IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

[nix85]

NDE story https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wjch_Qi_nio

[George1]

Hi nix85,
Need some time to consider carefully your last post.
George

[George1]

Magnetic levitation (PERMANENT MAGNETS!) for the zigzag design. Practically no friction and no heat.
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?

[George1]

Magnetic levitation at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoW0A8hYs5A and many other similar and related links.
Besides please look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-XngSTeh2Q and many other similar and related links. (It's about home-made and toy models of Maglev's train.)
Perfectly suitable for the zigzag mechanical conception. No friction and no heat.
Looking forward to your answer.
George

[sm0ky2]

Hi smOky2,
------------------------------
You strongly surprise me, my friend! What is the problem? You are not able to read a hand-written text? You are not illiterate, aren't you?
-----------------------------

Ehhhhhhhh....

I will repeat again. (As if it is most difficult to understand OBVIOUS truths.)
----------------------------
Firstly, please consider carefully the two links below:
1) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/pages_01-12.pdf
2) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/figs01-08.pdf
The first link contains the text, and the second link contains the related Figs.1-6. The two links form one united whole.
----------------------------
After fully understanding the concept, described in the two links above, you have to read carefully and fully understand the concept in the third link, which is a very important addition to the first link and to the second link, and which is given below:
3) https://mypicxbg.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/please_have_a_look.pdf
----------------------------
And at last you have to answer a simple question: Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against the concept, described in the third link?
-----------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George   
   

The OBVIOUS truth is that you are negating all of your variables, and presenting equations
that are not equivalent, nor are they a true representation of the physics behind your "zigzags".


Your math doesn't make sense.
How much of the friction is turned to heat or how much is a prolonged elastic collision is irrelevant.
You'll get the same numbers throwing your blue contraption at a wall.
The fact that you slide a bar to press on opposite sides of the wall(s) only complicates the math
not the solution. Neither of which are included in your hand-written paper.


If you attempt a real world experiment you will find that within the proportions of known materials
and densities you cannot simply "pick and choose" a condition where your math works out.
You preempted yourself by assigning a mass proportionality between the blue and the black
If you follow that assumption and what it implies you see where your friction went.
there exist devices that utilize your zigzag interface. Not exactly as you have with the double sided
U
But the same nonetheless.


Example: a type of brakes were made in this manner, and later abandoned due to a transfer of
motion into a perpendicular reference frame, in an oscillatory motion.
This is because the "ball" has actual mass.
If it had no mass the blue part would experience no effect of the zigzag.