non-mass expulsion type Thruster

[dijinj]

Here is non-mass expulsion type device, which uses properties of line integral and path dependent nature of friction force. The new device can achieve near light speed using properties inherent to relativity. In cases like LHC while particle moves at light speed the force is applied from stationary. But in new device force applied from and space craft is in same inertial frame, so comparatively less energy is required to attain light speed. Details of new device are given in link

https://sites.google.com/site/nonmassexpulsiontypethruster/

Please comment your views on feasibility of the above concept

 

for a Path independent force or conservative force work done in a closed path or its line integral must be zero.vice verse for path dependent force like friction. if friction of ball in closed path can do some work then there is equal and opposite reaction of that work done on space craft resulting in motion of space craft according to third law of motion by newton. share your thoughts on this

 

can you suggest a good dynamic simulation software that uses line integrals or vector calculus; so that I can test this device in that software for all possible permutations and combinations to get a positive result before start building a actual prototype. help me in this regard

 

[imatfaal]

To change the momentum of the centre of mass you need an external force

[swansont]

I only scanned the document (you should post the relevant parts here) but even if this could work, how do you keep the system from rotating? The same effect you think will cause propulsion will cause rotation as well. (it'll rotate anyway, but AFAICT your claim would cause the rotation to continually accelerate)

[dijinj]

to prevent rotation, you can use another thruster that is mirror image (Mirror plane being vertical axis)of original thruster . So when two thrusters work simultaneously they cancel out lateral motion of space craft..

[John Cuthber]

That would prevent rotation, but the whole thing would just wiggle back and to.

It wouldn't develop thrust.

[dijinj]

line integral of a closed path to be zero for just wiggle back and to.stays in original position. but friction does do some work in closed path so there must be equal and opposite reaction of that work resulting in thrust of space craft in any direction.

 

can you suggest a good dynamic simulation software that uses line integrals or vector calculus; so that I can test this device in that software for all possible permutations and combinations to get a positive result before start building a actual prototype. help me in this regard

[swansont]

line integral of a closed path to be zero for just wiggle back and to.stays in original position. but friction does do some work in closed path so there must be equal and opposite reaction of that work resulting in thrust of space craft in any direction.

 

can you suggest a good dynamic simulation software that uses line integrals or vector calculus; so that I can test this device in that software for all possible permutations and combinations to get a positive result before start building a actual prototype. help me in this regard

 

The friction is internal to the system and will only dissipate the kinetic energy. It can't change the center of mass. This won't work. You don't even need software to show this in simple systems, but you do need to set up and solve the problem correctly. (Hint: any result that says that this can cause propulsion is an incorrect solution)

 

Save your money. There's no valid physics that says this will work.

[imatfaal]

line integral of a closed path to be zero for just wiggle back and to.stays in original position. but friction does do some work in closed path so there must be equal and opposite reaction of that work resulting in thrust of space craft in any direction.

 

can you suggest a good dynamic simulation software that uses line integrals or vector calculus; so that I can test this device in that software for all possible permutations and combinations to get a positive result before start building a actual prototype. help me in this regard

Your idea relies on the conservation of linear momentum (ie a change in the momentum of the centre of mass requires an external force) not being true - as our theories rely on this being true you will not be able to use current physics to show that yours is correct.

 

x-posted with SwnsT

[swansont]

 

x-posted with SwnsT

 

OMG I've been disemvoweled.

[dijinj]

I am explaining a simpler case; Assume ball and spacecraft has equal mass. ball is moved from upper end of left straight segment of tube to the bottom end of that straight tube using electromagnetic force. assume ball now has 1 unit of momentum in downward direction so spacecraft has 1 unit of upward momentum. and then ball turns 180 degree in the friction less bottom semicircular arc without losing velocity magnitude then ball now has 1 unit of momentum in upward direction vice-verse for space craft. ball then travels freely through right side straight tube; so no change in momentum for ball and space craft. then ball enters upper semicircular friction tube. in that friction tube friction force will act to make the momentum of ball to zero with respect to spacecraft. the friction being path dependent the vertical Momentum(M_+y) of ball is made to zero by tangential force(F_t) in semicircular path ( line integral comes in to play in this case). my claim is that since F_x and F_Y contribute in tangential friction force (F_t) to make momentum (M_+y) of ball zero with respect to space craft then some resultant force will be there on space craft to to propel it in any oblique direction. Is any such case could be true. Please be technical in answer; vague answer will not help anybody reading this forum.

 

forget the friction tube mentioning in the below sketch its just one of many combinations possible

[John Cuthber]

I am explaining a simpler case; Assume ball and spacecraft has equal mass. ball is moved from upper end of left straight segment of tube to the bottom end of that straight tube using electromagnetic force. assume ball now has 1 unit of momentum in downward direction so spacecraft has 1 unit of upward momentum. and then ball turns 180 degree in the friction less bottom semicircular arc without losing velocity magnitude then ball now has 1 unit of momentum in upward direction vice-verse for space craft. ball then travels freely through right side straight tube; so no change in momentum for ball and space craft. then ball enters upper semicircular friction tube. in that friction tube friction force will act to make the momentum of ball to zero with respect to spacecraft. the friction being path dependent the vertical Momentum(M_+y) of ball is made to zero by tangential force(F_t) in semicircular path ( line integral comes in to play in this case). my claim is that since F_x and F_Y contribute in tangential friction force (F_t) to make momentum (M_+y) of ball zero with respect to space craft then some resultant force will be there on space craft to to propel it in any oblique direction. Is any such case could be true. Please be technical in answer; vague answer will not help anybody reading this forum.

 

forget the friction tube mentioning in the below sketch its just one of many combinations possible

Do you realise that you are not arguing with Imatfall, Swansont or me, but you are arguing with the laws of physics?

[swansont]

I don't think you need software to show this. The calculus should be pretty straightforward if the frictional force is assumed to be constant.

 

I think the problem is that the particle does not lose half of its momentum in each half of the travel through the frictional area — i.e. the momentum transfer is not linear with distance, though you might think this is the case. If the particle comes to rest in a distance d, the equation is that v(x)² = v_i² -2ax, where v_i² = 2ad (a is the constant acceleration) That's from 1st semester kinematics

 

So at the halfway point, you've only lost .707 of the speed.

 

The other thing to consider is the changing speed and the effect the centripetal force has, since this varies over the path as well, and the reaction force to this transfers momentum too. (it's symmetric only when speed is constant)

 

Both of these can be solved analytically under a constant force of friction assumption. There's no need for finite-element software. But the punch-line here is that if you find out that the momentum of the whole system changes, then you've done the math wrong. There's no loophole to exploit here.

[dijinj]

I am not arguing with any body I am just discussing a feasibility of an invention. I am using well known theories of friction in physics to challenge another one in physics to the best of my knowledge please tell me where I am wrong or is there Any contradiction or either one of the theories has to be extended to fit the new situation.

 

I will make my point clear here: assume 1 unit of force is required to generate 1 Unit of momentum. then In the first straight section 1 unit of force in "-ve Y" direction given for the distance of straight segment ( assume that length to be d) to generate 1 unit of momentum for the ball and ball then turns 180 degree reach the upper end of second straight tube . Assume arc length of semicircular arc is also equal to d. Then constant friction force is given in that curved tube on the ball. you know that only one unit of force in distance d is required to stop the ball. Since friction being path dependent limit of sum of tangent force in that semicircular arc in distance d is required to stop the ball ( here is where line integral comes - area under/ between curved path and a bottom plane) . For conservation of momentum to be true; one unit of force has to be given for same distance in y direction only to stop the ball . but for the path dependent force both x and y components of tangent friction force contribute to stop the ball.with respect to space craft. In that tangential friction force in semi circular arc,resultant of y component of force cancels out since that force applies in both up and down direction for equal distances( in first and second quadrant of arc). then we are left with x component of that tangent friction force and initial force in Y direction these forces will not cancel each other so there will be an oblique force acting on space craft. that force will result in propulsion of space craft in oblique direction.

[imatfaal]

I am not arguing with any body I am just discussing a feasibility of an invention. I am using well known theories of friction in physics to challenge another one in physics to the best of my knowledge please tell me where I am wrong or is there Any contradiction or either one of the theories has to be extended to fit the new situation

 

We have all tried to explain - thought experiments (even seemingly well formulated ones) cannot show emprical observation to be wrong. You are using a very fuzzy and unexplained/informal idea to challenge something that has been seen to be true for centuries.

 

 

I will make my point clear here: assume 1 unit of force is required to generate 1 Unit of momentum. then In the first straight section 1 unit of force in "-ve Y" direction given for the distance of straight segment ( assume that length to be d) to generate 1 unit of momentum for the ball and ball then turns 180 degree reach the upper end of second straight tube . Assume arc length of semicircular arc is also equal to d.

 

Force applied for a distance is work done not change in momentum. You need to stop talking in prose and put some equations down.

 

F.d = W ie [Newton][Metres]=[Joules]

F=ma = mdv/dt ie [Newtons]=[kg][metres.second ^-2]

 

 

Then constant friction force is given in that curved tube on the ball. you know that only one unit of force in distance d is required to stop the ball. Since friction being path dependent limit of sum of tangent force in that semicircular arc in distance d is required to stop the ball ( here is where line integral comes - area under/ between curved path and a bottom plane) .

 

Why is friction constant? Where is your equation for kinetic friction? How does your equation tie in with Amanton and Coulomb? I think of kinetic friction being dependent only on the load - ie this case the normal. Which, unusually, will mean that the friction is varying with v^2 if I have my head straight.

 

 

. For conservation of momentum to be true; one unit of force has to be given for same distance in y direction only to stop the ball . but for the path dependent force both x and y components of tangent friction force contribute to stop the ball.with respect to space craft.

 

1. This is not conservation of momentum

2. You are not allowed to use conservation of momentum to show that conservation of momentum does not apply

 

 

but for the path dependent force both x and y components of tangent friction force contribute to stop the ball.with respect to space craft.

 

1. You need to consider the normal as well.

2. Unfo - as there is friction you need to consider that the ball will roll rather than slide. You then have angular momentum calculations to do

 

 

In that tangential friction force in semi circular arc,resultant of y component of force cancels out since that force applies in both up and down direction for equal distances( in first and second quadrant of arc). then we are left with x component of that tangent friction force and initial force in Y direction these forces will not cancel each other so there will be an oblique force acting on space craft. that force will result in propulsion of space craft in oblique direction.

 

In my opinion your power source will just, in the end, make the space craft spin and wobble (as the ball goes in the opposite direction and wibbles as the craft wobbles). There will be no change in system angular momentum nor linear momentum

[John Cuthber]

I am not arguing with any body I am just discussing a feasibility of an invention.

 

 

It has been pointed out several times that the "invention" is not feasible.

There is nothing to discuss.

[dijinj]

force is rate of change of momentum. if uniform force is applied over distance then momentum will increase continuously in equal steps in equal distance through the entire distance d.

 

To brush up your memory on line integrals watch this video:-

https://www.khanacademy.org/math/multivariable-calculus/line_integrals_topic/line_integrals/v/line-integral-example-1

 

work done by path dependent force is line integral or area between surface and path curve. In case of uniform force, area between flat surface and path curve

 

Normal forces will increase friction. then it will be too complicated to calculate. You know Line integral itself is too tough to calculate. that's why I am asking for a proper software

Edited April 26, 2014 by dijinj

[imatfaal]

force is rate of change of momentum. if uniform force is applied over distance then momentum will increase continuously in equal steps in equal distance through the entire distance d.

 

To brush up your memory on line integrals watch this video:-

https://www.khanacademy.org/math/multivariable-calculus/line_integrals_topic/line_integrals/v/line-integral-example-1

 

work done by path dependent force is line integral or area between surface and path curve. In case of uniform force, area between flat surface and path curve

 

Normal forces will increase friction. then it will be too complicated to calculate. You know Line integral itself is too tough to calculate. that's why I am asking for a proper software

 

Instead of telling me to brush up on line integrals - you should provide equations (I have and they agree with my assertions). I will be particularly interested in the ones that have force for a distance equalling momentum change per previous posts.

 

Also what are you calculating with your friction if it is not dependent on the normal? Friction doesn't just act - it acts under certain circumstances and due to surfaces (or fluids) under a load; in your case the primary load will be the normal/reaction to the normal (hint why does the ball go round the curve) . Again you need to provide an equation - you might not have the coefficients (in fact you cannot have them) - but you need to show what factors your friction is dependent upon, and to what power

 

You have not dealt with angular momentum and roll/slide problem - remember you have specified that the ball has a significant mass, thus the gain in angular momentum as the ball starts to roll has to be accounted for. Nor the fact that you are using the conservation of momentum to show that the conservation of momentum is incorrect.

[dijinj]

from well known equations you know that a non-zero work can produce non-zero change in momentum over distance. then nonzero work done by a path dependent force can change momentum of a Ball through a trajectory that starts and ends in the same place:. I mean for conservation of momentum to be true that work has to be zero so that there is no change in momentum.

 

 

There is zero net work (W) done by the path independent force when moving a particle through a trajectory that starts and ends in the same place:

for path independent force. its non -zero for path dependent force

 

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys211/lectures/power/power_all.html

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_force

 

 

friction force is dependent on normal force and Mu( coefficient of friction) but friction force act on opposite direction of motion of that ball( that's tangential over a curve) . Correct me if I am wrong using technical explanations.

[swansont]

I will make my point clear here: assume 1 unit of force is required to generate 1 Unit of momentum.

 

That's a bad assumption, because it's not true. P = Ft for a constant force, so it depends on how long the force was exerted.

from well known equations you know that a non-zero work can produce non-zero change in momentum over distance. then nonzero work done by a path dependent force can change momentum of a Ball through a trajectory that starts and ends in the same place:. I mean for conservation of momentum to be true that work has to be zero so that there is no change in momentum.

 

 

 

Another thing that's not true. You can change momentum of an object without doing work on it: have it move in a circular path, so that the force is always perpendicular to the displacement. Momentum is constantly changing, but work is not done; speed (and thus KE) stays the same.

 

Work and momentum are not directly related and certainly not interchangeable.

[dijinj]

angular momentum and linear momentum are pseudo vectors , They are independently conserved. Our subject of interest is linear momentum. angular momentum only causes rotation around a point.

[John Cuthber]

"force is rate of change of momentum"

And, from Newton's law we know that the force on the ball from friction is equal and opposite to that which the ball exerts on the pipe.

So the sum of those two opposed forces is zero.

So, the rate of change of momentum is zero.

So the whole item doesn't change it's momentum.

And, since speed times mass and the mass is not zero, the change of speed is zero.

That's why it doesn't work.

 

Now stop trying to argue with the laws of physics.

[dijinj]

 

And, from Newton's law we know that the force on the ball from friction is equal and opposite to that which the ball exerts on the pipe.

So the sum of those two opposed forces is zero. So, the rate of change of momentum is zero.

So the whole item doesn't change it's momentum.

And, since speed times mass and the mass is not zero, the change of speed is zero.

That's why it doesn't work.

Action and reaction are equal and opposite but they act on different bodies. if action is on ball then reaction is on space craft. for eg: man jumping from a boat; if action is by man the reaction is on boat..

 

Let me explain my case .

Ball and space craft gained momentum in equal and opposite direction by electromagnetic force in straight section. but then ball is brought into initial position and at rest with respect to space craft by path dependent friction force. for conservation of momentum to be true the ball has to be stopped by a straight force in opposite direction to the initial one. but for friction, force is in tangential direction along the curvilinear path. so both x and y component of that tangential force contribute to stop the ball at initial position with respect to space craft; so there would be an oblique force that will result in oblique movement of space craft. Remember I Don't want to move the ball to initial position and at rest in the earth's or any other reference frame but spacecraft's reference frame.

[John Cuthber]

"Action and reaction are equal and opposite but they act on different bodies."

No they do not.

That act on different parts of the same composite body (the spaceship).

 

So, for your example

" for eg: man jumping from a boat; if action is by man the reaction is on boat.."

After the man falls in the sea and both he and the boat have come to rest, the world hasn't moved.

 

 

Now, here are the laws of physics that you are arguing against- Newton's First law (as applied to initially static, and initially moving, cases)

 

• An object that is at rest will stay at rest unless an external force acts upon it.
• An object that is in motion will not change its velocity unless an external force acts upon it.

 

Your "ship" has no external force acting on it.

It's velocity will remain constant.

Stop arguing with the laws of physics.

[swansont]

Action and reaction are equal and opposite but they act on different bodies. if action is on ball then reaction is on space craft. for eg: man jumping from a boat; if action is by man the reaction is on boat..

 

 

YES!

 

Which means that any momentum lost by one is gained by the other; equal and opposite force, and equal duration. Which would be true of a ball and the tube/rocket that houses it. If the ball ends up at rest, the rocket must end up at rest as well.

[dijinj]

That's all true. but I am wrestling with those using path dependent nature of friction force, that's also a well established theory.

 

Path independence means if work is done on a particle between 2 points over a path. Then distance of straight line joining those 2 points (displacement) and force applied in that direction is required to calculate the work done. but for path dependent force what happens in that path is also required. That's where line integral comes.

 

Consider sketch below ; path independent force like electromagnetic force is applied on red line and path dependent friction force is applied over black curve. I assume that you can at-least agree that same magnitude of force is required to start moving a ball from initial point to another point and that same Magnitude of force is required to move ball from that point to stop the ball at original initial position.

first some electromagnetic force is applied to move ball at rest from top left point to bottom end of red line. then friction force is applied along black curve to stop ball at top left point. Magnitude of friction force is magnitude of tangential force exerted on ball by tube along that black curved path. here both x component and y component of that tangential friction force act to stop the ball at top left point. so red line's force and black curve's force wont cancel each other. Then that resultant force will propel space craft in some oblique direction.