It is unworkable as shown in my opinion unless we can change the context of how and why cause and effect take place.


That being said a change in context may produce a change in the outcome so long as there is a meaningful change in the properties of the system. Which begs the question how do we change the system in a meaningful way?. Unfortunately most cannot even begin to grasp what is required because the solution must be different and it is often very abstract and non-intuitive.


So how do we remove the float at the top of the tube?, if we were in outer space where things have mass but no weight then we could easily remove the float and replace the water which was displaced with almost no work involved in the process. Thus it would seem obvious to me the property which we need to change in the system is the construct of weight which is actually quite easy.


Consider the properties of the system at ground level and then in outer space then reproduce the properties of outer space as needed at ground level. I will let this roll around in our minds for a while and see if anyone here can find the solution before I give it to you.


AC

Absent an acceleration such as due to gravity or rotation, there isn't anything to induce differential movement between the denser and less dense materials in the first place.  Once there is an acceleration, then the greater density material is subject to a greater force, and the system will naturally seek to redistribute mass going from any starting state towards the PE minimum state. 

Where the starting state is not the PE minimum state, energy can be extracted during such a traverse.  After such a traverse the PE difference between states has been lost and must be replaced to return the system to its original condition.