Re: If NOT a reactionless drive, will it work?

From: vernonner3voltazim (vnemitz_at_pinn.net)
Date: 07/17/04 

Date: 17 Jul 2004 10:17:04 -0700

ghytrfvbnmju7654@mail.com (Jim Black) wrote in message news:<cb623e6.0407161502.71b06250@posting.google.com>...
> vnemitz@pinn.net (vernonner3voltazim) wrote in message news:<42336979.0407151933.18800f35@posting.google.com>...
> > ghytrfvbnmju7654@mail.com (Jim Black) wrote:
> > > > vnemitz@pinn.net (vernonner3voltazim) wrote:
> > > > For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that when
> > > > Superman applies his Super force to the end of the
> > > > battering ram, it takes exactly one whole second
> > > > for that mechanical force, moving at the speed of
> > > > sound inside the battering ram, to reach the far
> > > > end.
> > > > >
> > > > > \ | | | | | |
> > > > > \ | | | | | |
> > > > > | \ | | | | |
> > > > > | | \ | | | |
> > > > > | | | \ | | |
> > > > > | | | | \ | |
> > > > > | | | | | \ |
> > > > > | | | | | | \
> > > > > | | | | | | \
> > > > > | | | | | | \
> > > > > | | | | | \ |
> > > > > | | | | \ | |
> > > > > | | | \ | | |
> > > > > | | \ | | | |
> > > > > | \ | | | | |
> > > > > \ | | | | | |
> > > > > \ | | | | | |
> > > > > \ | | | | | |
> > > > > | \ | | | | |
> > > > > | | \ | | | |
> > > > > | | | \ | | |
> > > > > | | | | \ | |
> > > > > | | | | | \ |
> > > > > | | | | | | \
> > > > > | | | | | | \
> > > > > | | | | | | \
> > > > > | | | | | \ |
> > > > > | | | | \ | |
> > > > > | | | \ | | |
> > > > > | | \ | | | |
> > > > > | \ | | | | |
> > > > > \ | | | | | |
> > > > >
> > > > > |
> > > > > |
> > > > > |
> > > > > V
> > > > >
> > > > > time
> > > >
> > > > Thanks! If I am interpreting your meaning, especially
> > > > when comparing to a prior similar post by you, then
> > > > last time you drew ordinary oscillations, and this
> > > > time you have drawn incremental overall vibratory motion.
> > > > While I can't say for sure what to expect until a
> > > > test-gadget is built, I would not be surprised it the
> > > > result was some sort of combination of the two drawings,
> > > > a "two steps forward and one step back" sort of
> > > > vibratory motion.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks again!
> > >
> > > What this is is a simplification of what would happen if
> > > Superman gave it a whack on one end. In a more realistic
> > > rod, the shock would eventually spread out over the entire
> > > rod, as much of its energy gets converted into heat. The
> > > other picture is the same thing, only this time, the
> > > people all along the rod have exerted a force equal and
> > > opposite to Superman's. In that case, there's a lot of
> > > vibration, but the center of mass of the rod doesn't go
> > > anywhere.
> >
> > OK, major misinterpretation on my part. But what I fail to
> > see in your sketch above is the compressed region of the
> > moving longitudinal wave -- the thing that takes one whole
> > second to reach the far end of the battering ram. It LOOKS
> > to me like you have all of it moving at once. Not possible!
>
> You need to look more carefully. The right end of the ram remains
> stationary for the first 7 units of time.

OK, I apologize for misinterpreting it AGAIN. And if I am
not misinterpreting it a third time, then I am seeing some
vibratory consequences of a single impact at one end. But
don't you think those vibes are going to die down after a
while, and the battering ram will have finished experiencing
jerk and acceleration, and will then proceed smoothly forward?

    \ \ \ \ \ \ \
     \ \ \ \ \ \ \
      \ \ \ \ \ \ \
etc.

Yes, I know that in the specified thought-experiment
scenario, this possibility is not being given any
chance to happen.

For more descriptions and clarifications of the
suggested thought experiment, there is a forum at:
http://www.analogsf.com/discus/
(click on "General Discussion", and then click
on "Any Viable New Ideas to Achieve .1c?"

Also, I'd still like to know what you think about
what I wrote in the last portions of my prior
message to you.

Thanks, again!

Quantcast