Novel propulsion method- differential linear percussion

Page 3 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.


"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
In the most general terms, if I had a good idea (and doubts about patenting) I would act quickly to make some money out of it before anyone else noticed.

I am an expert on losing money (although I made some as well). I had one instance where I paid a fortune protecting names and the 'protected' name turned out to be worthless.

Cat :)
my business and career are shambolic

-but money is not my object here, for indeed I find it deeply pretentious and deceptive,
although it also appears to be a civilised convention
I don't think accruing numerals will help us get on
-but then I don't like what does either

a lot of what work did for me was hurt me,
-but somehow I'm a little glad for some experience
...thanks for sharing your experience and advice
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
my aim is largely to do no harm,
this project is largely aligned with my aim of help if it works
hehe because it is not hard work, means I am more inclined
- now also I want to solve the power source problem for this craft,
and also help the terrestrial power problem

-so I am stuck, I have some idea what helps people,
but am not naturally aligned to do it
but I mean in my own way to help us get what we need in engineering
to mention how I live that's relevant here

secrecy to me is not an issue really


"Science begets knowledge, opinion ignorance.
I have gone right back to your post #1 (and I have B.Sc. in Chemical Engineering) and I do not understand what you want here. OK I am now very old, and it is about 60 years since I was at Uni, so maybe that is the problem.

Cat :)
the concept is a drive to move forward in space
this is done by making a weight move backwards fast-
which throws the drive forward
and forward slow- which causes less retro movement than the fast gain/power stroke

-this is aided by the formula for kinetic energy being a power->
K.E = half * mass *metres per second squared

in the videos you can see that this is working on Earth


the goal is to provide a purely electronic space propulsion

it's so nice to have a friendly chemical engineer here
I have heard about liquid oxygen and hydrogen now, and some of it's associated difficulties
as rocket fuel.

This drive will need to be carried to space, but I infer it may have more thrust than an ion thruster,
which is around 50 grams for 2100 watts
the power can be constantly applied with a solar array(photovoltaic) when not too far from a sun
this is electrical power, and runs a compressor if using rams
and the AC/DC servo motors more directly if that is the desired actuator
-and nuclear is an option too, which can be steam pistons,
or once again generating electrical power

I would like to use a passive magnet generator,
- a magneto
such a unit would be a perpetual motion device
I want to create that also, but it's possibly an impossibility heh

motion is perpetual in space, until the moving object is hit, pushed or gravitationally affected
Last edited:
Particle Article, sorry for hi-jacking your thread, but I notice that you are a mechanical engineer. You know what would be dope? A pneumatic motor with permanent fixed magnets axially fixed to the casing. Then, pressurize the motor with charged air.

Its an experiment in Ionic Propulsion. Another thing for earth, but if you want to make a "cart" or a bike and you have a chemical electric battery and an air canister, you can make a hybrid system that has electric charging and a propellant.

Check out my thread in Astronomy about the UDMVT "Union's Dark Mater Vector Telescope."

I have thought about this ion ram drive you propose.

On Earth simply air without ions will work
-in space air without ions will work too- however it's impossible to sustain it because we run out of gas
for the cylinder.

...I was recalling your thought, and it made me think this->
what if we filled a cylinder with vacuum and created an ion density within it, then open a valve and push the ions with the ram. However ions move at light speed, so that's pretty pointless

then I thought of ion compression
with a ram full of vacuum and ions, with a valve closed on it's outlet,
actuate it and the vacuum will compress the ions, then open the valve to create an ion pulse
after the compressed ion pulse, we fight from within the craft to draw the ram back,
with a thread or a geared vacuum

I wonder if that's some sort of explosive ion pulse?

-ty for the discussion
...with your original idea, an electric arc will ionise the air in a cylinder, maybe not just a magnet
Last edited:
Kinetic energy is energy possessed by an object in motion. The earth revolving around the sun, you walking down the street, and molecules moving in space all have kinetic energy. Kinetic energy is directly proportional to the mass of the object and to the square of its velocity: K.E. = 1/2 m v2

less speed has more time unfortunately,
is this a square or what power? t 0.5? a logarithm(non-linearity)?

-the application of this is observed in the motion called slip-stick in physics==>

maybe we need to give a part of the sea to the aliens soon to save our ports, using some motor and this could apply to some part of that

-so take the water to Mars or the Moon, or store it on land
Last edited:
A good demonstration of the difference between dynamic coefficient of friction and static coefficient of friction.
Set this on top of an air hocky table and see what happens. Center of mass will never move.
agreed, with only this qualifier:
since speed is a power, time needs to be an inverse power also to create equal opposition,
to cause only backward and forward movement, without travel

water is another form of air hockey table, these are more difficult to actuate upon surely

this idea might start someone thinking of something that surely works perhaps I hope
I believe I know a way to accelerate mass, without a mass gain. I believe that mass changes like a ratchet spring. When you accelerate mass, it contracts like a spring. And this spring has a ratchet with it. If you stop the acceleration before that ratchet step is reached, and let the mass relax, the mass will keep it's velocity, and not gain mass. Then accelerate it again just to that ratchet point, but no farther. Rinse and repeat.

Intermittent acceleration gives you velocity without a mass gain. And allows for more acceleration. At the same power.

When the mass contracts, not only does the inertia increase, but the size and area of interaction decreases.....requiring more power density to accelerate. This is nullified with intermittent acceleration.

And if we can find an acceleration force faster than c........then we should be able to surpass c. But we should be able to reach c now, with electrons and protons. But the timing would have to be precise. And at different rates for the two particles.

And it should not take much power. Just the right rate.....and the right duration of that rate.

Try it.
Let's pick a point of a N-S railroad track. Install clock and some timers and one microphone that points N and another that points S along that RR line. 1000 ft S, we put a whistle with the same pitch as on the train. And we put a marker 1000 ft that when train hits that mark, at 50 MPH, he blows the whistle. At that same time.....the naked stationary S whistle blows.

Which sound hits the microphone first......the N train....or the S whistle?
Both sound sources are at the same distance. And emitted at the same time. One is moving and one is not.

Which sound gets there first?

Put them side by side. Have the stationary whistle and the train whistle go off at same time and distance. Which one is faster?
does an expelled projectile on a jet sum? -I wonder, to reiterate my edit

the sounds will be received at the same time, in an atmosphere
if the noisy object and reciever are equally distant I think

a car will travel at 1500kmh at the equator when stationary,
when moving with the earth's spin at 100kmh , it will travel at 1600kmh
All-righty then, the velocity of the train does not increase the velocity of sound. It only changed the wave length. Not the speed. The speed of sound is set by the character of the media. Air, water, steel bars.

But not with light. Light needs no media. The speed of light is set by the emitter. And all light(EM) emitters are spinning at c. And that's why all light travels at c. If atomic particles were spinning at a different speed, then the propagation speed would be different too.

So far, we have found nothing faster than c. So, we can't push faster than c.
Are you presently a student? My explanations will get you expelled from a modern class. And none of my answers will be excepted......or match any test questions. Or impress anybody.

In other words, my explanations would be laughed at in any official setting. And only hurt you if you repeated such.

My intellect is purely classical dynamics. Spacetime, probability, randomness and chaos is not permitted.

My physicality is straight, firm and square. There is only one solution.

Others tell me it's the medication.

But if you're just curious of the classical explanations, I'm glad to answer you. But also remember that modern science only skips thru classical a lot of it will seem foreign to you. And unheard of.
Yes, I can only communicate in English

I have been a builder's labourer, factory hand, fitter and turner,
artist, software dev, sound engineer, musician, technician -a little of each of these

ultimately now I just smoke cigarettes if I have them and play MIDI guitar