514void

I realise that in 100% efficient energy transfer you would not need extra energy. the energy transfer in a 100% efficient system would just be from the spinning wheels to the non spinning wheels to swap their spins. so the energy transfer to spin and unspin the wheels would create a net force? how would this manifest? because spinning up things creates no translational force.

the forces on the rest masses would cancel themselves out. there is no net force in moving the energy from downwards to upwards. there is a net force moving the energy from upwards to downwards.

there would be motors i suppose that would spin the double wheels to speed them up and maybe use them as generators to slow them down. any extra energy would be provided by a power source, maybe put that in the middle somewhere.

well if spinning something created a net force in a certain direction, then which direction would that be? I assume you mean that the disk would slow down when you spin it up and speed up when you slow it down.

it is reversing direction at the top with a force which will accelerate the system. it is reversing direction in the middle with no net force. (this bit is the key)

yes, and spinning an object will not cause it to speed up or slow down.

umm, you do realise that a heavier object is harder to change direction right?

it would gain relativistic mass after leaving the first thrower with spin.

Its like 2 people on a long skateboard person 1 throws an object. while its travelling to person 2 it gains mass without it changing speed. person 2 catches it and throws it back. it loses mass without changing its speed. person one catches it. They would accelerate.

yes, the relativistic mass is gained without any force exerted on the container, and the force that is exerted on the container will be greater than the force on the opposite side of the container. I will make a diagram so that you can understand it. (might take a while, I'm not so good at diagrams.)

the disk that is spinning will have extra relativistic mass, so the force will be greater.

a mechanism (maybe a spring) would push against the container and the spinning disk at the top, and another mechanism would push against the container and the non spinning disk at the bottom. It would push against the axle of the disk without affecting its spin. the forces from these mechanical interactions would cancel out rest mass, but there would be relativistic mass to counter by the top mechanism. The CoM (Center of Mass) could be kept in one place in the system with a counter weight, but the difference in forces that change the disks direction would create a net force on the system to move it upwards. In regards to Janus saying that moving energy to a disk would move the container, what would happen if the energy transfer was from slowing a spinning disk to a stop, and the energy was transferred to a non spinning disk to spin it. would these disks accelerate in a certain direction?

whichever way, with a spring or a mechanical arm or EM field or something else.

ok, I can see where you are confused, it takes energy to spin up a disk, but there is no propulsion from this bit, the propulsion is from reacting to this energy with a force. What is TANSTAAFL?

cool, so what is the issue with energy transfer?

o, i was thinking that dc current pushed electrons which have mass one way. The energy would transfer from one disk to the other as they went past the middle, so no net energy transfer in any direction. I would think that the CoM would be in the middle of the system when both disks pass each other, and then go towards the top where the spinning disk goes. There could be a counter weight that moves to keep the CoM in the middle. The issue is that the force needed to repel the spinning disk would be more than the for the non spinning disk, and since there would be an opposite reaction, then the container would gain speed upwards.

Ok, then transfer the energy into a disk that is attached to the container using AC current so there is no electronic mass transfer. This disk can spin when the moving disk isn't and not spin when the moving disk is. This will help dampen Phase 2. Or even better, have another disk doing the same thing but going down when the other is going up. so Phase 1 and Phase 3 would be just transferring spin from one disk to the other as it goes past.

Phase 1 The spinning disk is moving downwards in a container, its spin is slowed to a stop. Phase 2 The disk is accelerated upwards with a force, it slows and starts moving upwards. Phase 3 The disk is spun up giving it more relativistic mass. Phase 4 The disk is accelerated downwards with a force, it slows and starts moving downwards. So Phase 2 would accelerate the system downwards, and Phase 4 would accelerate the system upwards. Phase 4 would need more force than Phase 2, That would make the system accelerate. I don't see how Phase 1 and Phase 3 would make any difference.

So moving a spinning disk with some relativistic mass gain takes the same amount of force as moving the same disk that isn't spinning? I would of thought it would require more force. And this force difference could be used to accelerate a system. Wherever the center of mass is seems secondary. And spinning a disk faster or slower would not speed it up or slow it down relative to any inertial frame, unless you assume a preferred frame for it to gain or lose momentum relative to.

i realise that moving faster than light is impossible, so therfore I assume that moving the center of mass by spinning a disk will NOT move the system. but if you can change the center of mass in a system without actually moving it, then you could use this to accelerate the system. for example, if you moved the center of mass to the top of a system without moving it, then you could move masses in the system to move the system upwards. This could be used to accelerate the system.

Nice simplification, I think you assume relativistic mass is imaginary. umm, if you spin the disk up at any acceleration, it will gain some relativistic mass, and the center of mass would move in the system. If the system was long enough, then the center of mass could move faster than the speed of light, even if the spin of the disk was quite small.

the method where you spin a disk in a system to move the center of mass, and according to strange, the system would move to keep the center of mass at rest in an inertial frame. If the disk was far enough away from the center of mass, then as you spin it up, the center of mass would move toward the disk faster than the speed of light.

you couldn't move the center of mass faster than the speed of light that way.

So moving energy from one spinning disk from one side of a container to another using AC current would move the system to keep the center of mass at rest in an inertial frame? you could get really high acceleration with that system, just have the container really long.

Was just thinking that transferring the spin from a disk from the bottom of a container to spin a disk on the top of the container using AC current, how would the system know which way to move to keep the center of mass at rest in an inertial frame.