Inertia Drive

[TinselKoala]

I ask this of everyone.
Has anyone ever passed these tests (pendulum, etc.) and proved it without there being any doubt

C.

No.
Some claim to have leapt one or another of the hurdles: linear air tracks, canoes, air tables, carefully tuned pendulums like the Sargoytchev ion thruster in the above video, spring scales, postal scales, pan balances, etc.
But no device passes all tests expected of an inertial or reactionless drive, therefore they are not really passing their individual tests either, just tricking them with mechanical resonances and odd thrust vectors.
Newton still describes our macroscopic, slow, low-gravity world to a T, and hasn't been repealed yet.

[currenthopper]

Thank you for answering all my questions. I have but one more, if such a device could be created and passed all tests without there being any doubt as to it's reality. What then would be the monetary value of said device. As in, how and where could it be used. Assuming it was patented, licensed for use and created for mass distribution.





Once again, thank you.

C

[TinselKoala]

Such a device would be incredibly useful and significant. It would be the first known violation of the Principle of Conservation of Momentum, for one thing.
It would open up the possibility for development of reactionless power tools for use in free-fall; it would mean that one only needed a power supply, not reaction mass, for space drive thrusters; and it would be the basis for any number of "free energy" machines: since, if you can violate CofM, you can make a perpetual turner, that could be harnessed to output energy for other uses.
Monetary value?
How about saving the world from the tyranny of oil--what's that worth in Zimbabwean dollars?

[FredWalter]

it would be the basis for any number of "free energy" machines: since, if you can violate CofM, you can make a perpetual turner, that could be harnessed to output energy for other uses

I disagree that an inertial thruster would be the basis of any 'free energy' machines.

The law of conservation of (angular) momentum would need to be extended to take into account converting from angular momentum into linear thrust.

Consider E=mc^2 -> under normal circumstances mass is conserved and remains as mass -  however under special circumstances you can convert mass into energy.

[TinselKoala]

I disagree that an inertial thruster would be the basis of any 'free energy' machines.

The law of conservation of (angular) momentum would need to be extended to take into account converting from angular momentum into linear thrust.

Consider E=mc^2 -> under normal circumstances mass is conserved and remains as mass -  however under special circumstances you can convert mass into energy.

It would, and this has actually been proven mathematically.
Consider, simply, a thruster that did not eject reaction mass. Mount two of them on the periphery of the disk. Turn it on, stand back.

And Cof M needs no modifications. Angular momentum is defined as the vector cross product of a system or particle's position vector and its linear momentum. If linear momentum is conserved, so is angular momentum. Thrust is a force, that is an acceleration, which is a vector, times a mass.