Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

-13 Bad

About DandelionTheory

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science

Recent Profile Visitors

1214 profile views
  1. Condescension does not promote confidence. pretend i know the basics about inline masses.
  2. Can we agree my example has nothing inline masses? Right angles buddy Also read the part about rigid connection mentioned, seems you think C would "move closer" to A regardless of the rigid body between them. Am I correct to assume you forgot it wasn't a rope?
  3. How do I do it? If you take out mass A entirely it's opposite still, if you take mass C out instead it's opposite.
  4. got you, so if i calculate over time i would need to account for this. i attempted to use variables in order of magnitude to help with this problem, also i add force at certain times due to the units being in newtons/kg
  5. F1 is done to mass A by mass B, F2 is the opposite reaction mass B feels, F3 is the opposite to F2 due to mass B & C being connected.
  6. may i ask if this partains to the slight thousandths of a unit distance the 3 weight system seem to do?
  7. if you have 3 masses A, B & C A & C are rigidly attached to each other B Pivots around C via a rigid bearing. If a force on any of these masses is to be represented correctly, opposite forces need to be shown for every force applied. so if mass A acts on Mass B(represented by F1 and F2), the work done on mass B will be done oppositely to Mass C (F3)correct? see picture below.
  8. Yes, I'll ask you to check which one is the parent object. As the mass rotates relative to the pins position, the proper way to describe "down" to a 180┬░rotated object is with a negative vector. The idea is to change the Mass's direction and apply force to the center pin, the variables were entered into the computer to be stimulated by a physics engine. So I have to explain the phenomenon in exact words before it is allowed to be posted on a physics forum in speculation? That's absurd, what if I don't know how it works? How would I bring forth the phenomenon to your attention? PS, do some work too.
  9. Now you're getting it. Okay, did you assume I made that mistake? Or did you not read or look at anything I claim? Because you keep bringing up how I'm missing something, yet your argument is with the engine not the method. Elaborate... Opposite forces can be represented with unity if it is set up correctly, right? Are they set up correctly? Or did I miss a reaction force? Tell me. Don't argue language when you don't know the sentence structure. Also, downvotes are the only thing on this forum open for opinion. Or did you forget that
  10. Thank you. Can you be more specific? I do want to point out I wasn't trying to show perpetual motion or some nonsense. It just shifts it's gravity.
  11. Apologies, it's something I've been working on currently due to the need for specificity. https://forum.unity.com/threads/finding-the-center-of-mass-of-a-collection-of-rigidbodies.87578/ showed me how to do it.
  12. I never said it was perpetual motion. I said it made the center of gravity shift.
  13. So solar panels to motor to masses right? I wrote a calculation for the center of mass. I've seen the same kind of motion with one mass being forced upon about the pin in one direction, and another script with equal but opposite force on the center pin. I'm really trying to make it not work... Gotcha, these are swinging weights, one with an opposing direction. Maybe looking at the center of gravity shifting would give a clue.
  14. In the physics engine. I want a good representation of reality I can put numbers into, that won't argue back with opinion.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.