Done to death before, the last (apart from this one) thread on that topic being: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/electromagnetic-drive-produces-thrust-in-vacuum-nasa.145905/
Unconfirmed at best and since the concept explicitly violates conservation of momentum, I won't be holding my breath.
No, that would violate conservation of momentum too.
(First tip - click on reply button when replying to a particular post. It avoids ambiguity as to who is referring to who about what.)
It was about mechanical.
So, having presumably come across alt-sci sites where e.g. 'Dean Drive' and/or Eric Laithwaite's 'gyroscopic reactionless propulsion' came to your enthusiastic attention, there has been a sober reflection based on validity of Newton's 3rd law: 'For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction'. Which means shifting weights around in any manner whatsoever within a closed system cannot induce a net change in momentum. Good.
I was trying with solid state. It was able to make thrust 1-4 step to forward. But after that it is only able to make thrust to previous.
My translation: There was external motion of housing for part of cycle, which reversed exactly for remainder of cycle. Yep, that's allowed - parts of the whole can move temporarily in a given direction, but the whole cannot gain velocity/momentum overall. Asymmetric vibrations can fool balances etc. and give false positives.
You cannot move a spacecraft (very far) by means of movements of internal weights. As soon as the internal weight stops moving, motion of the spacecraft in the direction opposite that of the moving weight will be halted. If the weight goes in a circular path, what you have there is a gyroscope, not a spacecraft, and it may wobble a bit, but it won't go anywhere further than the diameter of the circular trajectory. You have to provide an action to get a reaction. It's Newton's third law of motion. Reactionless thrust, like perpetual motion machines, are an impossibility in this universe.
Microwave thrust ! Does it work sir ? It could be infrared or other kind of electro magnetic wave. But why the microwave ? August 2015 I saw about it on internet and I knew the rest mass of photon is 0. Thanks.
Tip #2 - It's commonly done but bad form to hijack your own thread. Which by your own admission was concerned with hoped-for *mechanical* means of violating conservation of momentum. Best then to either start a new thread dedicated to the EM case, or preferably, join in on the latest existing one already devoted to that issue - link given in post #2 above. And do make an effort to first at the least skim through all the (meaningful) posts there.
Thank you sir ! But I didn't . I'm not able to do that. Its gone to fun. Before your first comment to my thread, I knew about microwave thrust and rest mass of photons. I was thinking that how can it possible because its rest mass is 0. But after sometimes I thought that I know a little bit of physics, so may be it is possible and its about 4 months ago. When you posted your first comment I was looking at http://www.sciforums.com/threads/electromagnetic-drive-produces-thrust-in-vacuum-nasa.145905/ and saw some comments about it that ' it doesn't work' ...etc. And I discovered other kind of something from those comments. May be 3 years ago, I saw on internet about a thrust that solar panels can move through the vacuum when photon strikes on it. But now I'm thinking about photo electric effect that when a photon strikes on electron it gains kinetic energy..but the rest mass of photon is 0. But it is atomic that I know a little bit. Thanks.
OK well as you probably know then a photon despite zero rest energy has nonzero momentum |p| = hf/c, which allows for 'radiation pressure' hence solar sails etc.
You probably discovered the consensus view is the idea runs against prevailing physical theory i.e conservation of momentum as absolute principle. And that various experimental findings apparently contrary to that are disputed as to reliability, and competency of teams making such claims. Some of us keep an eye out for any further developments, but most consider the endeavor hype/beat-up and not worth further scrutiny. Up to you to make your own judgement - but to be an informed one you should really study EM theory. There are 'delicate issues' of interpretation involved and that's all I will say there.
Glad if I was of some help. Solar sails rely on so-called light pressure i.e. the momentum change induced in the sail by recoil/reflection of photons from the sail reflecting surface. That is conservation of momentum in action - applied to *an open system*. Photoelectric effect involves both momentum and energy transfer between photon and ejected electron, but there is a complication owing to metal work function. In any case there is no violation of conservation of momentum.
Off your meds is it?! This and your last post appears to be pure disruption not even worthy to be called trolling. Hope admin do something quick!
I don't know sir. But the black hole was real before discover it. Happy new year !