Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Science
In reply to the discussion: A new means of space propulsion... closed loop pulse propulsion... here's the idea [View all]relayerbob
(7,021 posts)57. This is correct
The kinetic energy of the projectile leaving the "gun" will effectively equal the kinetic energy of the impact, leaving zero net energy. In reality, there would be some energy loss as the projectile is turned, so in reality, it would still push you backward, resulting in slightly less energy when hitting, as opposed to firing, so in really the kick back would still send you backwards, albeit very slowly. One could argue that you can just fly backward, but the amount of fuel required to move you at a significant velocity would be FAR more than just any standard propulsion system.
As a physicist with actual objects in space that I've worked on, I pretty much know what I'm talking about. The OP is far off base.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
78 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
A new means of space propulsion... closed loop pulse propulsion... here's the idea [View all]
mikelewis
Dec 2023
OP
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
That one actually sounds more terrifying LOL! Glad that got scrubbed... this is totally different
mikelewis
Dec 2023
#10
Yes, you would ideally use a giant magnet... something weighing about 50 lbs... accelerated to about 2500 m/s...
mikelewis
Dec 2023
#11
Well... why not really take a look at what I am saying before you continue on that stance...
mikelewis
Dec 2023
#47
Wrong perspective. To inject angular momentum into bullet, it sucks linear momentum
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2023
#64
Here's My and AI's physics.... please apply real physics and fix this please...
mikelewis
Dec 2023
#24
According to the limited physics I understand... that momentum is conserved once it begins it's rotation...
mikelewis
Dec 2023
#31
If you aren't proving anything, why the in-your-face belligerence commanding repliers to prove things?
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2023
#71
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
DU can do without personal slams like you writing "running your mouth to feel better". . . . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2023
#62