IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

[Low-Q]

To F6FLT and to Low-Q.
Are you really ignorant or you only imitate ignorance because of the money you receive from the BIG OIL and/or from similar organizations? Most likely the second one is true.

This has nothing to do with Big Oil. Oil is Big because over unity doesn't work. Claiming that Big Oil is in the way, is just a conspiracy theory that is constructed by ignorant minds.
Science is all about numbers. If the numbers doesn't add up, you have a problem that can't be solved. Easy as that.
However, in spite of this, even myself have spent lots of time trying to crack the over unity code. Sleepless nights, convinced that I have figured it out, but then the day after I realize I made a mistake in the calculations, or methods that are used to determine how things work.


Working with OU is an extremely hard task to manage fully - just because, in the end of the day, the numbers doesn't add up, EVERY TIME. Frustrating, but true.
I'm not saying that all those experiments and simulations are a waste of time. While walking that steep uphill path, you learn more and more - learning the hard way, by doing errors. You learn what mistakes you did, and then avoid those in later experiments and simulations. Unfortunatly for someone, the broken record plays the same track over and over. Makes the same mistakes over and over.
Just a fool repeats experiments that fail. You must think new every time, even if you don't have any good ideas left - then try the bad ideas untill you come up with something promising.


Vidar

[Low-Q]

Any member of this forum who is a top expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems? As they do it in NASA and in Formula 1?

I have noe clue about these simulators, but what I assume, is that those computer models use calculus to determine the outcome.
As long that calculator correctly states that 1+1=2, I cannot guarantee that you some day will be able to simulate a mechanical system that delivers over unity.


Vidar

[George1]

To Low-Q
Hi Vidar,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Well, there are three possibilities -- the described above Baron Munchausen's reactionless drive either (a) breaks only the law of conservation of linear momentum or (b) breaks only the law of conservation of mechanical energy or (c) breaks simultaneously both the law of conservation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy.
2) The violation of the law of conservation of linear momentum automatically leads to a comparatively simple mechanical reactionless drive machine, which (PLEASE NOTE!) has nothing to do with literally lifting yourself into the air by pulling your own hair -- only the ultimate effect would be the same 
2) You wrote that you have spent lots of time trying to crack the over unity code. In such a case let us work together and not compete. Let us find together an expert in computer simulation of mechanical systems and processes. (You and I are not experts in this field for sure.) 

[Low-Q]

Well, George, I'm not actually competing. I just find such claims a little odd - the logic doesn't add quite up. By reactionless, I understand a force that does not need a reference. Say that you help a driver with his car by pushing it out of from a pile of snow. By "magic" you do not spend a calorie, but the car is still pushed away from the pile.
Then you realize that the car was hooked up on a tractor. The mistake was that you didn't noticed the tractor.


Vidar

[George1]

To Low-Q.
Hi Vidar.
Thanks a lot for your reply. And here is my answer.
1) Actually I did not understand what exactly are you talking about in your last message. May be this is due to my insufficient qualification. But let us try another simple approach.
2) Assume that the black component is either fixed to the ground or its mass is much bigger than the mass of the blue component. Then after covering a certain number of zigzags the blue component will stop WITHOUT HEAT GENERATION as friction is zero (or small enough for the related experimental error to be neglected). This corresponds to the second experiment.
3) Let us now replace the black component zigzag sector with a straight-line sector which is rough enough and long enough. Then after covering a certain suitable length/part of the straight-line rough sector the blue component will also stop but this time WITH HEAT GENERATION. This corresponds to the first experiment.
4) If in items 2 and 3 the black component is either not fixed to the ground or its mass is not much bigger but comparable with the mass of the blue component, then in both cases after covering a certain number of zigzags (experiment 2) and after covering a certain length of the rough straight-line sector (experiment 1) the blue and black components will form together one united whole which will move with one and same final velocity. But in one case (corresponding to experiment 2) THERE IS NO HEAT GENERATION and in the other case (corresponding to experiment 1) THERE IS HEAT GENERATION. This enevitably leads to the conclusion that may be both the law of conseravation of linear momentum and the law of conservation of mechanical energy are not correct simultaneously to some extent. And there is now only one step to designing and manufacturing a reactionless derive. (Let us call it for fun a "Baron Munchausen reactionless drive".)
---------------
It's simple, isn't it?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George