Step by step the construction of a propellant with the hands...

[VictorEliasEspinozaGUedez]

It is in a Google document:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/159bhQjclrm2MGYCdKWF6agVhPCxrOlSGyDq1fo43huA/edit?usp=sharing

Very affectionately,

Victor Elias Espinoza Guedez

[hugix]

I've seen your posts on other boards before. Made me laugh so hard coffee came trough my nose.

[tom1499]

Not you again.

[Aghanim]

So you are making a reactionless drive using some random PC fan and other stuff? Sorry but I prefer to bet on this NASA tested reactionless drive!

[OdinYggd]

This thing again. Looks like all you changed is the use of clear plastic instead of a normal box, but didn't change the principles of the design.

Have you actually tried building it? Pretty sure you'll find that it still doesn't go very far, at most vibrating in place from the dynamic imbalance of the fan it uses. It might see a very slight rise in internal temperature as well from the energy being added to it.

Oh and using plastic instead of a box has introduced a new problem. If you tried to use this in space, the difference in air pressure between your device's internal pressure and the vacuum around it will cause the plastic to rupture in most likely scenarios. Although atmospheric pressure is not much, it is still significant enough to require a vessel capable of enduring an air pressure of at least 1013 millibars and constructed without any leaks.

[Monkeh]

I quote yourself.

This propellant does not exist in the world.

[VictorEliasEspinozaGUedez]

This thing again. Looks like all you changed is the use of clear plastic instead of a normal box, but didn't change the principles of the design.

Have you actually tried building it? Pretty sure you'll find that it still doesn't go very far, at most vibrating in place from the dynamic imbalance of the fan it uses. It might see a very slight rise in internal temperature as well from the energy being added to it.

Oh and using plastic instead of a box has introduced a new problem. If you tried to use this in space, the difference in air pressure between your device's internal pressure and the vacuum around it will cause the plastic to rupture in most likely scenarios. Although atmospheric pressure is not much, it is still significant enough to require a vessel capable of enduring an air pressure of at least 1013 millibars and constructed without any leaks.

Do you know how difficult that is to build a space engine without a vacuum chamber?

I have 15 years thinking about inventions and this was one of those who wanted to achieve.

You see it easy because I already explained but were very difficult years I spent thinking about this propellant (space).

What I want you to understand, is that this invention was not easy.

Very affectionately,

Víctor Elias Espinoza Guedez

Edited October 2, 2013 by VictorEliasEspinozaGUedez

[lajoswinkler]

I was very affectionately moved by this device, despite my lack of propellant. (lol)

[astropapi1]

So you came here again...

This propellant does not exist in the world

[Anton P. Nym]

And here I was expecting instructions on how to handcraft UDMH out of fair-trade, free-range, eco-friendly ingredients...

-- Steve

[goldenpeach]

Can you post a video of the device?

[Kerbart]

So, there's this game, basically purely based on Newton's laws.

“In which I claim that Newton’s third law is voidâ€Â

Yeah. That’ll go over well.

[Psycix]

So aside from showing us how to build this, can you show us why it works this way (if at all)?

The burden of proof lies with you, not with us.

Science, which has been proven to work, disproves your theory. Instead of stating that it is wrong, prove us wrong.

Subtle movement in a kitchen setup won't cut it, there are many, many reasons why this thing could move around when placed in water.

But maybe we are all just being trolled massively.

[Ralathon]

Reminds me of this mythbusters episode.

Anyway, feel free to try and build this thing. Once you have actual evidence that this works I'm willing to at least listen. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and declaring "This is so because I think so" is not particularly strong. Especially considering that this violates conservation of momentum.

I mean, you have the blueprint and all. And the mats are dirt cheap. Go build it and see for yourself if it works.

[OdinYggd]

You really should actually build this and experiment with it to determine its properties. I'd like to see some actual performance data on it, especially if you can make a video of it floating on its own power.

The test equipment you would need for a device like this is also elegantly simple to construct, with guides for doing so available freely online from other hobby inventors who needed working equipment on a tight budget.

Having invented a few things of my own though, I can tell you that people will automatically be skeptical of anything that seems too good to be true- which your device does.

Claiming to violate a well known physics constraint as well only fuels that skepticism, and requires proof of your claims that shows the established facts may be in error- as they have been tested themselves thousands of times with predictable results.

I'll be closing this thread now, because it will probably attract people who are only interested in arguing about it. Without proof that it works, this thread really isn't going to go anywhere.