Can you move in space?

[MPMin]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

Nope

You’ll have to do better than that if you want to maintain the pretence that you are sticking to the science as you yourself demand from others

[Strange]

Just now, MPMin said:

You’ll have to do better than that if you want to maintain the pretence that you are sticking to the science as you yourself demand from others

I knew you would say that, so I have added a bit more !

Also, the burden of proof is on you as the person making the claims.

[MPMin]

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

Nope. If this were true then why would putting it in a box stop it working?

Because the energy being put into the system from the solar panels would have no where to go, its the same as putting a normal rocket in a box, your analogy doesn’t provide any insight here 

[Mordred]

Lol can an astronaut bang the side of a ship while onboard and generate thrust ?

That would be an equivalent scenario a wire A acting on Wire B when both are part of the ship

[MPMin]

1 minute ago, Mordred said:

Lol can an astronaut bang the side of a ship while onboard and generate thrust ?

 That would be an equivalent scenario a wire A acting on Wire B when both are part of the ship

It would help if you fully understood what ive been saying, while you misrepresent what I’m saying your arguments aren’t applicable 

[Mordred]

No I haven't you applied a calculation of wire A acting upon wire B. Then claimed that it was sufficient.

It's not 

You did not apply all the applicable force vectors in that scenario. Plain and simple. Incomplete calculations is identical to incorrect calculations

Edited July 20, 2019 by Mordred

[MPMin]

16 minutes ago, Strange said:

Also, the burden of proof is on you as the person making the claims.

You are right and I’ve provided as much proof as is available considering this hasn’t been tried or conceived before to my knowledge.

I have provided well documented evidence that wires with a continuous current will attract or repel each other or in other words exert a force on each other, my innovation is to cause a detachment in the magnetic field from on of the wires so that they emitted magnetic field briefly exerts a force on the other wire while it has a brief current, I provided an animation to illustrate this.

The proof needs to come from actually trying it. 

 

Edited July 20, 2019 by MPMin

[Mordred]

Tell you what prove me wrong 

Find one craft of any kind that has movement that doesn't apply some form of force outside of that craft. This includes outside forces acting upon said craft

Edited July 20, 2019 by Mordred

[MPMin]

8 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You did not apply all the applicable force vectors in that scenario. Plain and simple. Incomplete calculations is identical to incorrect calculations

All the other force vectors do not interact with the craft, the force vectors that do not interact with the opposing wires are equal from both wires and cancel each other out leaving only the disparity between the forces that do interact to be considered.

[Mordred]

Of course they do I already explained wire A acts upon itself when it emits the EM field. You did not apply Newton's third law to wire A

Edited July 20, 2019 by Mordred

[Strange]

29 minutes ago, MPMin said:

Because the energy being put into the system from the solar panels would have no where to go, its the same as putting a normal rocket in a box, your analogy doesn’t provide any insight here 

OK. Lets try this. Rather than surrounding it completely, lets leave an opening on one side:

But if we put the opening on the other side, then the thrust is in the opposite direction.

[MPMin]

42 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Tell you what prove me wrong 

 Find one craft of any kind that has movement that doesn't apply some form of force outside of that craft.

What if this is the first time this has been thought of, if so how can I show you another example. When Edison proposed the light bulb I’m glad you weren’t there to say ‘show me someone else has made a light bulb if you want me to believe such a thing could work’

if it makes you feel better you can consider the wires are mounted outside the craft, it makes no difference if the force occurs inside or outside the craft, the point is the system generates a momentary emp then the wire pulses a current to push or pull against that emp 

you show me where it has been documented that this would not work

 

29 minutes ago, Strange said:

59 minutes ago, MPMin said:

Because the energy being put into the system from the solar panels would have no where to go, its the same as putting a normal rocket in a box, your analogy doesn’t provide any insight here 

OK. Lets try this. Rather than surrounding it completely, lets leave an opening on one side:

 

But if we put the opening on the other side, then the thrust is in the opposite direction.



This does not relate to my proposal or the animation I provided, you are still fixated on radiation escaping rather than magnetic fields interacting with current carrying wires as Ive referenced. You should also notice that my animation shows how the force is generated to the left in both phases instead of left and right as you have shown above.

Edited July 21, 2019 by MPMin

[Mordred]

Grrr this is ridiculous

[latex] \underbrace{\longleftarrow}_{x Newton's}\overbrace{||}^{wire A}\underbrace{\longrightarrow}_{X Newton's}[/latex]

[latex]\leftarrow x= \rightarrow x[/latex]

Anything you don't follow about Newton's third law applied to wire A ?

Wire B will be pulled to the left by the mounting system the same quantity as wire A pushes against wire B.

Four force vectors involved

Edited July 21, 2019 by Mordred

[MPMin]

14 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Anything you don't follow about Newton's third law applied to wire A ?

Either you don’t get what I’m saying or are choosing not to. I am not proposing a continuous currents to produce two continuous counteracting forces. When you can explain what’s wrong with my design in the frame of reference that I have provided or as per my animation at least then your argument will apply, until then, you are effectively talking about something else.

[Strange]

34 minutes ago, MPMin said:

This does not relate to my proposal or the animation I provided, you are still fixated on radiation escaping rather than magnetic fields interacting with current carrying wires as Ive referenced. You should also notice that my animation shows how the force is generated to the left in both phases instead of left and right as you have shown above.

I am "fixated" on the radiation escaping because that is the only thing that can add momentum to the craft. 

The force on the wires is irrelevant. The only things that matter are "what leaves the craft" and "what momentum does it carry"

1 minute ago, MPMin said:

Either you don’t get what I’m saying or are choosing not to. I am not proposing a continuous currents to produce two continuous counteracting forces. When you can explain what’s wrong with my design in the frame of reference that I have provided or as per my animation at least then your argument will apply, until then, you are effectively talking about something else.

This has been explained to you multiple times, in different ways, by different people.

[Mordred]

They are fixed mounted they cannot seperate. Doesn't matter how you apply your counter forces.

You have two fixed wires you cannot seperate or ignore the action of the four forces acting upon two fixed mount wires. They all occur simultaneously. No matter what you attempt or believe

You must act upon something that can seperate from the craft.... Period

Edited July 21, 2019 by Mordred

[MPMin]

4 minutes ago, Strange said:

I am "fixated" on the radiation escaping because that is the only thing that can add momentum to the craft. 

The force on the wires is irrelevant. The only things that matter are "what leaves the craft" and "what momentum does it carry"

I have provided evidence with references to the basis of what makes my design work the way it does. With regards to my references; what is the force on the two wires with a continuous current then? Radiation escaping in both directions?

Edited July 21, 2019 by MPMin

[Mordred]

You have provided a lack of understanding and application of Newton's laws 

[MPMin]

4 minutes ago, Mordred said:

You have provided a lack of understanding and application of Newton's laws 

Without making direct references to my design with tangible explanations this is just an empty statement 

[Mordred]

I referenced your calculations and pointed out the error in them. That is sufficient to overturn your design. Everyone involved has been telling you the same thing.

You must apply a force against something not part of your craft.

PERIOD. Doesn't make a difference how you try to counter force.

Edited July 21, 2019 by Mordred

[iNow]

On 7/2/2019 at 7:45 AM, MPMin said:

A friend and I were having a debate

Did the debate involve how long you could troll people on a discussion forum? 

[Mordred]

If you applied your EMP against Earth's magnetic field or against ionized plasma then I would state it's workable. However you are not

[MPMin]

On 7/18/2019 at 10:17 PM, Mordred said:

Secondly 0.02 N won't move a 250 kg craft

Was this you showing me my error in my calculations or you showing your lack of understanding of physics?

See this is what it looks like when you actually reference something someone said and ask for an explanation on it.

[Mordred]

I also stated opposing forces being involved then stated them. If you read back and look at the full post I included the question are your wires fix mounted.

Edited July 21, 2019 by Mordred

[MPMin]

17 minutes ago, iNow said:

Did the debate involve how long you could troll people on a discussion forum? 

Funny that, it was my friend who convinced me to come here because the scientific community would embrace something new. 

Nice!