![]() ![]() Science 2.0.Originally posted by phonixrise:how about in terms of non SRB non physicless in the lower atmosphere of kerbin "Surprises from General Relativity: "Swimming" in Spacetime". "Swimming in Spacetime: Motion by Cyclic Changes in Body Shape". "A Machian wave effect in conformal, scalar-tensor gravitational theory". ![]() NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) Program, NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS) (published 11 October 2019). "Helical Engine", Control ID 3194907 - NTRS - NASA" (PDF). ^ "The Adventures of the Gyroscopic Inertial Flight Team".New Scientist (published 20 October 1990). "Review: Gyroscopes remain the strangest of attractors". Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion: Tesla, UFOs, and Classified Aerospace Technology. ^ "Detesters, Phasers and Dean Drives".Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 October 2011. 42nd Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit. Responding to Mechanical Antigravity (PDF). In weak gravitational fields, like that of Earth, the change in position per deformation cycle would be far too small to detect. "Swimming in spacetime" is a general relativistic effect, where an extended body can change its position by using cyclic deformations in shape to exploit the curvature of space, such as due to a gravitational field.It is not clear how (or whether) this effect could provide a useful means of accelerating an actual space vehicle and no practical designs have been proposed. Although this concept may be allowed by the currently accepted laws of physics, it remains unproven implementation would require a negative energy density, and possibly a better understanding of quantum gravity. The Alcubierre drive is a hypothetical method of apparent faster-than-light propulsion for interstellar travel postulated from the theory of general relativity.Helical engine īecause there is no well-defined "center of mass" in curved spacetime, general relativity allows a stationary object to, in a sense, "change its position" in a counter-intuitive manner, without violating conservation of momentum. However, after years of theoretical analysis and laboratory testing of actual devices, no rotating (or any other) mechanical device has been found to produce unidirectional reactionless thrust in free space. Įric Laithwaite, the "Father of Maglev", received a US patent for his own propulsion system, which was claimed to create a linear thrust through gyroscopic and inertial forces. In the 1990s and 2000s, enthusiasts attempted the building and testing of GIT machines. In the 1990s, several people sent suggestions to the Space Exploration Outreach Program (SEOP) at NASA recommending that NASA study a gyroscopic inertial drive, especially the developments attributed to the American inventor Robert Cook and the Canadian inventor Roy Thornson. He posited that a gyroscope set at various angles could provide a lifting force, defying gravity. Scottish inventor Sandy Kidd, a former RAF radar technician, investigated the possibility (without success) in the 1980s. The high-speed part of the trajectory allegedly generates greater centrifugal force than the low, so that there is a greater thrust in one direction than the other. The supposed operating principle of a GIT is a mass traveling around a circular trajectory at a variable speed. The concept involves various methods of leverage applied against the supports of a large gyroscope. The Gyroscopic Inertial Thruster is a proposed reactionless drive based on the mechanical principles of a rotating mechanism. Dean's claims of reactionless thrust generation were subsequently shown to be in error and the "thrust" producing the directional motion was likely to be caused by friction between the device and the surface on which the device was resting and would not work in free space. He held several private demonstrations but never revealed the exact design of the models nor allowed independent analysis of them. Dean claimed that his device was a "reactionless thruster" and that his working models could demonstrate this effect. The Dean drive was a mechanical device concept promoted by inventor Norman L. The rise and fall of these devices now serves as a cautionary tale for those making and reviewing similar claims. These two also stand out as they both received much publicity from their promoters and the popular press in their day and both were eventually rejected when proven to not produce any reactionless drive forces. Two of these represent their general classes: the Dean drive is perhaps the best known example of a "linear oscillating mechanism" reactionless drive the gyroscopic inertial thruster is perhaps the best known example of a "rotating mechanism" reactionless drive. Through the years there have been numerous claims for functional reactionless drive designs using ordinary mechanics (i.e., devices not said to be based on quantum mechanics, relativity or atomic forces or effects). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |