Difference between revisions of "Zero Mass Loss Thruster Devices"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Imported from text file) |
(Imported from text file) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
| − | Mechanical devices are often described which claim to produce a net directional thrust from motion confined within the device. Thus far, no such device is known to have accomplished this claim without some reaction force transfer (usually of a viscous or frictional nature) to the external environment. Paul Brown presents examples of arguments sometimes used to justify the mechanical production of net thrust.[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | + | Mechanical devices are often described which claim to produce a net directional thrust from motion confined within the device. Thus far, no such device is known to have accomplished this claim without some reaction force transfer (usually of a viscous or frictional nature) to the external environment. Paul Brown presents examples of arguments sometimes used to justify the mechanical production of net thrust. |
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Scientific Paper|zero mass loss thruster devices]] | ||
Latest revision as of 11:41, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Zero Mass Loss Thruster Devices |
| Author(s) | Paul M Brown |
| Keywords | Newton?s laws, phased pulses, reaction mass, reactionless propulsion, velocity of force |
| Published | 1992 |
| Journal | Electric Spacecraft Journal |
| Number | 7 |
| Pages | 26-32 |
Abstract
Mechanical devices are often described which claim to produce a net directional thrust from motion confined within the device. Thus far, no such device is known to have accomplished this claim without some reaction force transfer (usually of a viscous or frictional nature) to the external environment. Paul Brown presents examples of arguments sometimes used to justify the mechanical production of net thrust.
