New reactionless motor from India

[gravityblock]

So you think that video demonstrates a reactionless drive do you?

It's the simple things that escapes and gets by us!

Gravock

MarkE,

Where's the duality in this, that you speak of?  For example, a motor also acts as a generator, and a generator also acts as a motor.  The dual nature of a motor/generator opposes itself.  However, moving the heavier weight up and down by hand won't rotate the lighter weight, nor will it accelerate or decelerate the lighter weight in regards to it's angular velocity.  The most it can do is change the length of the moment arm.  If the moment arm is increased, then the torque increases which will accelerate the lighter weight.  However, the moment of inertia will also increase which will decelerate the lighter weight (conservation of angular momentum).  As you can see, the system remains unchanged and can't be ran in reverse due to an absence of a reactional force and will proceed with a uniform motion according to Newton's first law, thus a reactionless force is being demonstrated.  Since this has no dual and it can't run in reverse, then it also demonstrates a unidirectional force.

Newton's first law states, "an object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force".  This law is often called "the law of inertia".  The forces remain balanced throughout the system and it remains unchanged and in a state of uniform motion, even while doing work by lifting a heavier mass.  There's no inertia (resistant force) in lifting the heavier weight, thus it can be considered a reactionless force.  In summary, this simple device demonstrates a reactionless unidirectional force.

Gravock

[gravityblock]

MARK E
I forgot..how's that go again ??

Oh yeah
"Nothing to see here folks...move along "

According to MarkE, It's more like:

"Nothing to see here or anywhere folks...so move along to nowhere".

Gravock

[TinselKoala]

MarkE,

Where's the duality in this, that you speak of?  For example, a motor also acts as a generator, and a generator also acts as a motor.  The dual nature of a motor/generator opposes itself.  However, moving the heavier weight up and down by hand won't rotate the lighter weight, nor will it accelerate or decelerate the lighter weight in regards to it's angular velocity.  The most it can do is change the length of the moment arm.  If the moment arm is increased, then the torque increases which will accelerate the lighter weight.  However, the moment of inertia will also increase which will decelerate the lighter weight (conservation of angular momentum).  As you can see, the system remains unchanged and can't be ran in reverse due to an absence of a reactional force and will proceed with a uniform motion according to Newton's first law, thus a reactionless force is being demonstrated.  Since this has no dual and it can't run in reverse, then it also demonstrates a unidirectional force.

Newton's first law states, "an object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force".  This law is often called "the law of inertia".  The forces remain balanced throughout the system and it remains unchanged and in a state of uniform motion, even while doing work by lifting a heavier mass.  There's no inertia (resistant force) in lifting the heavier weight, thus it can be considered a reactionless force.  In summary, this simple device demonstrates a reactionless unidirectional force.

Gravock

No, it does not. There are reaction forces all over the place in that demonstration. You are just being silly now.  There are dozens of ways to make the reaction forces visible. I'm not surprised you can't think of any.... but those of us with a good grounding in statics and dynamics can.

[gravityblock]

No, it does not. There are reaction forces all over the place in that demonstration. You are just being silly now.  There are dozens of ways to make the reaction forces visible. I'm not surprised you can't think of any.... but those of us with a good grounding in statics and dynamics can.

Your reply is an argument by assertion with no scientific or mathematical rebuttal.  You have a good grounding in B.S.

Gravock

[MarkE]

MarkE,

Where's the duality in this, that you speak of?  For example, a motor also acts as a generator, and a generator also acts as a motor.  The dual nature of a motor/generator opposes itself.  However, moving the heavier weight up and down by hand won't rotate the lighter weight, nor will it accelerate or decelerate the lighter weight in regards to it's angular velocity.  The most it can do is change the length of the moment arm.  If the moment arm is increased, then the torque increases which will accelerate the lighter weight.  However, the moment of inertia will also increase which will decelerate the lighter weight (conservation of angular momentum).  As you can see, the system remains unchanged and can't be ran in reverse due to an absence of a reactional force and will proceed with a uniform motion according to Newton's first law, thus a reactionless force is being demonstrated.  Since this has no dual and it can't run in reverse, then it also demonstrates a unidirectional force.

Newton's first law states, "an object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force".  This law is often called "the law of inertia".  The forces remain balanced throughout the system and it remains unchanged and in a state of uniform motion, even while doing work by lifting a heavier mass.  There's no inertia (resistant force) in lifting the heavier weight, thus it can be considered a reactionless force.  In summary, this simple device demonstrates a reactionless unidirectional force.

Gravock

LOL