I thought your scientific credibility couldn't sink any lower - and then you go and say something like this:
Originally Posted By: paul
but reactionless propulsion is a fact.

Every real physicist on the planet disagrees with you. Reactionless drives are a physical impossibility, defying Newtons laws, conservation of momentum, and general relativity.

You're "model" is properly termed an oscillation thruster. It is well understood to be a physical impossibility - no matter how fast/slow you move your masses, or in whatever configuration they are moved, the total momentum will always balance out to zero.

Some other sources, explaining why your system will not work. You'll notice that their arguments are the same as kellogs and mine:
*Atomic rockets: reactionless drives
*NASA's list of common propulsion errors
*Mathpages description of oscillation drives

Physics: 1,000,000,000,000. Paul: 0.