Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Reactionless Propulsion

Paul, that is not a closed system, but rather an open one. The friction between the chamber and the tracks allows for forward movement of the chamber, so long as the return stroke is slow enough to avoid exceeding the static friction between the tracks and the container.

This will not work in space, as there is no friction, and hence nothing to resist the backward stroke.

Basic physics...

Bryan

Basic Physics .. knowing that those two words grouped together are comming from you , wouldnt that also mean Basic ignorance?

You can avoid static friction by using viscious bearings. Either have it sliding on a film of oil or use hard wheels with fluid bearings.

Tho even(especially) viscious friction provides different a force depending on speed, so it introduces a new problem.

How about measure the friction with some sort of force-guage, and also measure the force provided by the moving mass. Then make sure the latter is always much greater than the former.

You could nearly eliminate even moving-friction by operating it on one of those 'air tracks' they use in high-school physics labs.

Pity these Youtube guys don't bother witch such important features.

I'm pretty sure a lot of those videos are simply bait - people getting a laugh at the scientific illiterati that they sucker in...

Bryan

Could be, but it's a lot of trouble to go to for a laugh.

I think there are people who discover this asymmetrical effect without realising it's entirely caused by friction. Once the idea's in your mind, and you came up with it yourself, you don't want to just throw it away. If you then build it and find the effect is weaker than expected, that's OK, it's still something. If you refine it and the effect is even weaker still, that's still fine, there could still be some grain of revolutionariness deep behind it.