Science

indigoth

(162 posts)

29. Perhaps the final nail in the coffin

Reply to mikelewis (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 6, 2023, 08:14 AM

Dec 2023

You can’t put energy into a system and then pull out more energy than you put in. Regardless of arcs of any kind.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

78 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A new means of space propulsion... closed loop pulse propulsion... here's the idea [View all] mikelewis Dec 2023 OP

AI's reply mikelewis Dec 2023 #1

The reason it mentioned Saturn... mikelewis Dec 2023 #4

The Math mikelewis Dec 2023 #2

Follow up Question... Speed in mph over multiple reloads? mikelewis Dec 2023 #7

Your "math" is unreadable. You can do actual formatting or images. Until then, it's unusable. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #63

I apologize for that but if you copy and paste the things I said into AI it will fix that for you... mikelewis Dec 2023 #67

No Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #69

Why this is inline with physics mikelewis Dec 2023 #3

System Design and Equation from the book mikelewis Dec 2023 #5

reminds me of project orion AllaN01Bear Dec 2023 #6

That one actually sounds more terrifying LOL! Glad that got scrubbed... this is totally different mikelewis Dec 2023 #10

Is this bullet/slug a physical item, with form and substance? oldfart73 Dec 2023 #8

Yes, you would ideally use a giant magnet... something weighing about 50 lbs... accelerated to about 2500 m/s... mikelewis Dec 2023 #11

Then it would require a mechanism to catch it and reposition it for reuse. oldfart73 Dec 2023 #13

Absolutely... this design is an engineering nightmare... mikelewis Dec 2023 #16

However... you could catch it in another railgun... mikelewis Dec 2023 #17

It takes energy to change the direction of the slugs. indigoth Dec 2023 #9

That isn't quite correct... Try this... mikelewis Dec 2023 #12

Nope indigoth Dec 2023 #18

Sorry... that's not remotely correct mikelewis Dec 2023 #19

No. It doesn't. indigoth Dec 2023 #25

You are exactly right... there is no angular momentum when it's shot... mikelewis Dec 2023 #28

Perhaps the final nail in the coffin indigoth Dec 2023 #29

Really? So let's prove this mathematically... mikelewis Dec 2023 #30

Oh please indigoth Dec 2023 #37

Wonderful... do the math then... this is all basic stuff... mikelewis Dec 2023 #38

Starting at rest indigoth Dec 2023 #39

Where's the math? mikelewis Dec 2023 #40

I did make zero equal zero indigoth Dec 2023 #41

Weak... no proof nonsense mikelewis Dec 2023 #42

Well then, indigoth Dec 2023 #43

No... I'm talking to you... mikelewis Dec 2023 #44

And to your point about NASA. mikelewis Dec 2023 #45

The short (and absolutely correct) answer is indigoth Dec 2023 #46

Well... why not really take a look at what I am saying before you continue on that stance... mikelewis Dec 2023 #47

This is correct relayerbob Dec 2023 #57

Wrong perspective. To inject angular momentum into bullet, it sucks linear momentum Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #64

And as a backup... the same explanation AI style mikelewis Dec 2023 #20

One important note... AI gets the answer wrong here... and I fix it. mikelewis Dec 2023 #21

Your scheme is not fully thought out. It fails Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #61

IMHO The bullets will never hit you Cheezoholic Dec 2023 #14

Well... the masses are different... mikelewis Dec 2023 #15

Physics PhD here - can't work. caraher Dec 2023 #22

Ok... you are correct... this is a poor design... let's fix that... mikelewis Dec 2023 #23

Here's My and AI's physics.... please apply real physics and fix this please... mikelewis Dec 2023 #24

And here's the final velocity... please help me make that Zero 0 mikelewis Dec 2023 #26

rec ed as something worth thinking about, but rampartc Dec 2023 #27

According to the limited physics I understand... that momentum is conserved once it begins it's rotation... mikelewis Dec 2023 #31

I ask AI to review that statement... this is the response... mikelewis Dec 2023 #32

I accentuate this effect by cutting the radius... mikelewis Dec 2023 #33

An explanation as to why this works... mikelewis Dec 2023 #34

Nice thought experiment but. EmeraldCoaster Dec 2023 #35

Saying it doesn't prove it mikelewis Dec 2023 #36

Your math is unreadable. You haven't proven anything. . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #65

I am not proving anything. I am asking... mikelewis Dec 2023 #68

Force is not "absorbed" Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #70

If you aren't proving anything, why the in-your-face belligerence commanding repliers to prove things? Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #71

Why don't actual rocket scientists use this propulsion system? Ptah Dec 2023 #48

We don't know if it works or not... mikelewis Dec 2023 #50

I think I found a demonstration of your model. Ptah Dec 2023 #52

Clearly you didn't read any of this... mikelewis Dec 2023 #55

Will you provide a better illustration of your proposal? Ptah Dec 2023 #56

One hears these sort of things, and one doesn't want to believe it. NNadir Dec 2023 #49

Ok... there is no claim that this is perpetual motion... there are power supplies and limits to the length of runtime... mikelewis Dec 2023 #51

I would suggest taking a physics course. NNadir Dec 2023 #53

Well... your mathematical proofs will be fine... mikelewis Dec 2023 #54

Whatever. NNadir Dec 2023 #59

DU can do without personal slams like you writing "running your mouth to feel better". . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #62

Only works if you violate several laws of physics relayerbob Dec 2023 #58

This thread is a great example on how AI chats can create utter nonsense and make it look good. unblock Dec 2023 #60

Ahead full impulse, Mr. Sulu DoBW Dec 2023 #66

Let's make this real simple... mikelewis Dec 2023 #72

AI's response mikelewis Dec 2023 #73

Please correct the AI mistakes here... mikelewis Dec 2023 #74

Why argue with you? We explain things but then you get belligerent Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2023 #75

Post removed Post removed Dec 2023 #76

Please take a course in physics! CloudWatcher Dec 2023 #77

What exactly is your educational background, anyway? NickB79 Dec 2023 #78