IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?

[Low-Q]

Vidar,
1) But you haven't read at all the two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY!
2) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." Any objections against this last claim?
George

What's written is one thing. How your device work in real life is another thing.
I strongly believe it is smart to do the practice first, then figure out how it works. Anyone can write down ones ideas, claims, etc, but that does not prove anything.


For 10 million dollars, you really need to prove your claims. The one and only way to do that, is to build the thing, and exmine how it works - not only by you, but by independent people without influence of the inventor. Avoiding anything that would possibly bias the examiners work and results.


Vidar

[George1]

Hi guys,
------------------------------
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
------------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George
=================
P.S. To Vidar. Firstly, (1) our reactionless drive conception and (2) our revolutionary electric technology are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. Secondly, as far as I can see you have no objections against the claim of item 1. Thirdly, if you have 10 million dollars, then we could start negotiating about our electric technology. And fourthly, the reactionless drive motor could be either (a) some kind of electric technology or (b) an internal combustion engine or (c) a steam engine or (d) a steam turbine combined with some nuclear device for example, etc. (You can even integrate the reactionless drive with some bycicle-like device and use your muscle power.) And at last, you, Sven and I are viking descendants and we have to support each other and not to confront.         

[Low-Q]

.......... And at last, you, Sven and I are viking descendants and we have to support each other and not to confront.         

Supporting each other is not the same as agreeing to everything. Confrontations are something else I think - like something that happend when the vikings boarded the northern shore of Scotland and took with them the most beautiful nuns back to Norway...


Vidar

[George1]

Hi Vidar,
A) Yes, you are right about the words "support'" and "confront" -- I did not use them in the most suitable way.
===================
B) But let us get back to the essence of this discussion. I am sending again the text of one of our last posts.
===================
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
===================
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
------------------------------
Do you agree with items 1, 2 and 3?
Looking forward to your answer.
George

[George1]

Some idiots try to imitate us coppying the name of our topic. Please don't pay attention to their writings.
George 1