Kinetic to heat (building a spaceship)
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Big Bang is a amorphous, a nonentity, process whereas Atom Totality is a "something that is building" Chapt 3 #153; ATOM TOTALITY
Next: Serpent Mound. Ohio. Part 2.
From: Androcles on 13 Jun 2010 17:43 "gb" <gb6726(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c7d9e7de-114a-4ed1-b8fa-ab7a9c1eacde(a)t10g2000yqg.googlegroups.com... On Jun 11, 7:01 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/11/10 5:20 PM, gb wrote: > > > There are ways with pressure to accelerate something, like hot and > > cold gas. Compressed liquid will immediately turn into gas, and cold > > will accelerate toward hot. The particles slam on the bottom of the > > ship stronger from introduced pressure which accelerates the motion of > > particles. > > > Can use hot and cold difference, or pressure difference. In the end > > the resulting slam at the bottom of the spaceship produces the stop, > > which may be a stronger force than what initially was thrown or > > released downward. > > You cannot fool mother nature. Momentum is conserved in closed > systems. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum It refers to perpetual motion machines that no such thing can be created. I think in the reverse. I want the worst friction possible to absorb energy. ======================================== Then you want "Kinetic energy to heat (building a bomb)" in the title. We usually prefer "Heat to kinetic energy (building a rocket)" ======================================== I am not claiming my idea works or can work. ===================================== Yes you are, or you would not be discussing them.
From: gb on 13 Jun 2010 18:01 On Jun 13, 2:40 pm, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 12, 5:26 am, "n...(a)bid.nes" <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 10, 12:46 pm, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Usually people want to avoid friction, I want to create one. > > > > The idea is that there is a spaceship in space. You throw something, a > > > weight from the front of the spaceship to the back of the spaceship, > > > then the spaceship moves. > > > > But when the weight reaches the end of the spaceship, the spaceship > > > stops in space. > > > > Now what if we convert kinetic energy into heat? > > > Say, by throwing the weight at something that stops it gradually by > > inducing drag rather than all-at-once by impact? > > > > Heat is this thing > > > which can be lost as friction between the weight leaving the top of > > > the spaceship and arriving to the end. > > > Heat *is* kinetic energy, the energy of motion of molecules and > > atoms. Look up "phonon". If all the individual velocity vectors of an > > object's component bits sum to zero in all directions, that's heat. If > > there's a nonvanishing component, that's velocity. > > > Kevlar projectile-proof fabric works by converting the velocity of > > projectiles into heat, which deforms the kevlar fibers. Hang a kevlar > > curtain in the middle of your ship and fling the weight into it; the > > kevlar gets hot, and the weight stops because the kevlar is anchored > > to the ship (or it might as well not be there). > > > You are thinking that if the kevlar weren't there, the ship would > > move a bit and then stop because the impact of the weight in the > > ship's tail exactly cancels the force of your throw, which is correct > > according to old-school Newtonian physics. But, with the kevlar in > > place some of the velocity vector of the weight gets converted to > > (presumably) perpendicular velocity of the heated kevlar fibers. So, > > the ship will move a bit, then slow down, but *not stop* since all the > > momentum didn't cancel, right? > > > Let's tighten those curtain rods so the kevlar is basically a big > > drumhead, bolted to the ship's hull. Throw the weight and it will > > bounce, but will come back slower because some of its impact energy > > got "wasted" warming the kevlar. Presumably, you could keep bouncing > > the weight off the kevlar, and have a reactionless drive (no exhaust) > > at the expense of replacing the kevlar when it catches fire or melts > > too much to stop tossed weights. > > > That what you're thinking? > > I brought up a theory: the opposite of perpetual motion machines, in > space. What is thrown down from the top of the ship moves the ship up. > Simply what I realized, is what if bad friction takes away energy in a > way that is lost. I started thinking that energy can be lost through > heat, and energy is a thing that can evaporate invisibly. > > A theory. Adding: How effective is absorbtion? Can impact into a bag filled with sand absorb the impact into vibrations, where the sandbag itself would move with less energy after the hit because some energy is lost, absorbed? Do water bags colliding absorb energy of impact? My only experiment revolves around five pool table balls hanging in line and hitting the first one moves the last one. Can we make energy absorbed so the last one moves just a little, then place these absorbing balls to the bottom of the spaceship?
From: Sam Wormley on 13 Jun 2010 21:18 On 6/13/10 5:01 PM, gb wrote: > Can impact into a bag filled with > sand absorb the impact into vibrations, where the sandbag itself would > move with less energy after the hit because some energy is lost, > absorbed? Do water bags colliding absorb energy of impact? My only > experiment revolves around five pool table balls hanging in line and > hitting the first one moves the last one. Can we make energy absorbed > so the last one moves just a little, then place these absorbing balls > to the bottom of the spaceship? Get some water balloons, go to the sandy beach, do some experiments, write down the experimental setup, record the data and experimental error and draw conclusions. Apply mathematical analysis. Write this all down in a lab notebook and get back to us.
From: alien8er on 14 Jun 2010 06:52 On Jun 13, 3:01 pm, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > I brought up a theory: the opposite of perpetual motion machines, in > > space. What is thrown down from the top of the ship moves the ship up. Yes, I got that. Volubly. ;>) > > Simply what I realized, is what if bad friction takes away energy in a > > way that is lost. I started thinking that energy can be lost through > > heat, and energy is a thing that can evaporate invisibly. > > > A theory. > > Adding: How effective is absorbtion? Can impact into a bag filled with > sand absorb the impact into vibrations, where the sandbag itself would > move with less energy after the hit because some energy is lost, > absorbed? Do water bags colliding absorb energy of impact? My only > experiment revolves around five pool table balls hanging in line and > hitting the first one moves the last one. Can we make energy absorbed > so the last one moves just a little, then place these absorbing balls > to the bottom of the spaceship? Police occasionally need to know if a particular gun fired a particular bullet during the commission of a crime. One way is to fire a test bullet through the gun, then compare its unique marks left on the bullet by the gun barrel with the markings on the "crime" bullet. You want to "catch" the bullet somehow so it doesn't deform, thus effacing the desired markings. One way to "catch" a bullet is to shoot it into a barrel filled with plastic beads as big as, say, dice, but usually round. Do you think momentum is mysteriously lost every time the cops test a gun this way? Mark L. Fergerson
From: JT on 14 Jun 2010 13:35
On 10 Juni, 21:46, gb <gb6...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Usually people want to avoid friction, I want to create one. > > The idea is that there is a spaceship in space. You throw something, a > weight from the front of the spaceship to the back of the spaceship, > then the spaceship moves. > > But when the weight reaches the end of the spaceship, the spaceship > stops in space. > > Now what if we convert kinetic energy into heat? Heat is this thing > which can be lost as friction between the weight leaving the top of > the spaceship and arriving to the end. > > What is launched at the top can be some chemical, which transforms > from kinetic motion to where the energy of motion is lost as heat and > friction. > > Heat can absorb energy of motion where particles lose energy by > colliding with one another and they build heat. > > This spaceship, or flying saucer would pulse energy this way > internally without letting matter escape, would use a nuclear reactor, > and is a master of cruel friction. > > How could such a spaceship be built technologically where kinetic > energy is transferred into heat, producing valid motion in physics by > such a spaceship? The easiest way to achieve inertial propulsion is to use a Thornson engine, it is built around the principle that the action and reaction take place in a closed system but the two forces is not separated by 180 degrees so there will be no equillibrium. Basicly the main part of acceleration take place in opposite direction of the impact the mass in slingshot thru a 180 degree curve. So you have a mass that creates an action force in same direction as the reaction force within a ringlike construction. Now this of course would only lead to angular forces making the ring spin or rotate, that is why you need two ringstructures and let one mass in each work counterwise eachother. Except from the friction of the accelerated mass you have now created a linear force in the direction of the impact zones that make a pulse transfer of linear momentum when the two synchronized masses pass the impact zones. The easiest way to test a upgraded Thornson engine would be to use motor and disc of two parallell attached harddrives counterwise accelerated with neo dynium magnets glued on the discs so the repulsive forces work in the rotating direction. Now you mount each on a elongated piece of styrofoam and basicly build a catamaran. For the impact zones of the two accelerated neodyniums you use a piece of spring suspended ferromagnet that is pushed every time the neodyniums pass, of course you could mount them on skateboard if you rather would like a landdriven inertial propulsion vehicle. But in real inertial space propulsion there is two counterwise rotating ferromagnetic liquids or gases accelerated within two topmounted ringtube/pipe by using a ring shaped railgun. The linear force is created by simply flip/inverse two of the electromagnets within the two topmounted ringtubes on opposite sides so that there is a linear force created at the oppposited polarised magnetic impact zones. That is how inertial propelled vehicles can acclerated into any direction from being hovering. The hovering is made by two smaller rings vertical mounted in middle of ring structure. \ = / /<=|=|=|=|=|=|=// \\=|=|=|=|=|=|=>\ | = = | \<=|=|=|=|=|=|=\\ //=|=|=|=|=|=|=>/ / = \ Of course it is all speculation, even the Thorson engine, and still it works. JT |