[BT & HG] Magnet Drives -- Ok so Newton's 3rd law is correct, whatever
HERO Chip
Motion. And I came up with this type of ship drive that uses 6 magnets.
1 2
S S
N N
N SS N
S NN S
3 4 5 6
Tube 1 goes from Point 3 to Point 1 to end at Point 4.
Tube 2 goes from Point 5 to Point 2 to end at Point 6.
You can tell how my bar magnets are arranged. A plane connecting the south and
north poles of 3&6 and 4&5 respectively forms the backside of the ship.
Magnets 1 & 2 are inside Tubes 1 & 2 respectively. When the north poles of
mags 1 and 2 get close to the north poles of mags 3 & 6 respectively, they'll
repel away from each other. Mags 1 & 2 will go through their respective tubes
until their south poles come into proximity of mags's 4 & 5 south poles
respectively, the magnets will repel away from each other. Mags 1 & 2 will
keep going away from the ship and the remaining mags will keep going away from
them and will move the ship forward (or backward if the drive is rotated 180
degrees around. I call this drive the W drive (since if you turn the tubes
upside down, it'll look like a W).
Remember, this science relies on the principle that same magnetic poles repel
each other and Newton's 3rd Law: For every action there's an opposite & equal
reaction.
Nought
HERO Chip wrote in message
<19991223104026.0...@ng-ce1.aol.com>...
Tinarandil
news:19991223104026.0...@ng-ce1.aol.com...
> Also, here's something I found interesting: I was using Newton's 3rd Law
of
> Motion. And I came up with this type of ship drive that uses 6 magnets.
>
sit in one spot bouncing back and forth stupidly, at the same time tearing
your pathetic little engine to pieces from the bouncing motion. There's a
reason why no scientists have come up with an engine like this - even in an
atmosphere, where physics tend to be more forgiving, it won't work.
HERO Chip
Once again, all you're doing is changing the ships center of gravity. It'll
sit in one spot bouncing back and forth stupidly, at the same time tearing
your pathetic little engine to pieces from the bouncing motion. There's a
reason why no scientists have come up with an engine like this - even in an
atmosphere, where physics tend to be more forgiving, it won't work.
>>
polarity magnets using Newton's third law of motion. I'll admit there will be
the gradual wear and tear, but that can be lessened with rollers placed in the
tube to enable Mags 1 & 2 to be rolled through the tube. Actually, I now use
the two moving magnets to repel each other back to the ship so they can repel
the ship away from them again. And it's no joke, Nought. This is for real.
I've also designed a simpler version that eliminates Mags 4 & 5. Mags 1 & 2
repel each other through one tube towards Mags 3 and 6 (I've renamed this
drive the "O Drive" and Mag 6 "Mag 4").
John Campbell
>
[more stuff that reveals his basic lack of understanding of physics]
> the ship away from them again. And it's no joke, Nought. This is for real.
It is a joke, actually. The only question is whether you're the
perpetrator or the butt of the joke...
---
John Campbell
jcam...@lynn.ci-n.com
... who suspects the latter...
Brad Carletti
Ahh, so you've built a working model?
Brad Carletti
"... the complete game rules, . . ." - BMR blurb
"True aircraft... are beyond the scope of these rules." - BMR pg. 54
--
"When a unit jumps, it can move 1 hex for every available Jump MP"
Hrmm, not only can you jump 0 hexes, but ANYTHING can jump 0 hexes ;)
--
Hey, I can nitpick if I want. I have a company of Unseen.
--
"Only half the heatsinks on mine have been upgraded!"
- Karl Villiers, Knight of the Inner Sphere.
--
Well on my way to having another mega .sig.
Xarzandon2
just been stared at by an Umber Hulk. I've been trying for weeks to grasp the
concept of this whole BOP driven ships thing, and I am forced to come to the
conclusion that HEROchip is a cartoon, for only in the bizzare pseudo-reality
of cartoons will his ideas work. I have seen many examples of cartoon
character moving buildings from the inside by ramming into a wall and pushing.
This is the closest analogy I can reconcile the BOP drive to. It just makes no
sense, and even if it did, what relevance would it have to Battletech?
Come to think of it, has chip ever posted anything even remotely relevant to
the Blessed Game? by the way he seems bent on destroying it, I can only assume
that he originated somewhere in the Robotech universe. What other cartoon
would have such a reason to hate Battletech? I can't seem to remember any Chip
from Robotech, though. Perhaps, one of the Voltrons.... Hmm...
"Why can't there be two?"
-The second-to-last Immortal
Brad Carletti
>would have such a reason to hate Battletech? I can't seem to remember any Chip
>from Robotech, though. Perhaps, one of the Voltrons.... Hmm...
There was a kid called Chip in Transformers. :)
Tinarandil
news:38625aab.1...@news.internode.on.net...
> >that he originated somewhere in the Robotech universe. What other
cartoon
> >would have such a reason to hate Battletech? I can't seem to remember
any Chip
> >from Robotech, though. Perhaps, one of the Voltrons.... Hmm...
>
> There was a kid called Chip in Transformers. :)
people. Really, a child against ten foot robots? How is he going to last
long at all?
Nought
Since I only weight 235lbs, I am fairly certain then that I can lift myself
off of the ground by grabbing my bootstring. If I can pull hard enough,
and long enough, I could raise myself up to an incredible height! maybe even
to the top of my house!
That is what you are trying to say with your magnet drive, bop drive,
whatever drive. You can't "push" against yourself, those "equal and opposite
reactions" will cancel each other out. Your magnets will
only rip your ship apart much like my arm in the above example would just
tear off my shoe string.
Also try your experiment at home with bar magnets and a paper towel
cylander (the cardboard tube). Arrange your magnets in the
arrangement you describe. Don't work, does it?
Sorry HEROchip, back to the drawing board......
HERO Chip wrote in message
<19991223175036.0...@ng-cj1.aol.com>...
><<
>Once again, all you're doing is changing the ships center of gravity.
It'll
>sit in one spot bouncing back and forth stupidly, at the same time tearing
>your pathetic little engine to pieces from the bouncing motion. There's a
>reason why no scientists have come up with an engine like this - even in an
>atmosphere, where physics tend to be more forgiving, it won't work.
>>>
>I never changed the ship's center of gravity, except by moving it using
reverse
>polarity magnets using Newton's third law of motion. I'll admit there will
be
>the gradual wear and tear, but that can be lessened with rollers placed in
the
>tube to enable Mags 1 & 2 to be rolled through the tube. Actually, I now
use
>the two moving magnets to repel each other back to the ship so they can
repel
>the ship away from them again. And it's no joke, Nought. This is for
real.
Warner Doles
: Also, here's something I found interesting: I was using Newton's 3rd Law
of
: Motion. And I came up with this type of ship drive that uses 6 magnets.
Yes Yes Yes and while you are using you Mag Drives, I will be
using my new Hamster / Rubber band / Flatcuant powered
star drive to out maneuver you and eventually out run you...
--
Warner Doles
str...@wbu-bt.com
http://www.wbu-bt.com
WarIRC.wbu-bt.com
"Now I want you to remember that no soldier ever won a war by dying for his
country. You won it by making the other poor dumb slob die for his
country."
General George S. Patton.
cra...@hotmail.com
HERO Chip <hero...@aol.com> wrote:
> Also, here's something I found interesting: I was
> using Newton's 3rd Law of Motion. And I came up with
> this type of ship drive that uses 6 magnets.
>
> repel away from each other. Mags 1 & 2 will go through their
> respective tubes until their south poles come into proximity of
> mags's 4 & 5 south poles respectively, the magnets will repel
> away from each other. Mags 1 & 2 will keep going away from the
> ship and the remaining mags will keep going away from them and
> will move the ship forward (or backward if the drive is rotated
> 180 degrees around.
If I follow this correctly, what you're saying is this
ship has some magnets bolted onto it and uses the repulsion
with some free-flying magnets to propel the ship, right?
And you're hoping that the magnets continue to repel
each other, right?
If that's so, you have found a viable space drive. It is
a very inefficient rocket engine because of the very low
velocity and repulsive forces of the heavy magnets involved,
but yes, it should work.
The magnetic repulsion force between the bolted magnets
and free-flying magnets will drop off with the square
of the distance. If the base strength for the field interaction
is at 1cm, at 2cm the strength is 1/4 the base, at 3cm
its 1/9, at 10cm its 1/100, at 100cm (3ft) its 1/10,000, etc.
The magnets will be shot out of the ship at a pretty slow
rate compared to the gases of a rocket engine, let alone a
fusion rocket, but this will work. The acceleration should
be weak and should become negligible within a kilometer, but
this is a workable rocket.
You might want to look up "massdrivers" and "railguns"
for moving asteroids. Those use the continued ejection
of debris to propel the ship. With a reasonably advanced
massdriver, you might do 50% better than 20th century
chemical rockets in terms of fuel efficiency. Fuel
efficiency compared to Battletech fusion rockets is crap.
> Remember, this science relies on the principle that same
> magnetic poles repel each other and Newton's 3rd Law: For
> every action there's an opposite & equal reaction.
Yes, you now seem to grasp how rocket engines work. They
shoot stuff out one end and go the other. The faster they
shoot stuff out one end, the more fuel efficient they are.
--
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
"Catherine the Great: Strong Russian Queen, but couldn't
resist the mane attraction." -- Newsweek's 'Millenium in
a Nutshell'
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
HERO Chip
Actually, I forgot the information that my sister told me about 6 months ago.
That information was that NASA has already designed and uses such a magnet
drive in a coil. The magnets get repelled and move through the coil to
generate the ship's electrical power (or part of the ship's electrical power if
the ship has solar panels and/or batteries already mounted/installed).
The reason why I'm so interested in designing "exhaustless" emitting drives is
because in BattleSpace, the rules state that a ship's exhaust drive can be
visibliy detected 3.5 Mm away. Radar waves, in BattleSpace, only extend to
about 150km. That means less time to detect incoming ships. Of course, if a
ship that emits an exhaust stops emitting exhaust and just relies on inertia to
travel, then the ship won't be emitting an exhaust that can be detected from a
range of 150km to 3.5Mm.
Patrick Weaver
"Nought" wrote
> This is a joke, right?
>
No, it's a clueless troll........................
Andrew Lannon
of
> Motion. And I came up with this type of ship drive that uses 6 magnets.
OK...interesting. I'll give you that. First, lemme explain how I think
this is working (it's been a long couple of days, so it's getting a little
difficult to think clearly):
Magnets 1&2 basically oscillate between a region somewhere around the
back of the ship and the front of the ship, yes?
Well, since this is presumably a vacuum environment, more efficient that
way, no kinetic energy wasted on drag, magnets 1&2 will hit the opposite
side of the ship from magnets 3-6 with pretty well the same amount of force
as their magnetic fields pushed against the magnetic fields of magnets 3-6.
Net force: zilch. Also, magnets 1&2 would have to have a huge mass in order
to exert enough force to move the ship. And, since you need to keep those
magnets around, you'll keep adding their mass to the mass of the ship, which
makes it yet harder to move. Also, you'd have to provide some sort of
impetus to the magnets 1&2 to make them move; nature innately settles into
the most efficient configuration. Applications of the various laws
concerning entropy, conservation of energy, etc. So, you'd have to push
against the magnets with a force equal to your thrust; this leads to the
question of "why don't you just use that thrust directly against the ship,
rather than using magnets in the first place?"
Now, I'm sure I made some glaring errors (I always did in physics, and now
it's compounded by lack of practice and fatigue :)), but that should've
gotten my point across. Sorta.
Andrew Lannon
Remora2
>Also, here's something I found interesting: I was using Newton's 3rd Law of
>Motion. And I came up with this type of ship drive that uses 6 magnets.
>
>S S
>N N
>
>N SS N
>S NN S
>3 4 5 6
>
>Tube 1 goes from Point 3 to Point 1 to end at Point 4.
>Tube 2 goes from Point 5 to Point 2 to end at Point 6.
>You can tell how my bar magnets are arranged. A plane connecting the south
>and
>north poles of 3&6 and 4&5 respectively forms the backside of the ship.
>Magnets 1 & 2 are inside Tubes 1 & 2 respectively. When the north poles of
>mags 1 and 2 get close to the north poles of mags 3 & 6 respectively, they'll
>tubes
>until their south poles come into proximity of mags's 4 & 5 south poles
>respectively, the magnets will repel away from each other. Mags 1 & 2 will
>keep going away from the ship and the remaining mags will keep going away
>from
>them and will move the ship forward (or backward if the drive is rotated 180
>upside down, it'll look like a W).
>each other and Newton's 3rd Law: For every action there's an opposite & equal
>reaction.
>
Is the "W" for "Wrecking"? I mean, if the magnets are all part of the ship's
structure and they're repelling each other, won't the magnetic repulsion tear
the ship apart?
Ken
SMarsh3807
That is well and good, but how big are the magnets? You are ignoring inertia,
and the amount of energy required would require huge magnets. Not a very
practical form of propulsion, not ot mention that both segments would have to
be attached to the ship and would give you no net motion. nice try though
Steve
Cliff McKinney
so you have a magnet bouncing back and forth in a tube...how does this
motivate a craft of any type?
Cliff McKinney
another note...eventually your two mobile magnets will equalize in their
tubes
Jennifer Stewarts
Tinarandil wrote:
>
> > There was a kid called Chip in Transformers. :)
> I kept praying they would kill him off, but Transformers is too forgiving on
> people. Really, a child against ten foot robots? How is he going to last
> long at all?
ummm, depends on if he's got Mospiada dive armor or not... or maybe hard
suits... unarmored... bout as long as those toads lasted when the union
landed
on them.
Jennifer Stewarts
Nought wrote:
> Also try your experiment at home with bar magnets and a paper towel
> cylander (the cardboard tube). Arrange your magnets in the
> arrangement you describe. Don't work, does it?
> Sorry HEROchip, back to the drawing board......
I got an experiment, lets arrange the magnets around Hero's monitor and hard
drive...
might give us a breather for some serious conversation.
*dives for cover*
Sorry, sorry, couldn't resist.
Cliff McKinney
does the hamster run in a curved habitrail bumping his head on each end
to give the ship motion?
that would eliminate the need for costly large magnets
or how about a larger tube with a cow?
"Katherine Steiner-Davion was found dead today after laughing caused her
spleen to rupture. Plans for the new Moo Drive were found on her desk.
Behold the new power of the unvirse....Cattletech"
Cliff McKinney
I propose I cow version....but a cow in large tubes running back and
forth being repelled by wolves at either end of the tube...
my invention....Cattletech
Andrew Lannon
> Actually, I forgot the information that my sister told me about 6 months
ago.
> That information was that NASA has already designed and uses such a magnet
> drive in a coil.
Why don't you post a URL for it? Everything NASA uses is posted on their
site somewhere. Unless it's classified, I guess; but the Chinese get all of
that anyway, so you can probably find it on one of their government sites.
> Of course, if a ship that emits an exhaust stops emitting exhaust and just
relies on inertia to
> travel, then the ship won't be emitting an exhaust that can be detected
from a range of 150km to 3.5Mm.
OK...in space, there's not really anything to slow you down so you have no
acceleration, so you have no change in velocity. All you have to have your
vessel do is jump to a point >3.5 megameters from any RADAR-equipped
vessels/stations/whatever, turn off their drives at about 3.5 megameters,
and coast in. It'll take awhile, but it'll work; and your ships won't have
to haul themselves around by the seats of their own pants [1].
[1] hoist by their own petards? :)
Andrew Lannon
Straat_Hondo
Tinarandil wrote:
>
> Brad Carletti <guppy...@quakeclan.net> wrote in message
> news:38625aab.1...@news.internode.on.net...
> > >that he originated somewhere in the Robotech universe. What other
> cartoon
> > >would have such a reason to hate Battletech? I can't seem to remember
> any Chip
> > >from Robotech, though. Perhaps, one of the Voltrons.... Hmm...
> >
> I kept praying they would kill him off, but Transformers is too forgiving on
> people. Really, a child against ten foot robots? How is he going to last
> long at all?
As a little redish brown smear on the foot of one?
Toontje
--
Groetjes & xxx-jes van Anton de Geweldige
(Beter bekent als stevige staartmans, of slappe anti-staartmans.)
"Greenback extrordinair"
"G.T."
"Soms zuigt het"
cra...@hotmail.com
HERO Chip <hero...@aol.com> wrote:
> Actually, I forgot the information that my sister told me about
> 6 months ago. That information was that NASA has already
> designed and uses such a magnet drive in a coil. The magnets get
> repelled and move through the coil to generate the ship's
> electrical power (or part of the ship's electrical power if
> the ship has solar panels and/or batteries already
> mounted/installed).
Uh...you just described a basic dynamo in use for the past
century or so. A moving magnet field sweeping through a
conductor generates electricity. The essence of a dynamo
in an electrical generator.
However, you mentioned NASA, so I suspect you're thinking
of electrified tethers which the shuttle was testing in
the past few years. By pushing an electrical current through
a conductor, you generate a magnetic field (which, by the
way, is part of how an electric motor works). The magnetic
field can repel itself from an external magnetic field.
This is convenient near a planet with a strong magnetic
field. Alternately, a tether sweeping through a planetary
magnetic field could generate electricity in exchange
for velocity.
However, in deep space, its useless. The magnetic field
of stars and planets are vanishingly weak in interplanetary
space. I mean, the ship would do 0 to 60mph over the course
of weeks. At 1G of acceleration, a rocket would take 3
seconds to do the same.
> The reason why I'm so interested in designing "exhaustless"
> emitting drives is because in BattleSpace, the rules state
> that a ship's exhaust drive can be visibliy detected 3.5 Mm
> away. Radar waves, in BattleSpace, only extend to
> about 150km. That means less time to detect incoming ships.
> Of course, if a ship that emits an exhaust stops emitting
> exhaust and just relies on inertia to travel, then the ship
> won't be emitting an exhaust that can be detected from a
> range of 150km to 3.5Mm.
I recommend inertia and using short, hard burns from fusion
rockets behind planets and other cover.
There is a drive called the M2P2 drive, IIRC, theorized in
the past year. It's a magnetic sail pushed by solar winds.
Acceleration sucks: 0 to 60mph in a day. But it's a little
better than coasting. Unfortunately, it uses large magnetic
fields that should be quite detectable to sensors. You
trade rocket exhausts for huge magnetic fields.
Within the limits of BTech and real world physics, I don't
think you'll beat a fusion rocket or invent a reactionless
drive. Use existing technology in a clever manner, don't
look for new toys to fix your problems. BTech isn't good
for innovation.