Senior Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About MasterOgon

  • Rank
  1. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I agree. I drew attention to this fact, because it indicates that object B was already set in motion without violating the law of conservation of energy. As far as I understand, that was exactly what had to be proved.
  2. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    When object A and object B receive an impulse P in opposite directions, a reactive motion will occur, because they are repelled from each other. If the impulse P of object A is transmitted to object B, the movement will stop. In this case, the AB system always remains at rest relative to the initial position. But position B regarding A has changed. This is enough, because object B may already be in another galaxy, while remaining part of the AB system.
  3. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I know about saving momentum. Energy can not come from nowhere. In order to understand the process it is necessary to understand the principle of the movement of water or gas. Let's consider the following model. What is a substance (eg water) Atoms or molecules of a substance are equally spaced from each other. The forces of their mutual attraction and repulsion are balanced. And the substance is at rest. A structure in which the distances between points are equal will look like equilateral triangles. They in turn turn into hexagons. To a certain extent, this corresponds to the structure of water in a calm state. Like a snowflake. Suppose that if you apply a force to one of the atoms, then its movement is possible only along the path of least resistance. This property also has a water. Now look at the picture. We push atom 1 and the arrows show the direction in which the energy transfer of this impact is possible. It's like in billiards. We see that part of the water resistance force goes in a circle and comes back to us from behind. And the energy that does not return to us is distributed evenly in a circle. This construction is a purely logical problem. But it corresponds to the process that exists. The role of inertia here is that this process takes place for a certain time. Atoms are pushing each other in turns and we get a blow from behind when we forget that we were pushed forward and returned to the starting position. If we consider this on the example of a square-shaped crucifix, we will get a completely different picture, which will also correspond to the real one. For example, if we hit the metal. It seems that when science lacks data, conduct research
  4. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I understand that this conversation has stalled. The problem is that all denials are based on incomplete information. And to find a reliable source with the missing information, to use it as an argument, is impossible or very difficult. This argument is that the environment (water or air) continues to move by inertia after it gets accelerated. This is because every atom of air or water has a mass. Is this speculative information? It turns out that the concept can not be proved due to the fact that I can not find a link to a simple fact. All my explanations are meaningless without this fact.
  5. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    The flow of air that creates the force occurs around each individual blade. But this is not written To describe the work of the saucer you need to understand how a whirlwind forms in the air and why it continues after it has been created. This should be considered at a more complex level. I just have no time to think it over now.
  6. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I told you that you will not find confirmation of this data anywhere. I have a clear interpretation of the results of the experiment. The saucer pushes away from the air. I described how this happens in all possible ways and well-known analogies. With the help of the experiment, you can make sure that this happens, and understand exactly how. If there is no concept of "inertia of the air flow", does this mean that the air cannot move by inertia? I think the result of the experiment is more important than any reliable sources. The wind tunnel was thought for good reason. The process I'm talking about is happening near the aerodynamic plane. This example is great. Even if the saucer will have the shape of a helicopter blade.
  7. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    Ring vortex can be created in other ways. The example with a helicopter is more complicated than it is required for a plate. It only shows that such a vortex can create a tangible force for some time. But it’s better to look at the following example. "A vortex ring usually tends to move in a direction that is perpendicular to the plane of the ring and such that the inner edge of the ring moves faster forward than the outer edge. Within a stationary body of fluid, a vortex ring can travel for relatively long distance, carrying the spinning fluid with it. " This means that regardless of how it appears, a vortex is a mass of air that can move, and therefore move an object. "One way a vortex ring may be formed is by injecting a compact mass of fast moving fluid (A) into a mass of stationary fluid (B) (which may be the same fluid)." This means that you can create an annular vortex by giving acceleration to the air simply by pushing it. Oppantion of how the saucer pushes the air upwards and creates a ring whirlwind underneath you will not find anywhere else. This cannot be verified by a reliable source. Only experimentally. Based on the available information, we can assume the following. When gas or liquid flows around a circular plate, turbulence forms in the form of a vortex ring behind it. When the plate stops, a whirlwind closes. You may find it easier to find it in English.
  8. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I'm just doing this. The car really makes a lot of unnecessary movements, because of which it is more difficult to understand. Not a very good example. About the model. There is an article from Wikipedia, in which it is written that this phenomenon is formed and established during a sharp drop in the helicopter. (This is the same as a sharp movement of the plate up. Only the top is kicked.) But there is no explanation for what principles this happens. Whirlwind is still an open question in science. Or at least on Wikipedia: Air vortices can form around the main rotor of a helicopter, causing a dangerous condition known as vortex ring state (VRS) or "settling with power". In this condition, air that moves down through the rotor turns outward, then up, inward, and then down through the rotor again. This re-circulation of flow can negate much of the lifting force and cause a catastrophic loss of altitude. Applying more power (increasing collective pitch) serves to further accelerate the downwash through which the main-rotor is descending, exacerbating the condition. I can not imagine how I can describe this phenomenon mathematically. I can only say that the vortex is formed due to the properties of the substance and lasts by inertia. How is my theory worse than the theories of other scientists who called all that they could not understand as dark matter? My theory is even confirmed experimentally. But I think about how this happens. I assume that the air in a quiet state (without taking into account the Brownian motion) can be represented as particles that are at equal distance from each other. At the same time, the forces of attraction and repulsion between them are balanced and such a medium is completely homogeneous. Can this be applicable to air to simplify?
  9. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    And why does this car cling to the ground when it lowers the wing? According to your statements, he should bounce. This device clearly refutes the theory according to which the rise of a bird is due to the fact that its wing area is smaller during its upward movement.
  10. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I thought that the principle of flight of birds is already known to all. I saw about this telecast on a natural geographer but I do not know how to find it. And but I have to prove to you what is already known. Perhaps this is new information and it is difficult to find. Perhaps you should study this issue in more detail if you want to reasonably refute the design of the saucer. Unfortunately I could not find that movie. Following your ideas, in this video the fluff should fly back and not after the bird:
  11. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    The examples I give are excellent. You just do not take into account some of the points about which I speak. In order to derive an exact mathematical model of saucer movement, one must be a good scientist and delve into different areas of knowledge. Therefore, so far I have it. But I have the result of the experiment, which I already understand. But the argument about this is still useless. Something I could already assume to describe the formation of a vortex by an exact model. I'll write about it later.
  12. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    The movement of air at the same time will resemble what happens during a nuclear explosion above the ground, when the shock wave propagates only upwards. The air filling the space goes upward, following the wave, raising a column of dust. Similarly, this air can lift a saucer.
  13. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    We walk in a circle. The initial impulse is obtained according to this scheme: A scientist can push a spoon using his weight. At the same time, it can be in zero gravity and not be in contact with anything else except tea. The question is how the liquid or gas will behave when this effect is exerted on it. Let's look at the bullet example. This is more visual. When the bullet flies, it is affected by the resistance of the air you are talking about. But what will happen if the bullet stops abruptly? It can be assumed that the compressed air in front of the bullet will begin to fill the area of low pressure behind it. And then the bullet will fly back into the gun. Then, according to your calculations f bullet = f air resistance and total f = 0. But I doubt it. You do not take into account the fact that gas molecules have the energy of a bullet. By inertia, they will transmit this energy to each other, and the shock wave will spread further. And after it the area of reduced pressure will spread. And the bullet will be in the area of reduced pressure. This will be filled with calm air around the low pressure area. And since the low pressure will move forward after the wave, this will cause the wind to follow the wave and push the bullet further.
  14. Flying saucer. Picture, project of a spacecraft

    I wanted to say mass and not the center of mass. This process can be seen in a cup of coffee when there is foam. If you make a movement with a spoon, then two vortices form behind it. When the spoon stops, whirlwinds will create a current that will push the spoon further.