# Reactionless device using the principle of Pascal for fluids

## Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I have a pending patent on this concept of "reactionless devices", like gyroscopes etc etc, but bringing to the table a new idea, that mixes up the laws of Newton and the principle of Pascal to obtain a thrust. Excuse my english btw. So I have created several animations, with some animation errors, but very easy to understand and visualize, and very short to not to bore you Lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIZN5zDDXEo -  The descriptions are in spanish but the animation begins in second 37

The first two animations that have more chances to work in my humble opinion, are one linear and another rotational simple devices, that what makes the diference is that transfers moving mass to a point that is quite. Using 2 containers with the same amount of fluid and weight to get impulsed in opposite directions and when they got a constant velocity, one of the containers will transfer its mass in fluids to another container that is placed in the platform quiet respect to its peer. And when both moving containers will arrive to their respective wall, one of the containers will arrive with more fluid and will push with more force. Anyway take a look to the animations, and tell me where Newtons laws are violated or what have I missed, because I am not able to see it, despite I have a good knowledge of Newton Mechanics

And here comes 4 versions of the same concept of the invention, using Pascal Laws, but in a different way, but its very easy to view and understand. I am quite limited in english. What I can say is that the momentum gets diluted inside the fluid and the only momentum that is conserved, its for friction. As the first 2 videos, it profits of Pascal principle to unbalance the forces on each side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aB4x7hWFJmQ - This was my first animation in this subject. Very primitive and simple, but the animation is bad especially the last second, but its very clear.

By the way, I post it here, because its my first post and I dont want to get banned already Lol

Edited by esposcar

##### Share on other sites
!

Moderator Note

Our rules require you post enough here so that discussion can take place, without people having to watch videos.

Animations are not evidence of anything. You can make animations do things that are physically impossible. What we require are models, predictions, and/or experimental evidence

##### Share on other sites

Perfectly clear. But with all respects, if you have not even taken a second about this, how can you quote already what I have done? You just view in the video how it works and detect that if there is a second that the device violates Newton laws or Pascal laws, actually you just need a diagram of forces, not any exhotic quantum equation, I will excuse myself for making you lose your time, despite this time is work

But anyway I am not here to discuss, I just wanted an answer, and the animation is very clear, even a child can view it.

##### Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, esposcar said:

Perfectly clear. But with all respects, if you have not even taken a second about this, how can you quote already what I have done? You just view in the video how it works and detect that if there is a second that the device violates Newton laws or Pascal laws, actually you just need a diagram of forces, not any exhotic quantum equation, I will excuse myself for making you lose your time, despite this time is work

But anyway I am not here to discuss, I just wanted an answer, and the animation is very clear, even a child can view it.

2
2

But not all forces are forces, apparently.

Edited by dimreepr

##### Share on other sites

the invention is a sistem that have in the moment to begin all the same weights and forces equal on right and left, they are simetrical, the only moment that there is an unbalance of forces is it when one of the moving objects when its in movement pumps through a piston its fluid to another container that is quite respect to this object in movement. And as long as I know about Pascal laws, if you push through a piston a fluid it will have inside the fluid, al the pression=force in each centimetres of the walls that confine the liquid, so, I understand that it could work as a kind of rustic teletransportation  Lol

There are no hidden forces, all are clear, actually if Newtons and Pascal laws work, this invention must work. My question would be of a yes or no. Lets say we have two containers, one in a car and another in earth, connected by a flexible pipe, tube etc, so they can transfer each other fluid. And the car have a container full and on earth its empty, so once the car go at 100 km per hour, begins to pump its fluid to the empty container on earth. Would the fluid of the moving car will arrive quiet to the container resting at earth? if its yes, then it works sure, if not, then its another cracker idea

##### Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, esposcar said:

There are no hidden forces, all are clear,

Quote

A fictitious force (also called a pseudo force,[1] d'Alembert force,[2][3] or inertial force[4][5]) is an apparent force that acts on all masses whose motion is described using a non-inertial frame of reference,

##### Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Its a linear device, and yes I get it, but if you viewed the video, its very interesant to know that when both opposite bodies hit their respective wall, to move the system right or left, or stay still, one of the bodies (Container) will have more fluid, that means more mass, that its opposite, so both of the bodies going on the same constant velocity but with one of them with less mass, there will be an unbalance of forces, despite the frames of reference. Can you tell me where it can go wrong from the 10 second animation, if before all laws are respected? So what would happen then on the end of the animation? all forces will become equal?

##### Share on other sites
1 minute ago, esposcar said:

So what would happen then on the end of the animation?

It will end

##### Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

One little detail about the velocity. One of the containers will begin to pump its fluid, when both containers will have a constant velocity. "However, four fictitious forces are defined for frames accelerated in commonly occurring ways: one caused by any relative acceleration of the origin in a straight line (rectilinear acceleration);[8] two involving rotation: centrifugal force and Coriolis force; and a fourth, called the Euler force, caused by a variable rate of rotation, should that occur. " This dont apply to the moment that the fluid is transfered as I understand, because the changes will happen at a constant velocity not in an aceleration. This invention is ideal for space and no gravity

##### Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, esposcar said:

One little detail about the velocity. One of the containers will begin to pump its fluid, when both containers will have a constant velocity. "However, four fictitious forces are defined for frames accelerated in commonly occurring ways: one caused by any relative acceleration of the origin in a straight line (rectilinear acceleration);[8] two involving rotation: centrifugal force and Coriolis force; and a fourth, called the Euler force, caused by a variable rate of rotation, should that occur. " This dont apply to the moment that the fluid is transfered as I understand, because the changes will happen at a constant velocity not in an aceleration. This invention is ideal for space and no gravity

Quote

the Euler force is the fictitious tangential force

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, esposcar said:

Perfectly clear. But with all respects, if you have not even taken a second about this, how can you quote already what I have done? You just view in the video how it works and detect that if there is a second that the device violates Newton laws or Pascal laws, actually you just need a diagram of forces, not any exhotic quantum equation, I will excuse myself for making you lose your time, despite this time is work

But anyway I am not here to discuss, I just wanted an answer, and the animation is very clear, even a child can view it.

!

Moderator Note

A diagram of forces is something you should be providing. As I said before, an animation isn't constrained to follow the laws of physics.

You are also missing the point: we have rules, and you are not following them. "It only takes a second" is an excuse for not following the rules. What we require is compliance with the rules.

##### Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Its very clear and I understand it gentleman. Finally I got a much clear description of the forces acting on the reactionless device. Please I would like to know your opinions. I need empirical arguments, because as I see it and show it, I think I am not missing any element.

An error was done. The weight of the container C will be 130 kilos all the time and not 140 kilos as its written above.

Edited by esposcar

##### Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 10:01 AM, swansont said:
!

Moderator Note

A diagram of forces is something you should be providing. As I said before, an animation isn't constrained to follow the laws of physics.

You are also missing the point: we have rules, and you are not following them. "It only takes a second" is an excuse for not following the rules. What we require is compliance with the rules.

Good morning!!! I have another more clear example of forces, about the fluid transfer, to settle it as a better example to understand the reactionless device example of above. I know it goes against any logic, but if there is no mistake, it works, if it obeys Newton laws and Pascal principle for fluids, then what are the consecuences in the device, as I show? In the equation of momentum, if you take away mass, it will decrease the momentum, as far as I am concerned. Do you have any empirical critic? please dont let me in the indiference Lol. The topic maybe was bad introduced. It does nothing to do with peryscopes and other inventions, that try to unbalance forces inside a closed system that works with Newtons laws, that is impossible, but with this device, I want to find the mistake. Some clues? or maybe I should show you a further example about how the transfer of fluids, wont affect constant speed devices (containers etc) were they are transfered from to stationary devices (containers etc).

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, esposcar said:

Do you have any empirical critic?

You need to post empirical data, or some mathematical model, first. One can’t criticize that which doesn’t exist.

##### Share on other sites

But just between you and me Lol, the concept at least looks interesant ;). I will do it, thank you.

##### Share on other sites

You have not explained how you transfer the fluid, and yet have zero flow. i.e. zero velocity as it enters B. This is why you need analysis, not just assertions.

##### Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/10/2019 at 3:44 PM, swansont said:

You have not explained how you transfer the fluid, and yet have zero flow. i.e. zero velocity as it enters B. This is why you need analysis, not just assertions.

Well, I have making some research about some equations, to try to explain how the transfer would not have momentum with it. And well, does not seem to be nothing about it. This might sound very stupid, but maybe there was never thought about a problem like that. About flow, it would be 0, there is no flow, inside a Pascal Hydraulic system, and that is also why it belongs to static fluids and no Dynamical fluids. And as it is stated for Pascal principle:

In any fluid, the static pressure is exerted on the walls of the container and in the fluid. These forces act perpendicular to the walls of the container. When an external pressure is applied to the fluid, the pressure is distributed uniformly in all parts of the fluid and this is known as Pascal’s principle named after the Physicist Blaise Pascal.The Pascal’s principle refers to only the external pressure and within the fluid the pressure at the bottom is greater than the top.

According to Pascal’s principle, the force per unit area describes an external pressure which is transmitted through fluid and the formula is written as,

$img=https://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?%5Cfrac%7BF_%7B1%7D%7D%7BA_%7B1%7D%7D=%5Cfrac%7BF_%7B2%7D%7D%7BA_%7B2%7D%7D&key=a015bf8ad0b0289a7cc456158b96e7a26cd109722760ee7cfde0d4dc133adde9$

This is mainly how the transfer of the fluid will be done with the push of an input piston in a moving container to an stationary container that will have an output piston united by a very long hose or pipe. And the pression will be the same in all the interior of the system. If you think about it, if you have a bottle fulled up the top of water, and you hammer something, it will be as consistent as a real hammer, because the forces are transmitted to the interior of the fluid as pression.  In the pic below I show an example.

As it is viewed, the transfer of the fluid would work in the same way despite of the velocity diference between the containers.

In this other pic, I show a type of rolling container, going at 100 m/s and transfers at it is shown, its fluid to an stationary container. My question would be, if the container A will transmit its momentum to the container B as the fluid arrives? So if its like that, the container B will move in the direction of container A, accelerating? It would be very bizarre. It would be as in a pick up, you place a water dumper, and its connected to a very long hose. The pick up goes away opposite to you and you hold the hose at its end. When the water would go out of the hose, it would just jump back in direction to the pick up, because the momentum was transmitted? I dont think so. What makes momentum is the velocity, without velocity momentum does not exist and the only thing that is stealed in the transfer from the equation is mass. Thats my personal opinion, but I cannot show it mathematically. But there is another version for this invention and I can show mathematically that works. It uses the principle of Pascal of course and profits from this principle in another way. But if there is some help, it would be appreciated as your opinion.

Edited by esposcar

##### Share on other sites
7 hours ago, esposcar said:

Well, I have making some research about some equations, to try to explain how the transfer would not have momentum with it. And well, does not seem to be nothing about it. This might sound very stupid, but maybe there was never thought about a problem like that. About flow, it would be 0, there is no flow, inside a Pascal Hydraulic system, and that is also why it belongs to static fluids and no Dynamical fluids. And as it is stated for Pascal principle:

In any fluid, the static pressure is exerted on the walls of the container and in the fluid. These forces act perpendicular to the walls of the container. When an external pressure is applied to the fluid, the pressure is distributed uniformly in all parts of the fluid and this is known as Pascal’s principle named after the Physicist Blaise Pascal.The Pascal’s principle refers to only the external pressure and within the fluid the pressure at the bottom is greater than the top.

According to Pascal’s principle, the force per unit area describes an external pressure which is transmitted through fluid and the formula is written as,

But the situation you describe is not static. You can't apply Pascal's law to a system where there is flow. There can be no transfer of fluid when applying that equation. Any conclusion you draw from such a case will be invalid.

##### Share on other sites
On 3/8/2019 at 4:03 AM, esposcar said:

Finally I got a much clear description of the forces acting on the reactionless device. Please I would like to know your opinions. I need empirical arguments, because as I see it and show it, I think I am not missing any element.

Hello. I'll try to understand more of the proposed setup, I'll begin with some initial questions in addition to those posted by other members.

Step 2 contains container A moving at constant velocity. The distance between A and B increases so A is dragging the pipe along? The fluid in the pipe has mass, have you accounted for the acceleration of that mass when A is moving away from B?

The pipe seems to twist and bend to be able to connect A and B when A is moving away from B. How is the pressure P1=P2 guaranteed?

Even in an idealised case where the pipe is massless, the fluid mass still has to be taken into account into my two questions above?

##### Share on other sites

Isn't Pascal's principle only an approximation during any fluid transfers, and only exact statically?

Doesn't the fact that your device won't actually work highlight that?

##### Share on other sites
On 3/15/2019 at 4:09 PM, Ghideon said:

Hello. I'll try to understand more of the proposed setup, I'll begin with some initial questions in addition to those posted by other members.

Step 2 contains container A moving at constant velocity. The distance between A and B increases so A is dragging the pipe along? The fluid in the pipe has mass, have you accounted for the acceleration of that mass when A is moving away from B?

The pipe seems to twist and bend to be able to connect A and B when A is moving away from B. How is the pressure P1=P2 guaranteed?

Even in an idealised case where the pipe is massless, the fluid mass still has to be taken into account into my two questions above?

Good morning, let me first answer Mr. Swansont, in real life the machines that uses Pascal principles are in constant movement and with gravity applied to them, and they are still very efficient. Inside the containers and the hose or pipe that link them, will be an static fluid. Please note that pressure in an enclosed fluid can be considered uniform throughout a practical system. There may be small differences arising from head pressures at different heights, but these will generally be negligible compared with the system operating pressure. And we talk about a system in earth considering gravity. But we can go to practical examples, for example us, our circular system (blood), works as an enclosed Pascal system, and the prove is that we can be runing, moving and dancing, and if we take the pressure of one point of our body, it will represent the hole body pressure. We can turn around in a rotatory motion, to have the centrifugal force acting on our body like the NASA tests for astronauts, and still, taking the pressure of one point of the body like the nake, they will know the pressure in all the body, meanwhile the astronaut is having a constant acceleration.

About the draw, it can actually be taken as a physical problem and even be tested at earth, as I posted before, and the transfer would still happen, and if not, my device would not work, so as a pragmatical physicial problem, we can give numbers to this question, but the heart of the question would be. If the container A with wheels, is going away at a constant velocity from the stationary container B and we do the transfer at a constant speed with no force pushing on it, when the fluid is arriving and filling the stationary container B, will it begin to move in direction to the container B and increase its acceleration as more fluid arrives on it? easy answer, yes or no. If container B does not move then the device works and if it moves gradually as the fluid arrive, then the device does not work at all. So show me mathematically giving numbers to the weights of the containers, and the total fluid and the fluid transfered, and find any equation that fits the purpose, and you will see that not equation can give you and answer unless its tested as I posted, with a pumper of water placed in a truck and on earth a container with wheels and lets see if it moves as the truck in movement makes the transfer bumping the water. You can hold the hose as the truck moves and you can see by yourself that the water will still go out normally as if it was static. I tried to find similar problems, but have not found any example to bring it to the table. Somebody have a solution to the problem?

And answering to Mr. Ghideon to his first question, well you have to consider that on the right there is exactly the same thing, a pipe of exactly the same length and container C full of fluid, so the forces are the same, but it can be more efficient, if during the constant velocity the transfer is madebeacuse container A will lose mass and it will slow down more than its opposite container C, so Container C will be able to have much more force than container A before hitting its wall. But if that dont convince you, we can put extendable devices that hold some parts of the pipe and moves at the same speed as container A and B, so there is no drag at all, every thing is as Newton describes at the point. Consider that the transfer will occure when the pipe will be totally extended also, if that helps the bending problem that you have placed.

And the bending will not affect the pressure, I mean if there is a lot of bending it will break up, before losing pressure. Its a liquid and there is no way to compress it in any mechanical way. But you can see pipes and hoses all around machines that operates with Pascal laws like bulldozers excavators etc etc, and the pipes or tubes are bended , so from an engineering point of view, this would not would be a problem at all. Even the hole process could be done in 3 seconds or less. Imagine how an Airbag works on that speed, so the fluid could be done in second, and the pipe with the fluid inside can represent also the 10% of the total weight of the moving container A, so that wont be also a big problem. But anyway, I am preparing another example about how to use pascal laws to create throttle with mathematical proves and has nothing to do with this example that I posted.

28 minutes ago, esposcar said:

Good morning, let me first answer Mr. Swansont, in real life the machines that uses Pascal principles are in constant movement and with gravity applied to them, and they are still very efficient. Inside the containers and the hose or pipe that link them, will be an static fluid. Please note that pressure in an enclosed fluid can be considered uniform throughout a practical system. There may be small differences arising from head pressures at different heights, but these will generally be negligible compared with the system operating pressure. And we talk about a system in earth considering gravity. But we can go to practical examples, for example us, our circular system (blood), works as an enclosed Pascal system, and the prove is that we can be runing, moving and dancing, and if we take the pressure of one point of our body, it will represent the hole body pressure. We can turn around in a rotatory motion, to have the centrifugal force acting on our body like the NASA tests for astronauts, and still, taking the pressure of one point of the body like the nake, they will know the pressure in all the body, meanwhile the astronaut is having a constant acceleration.

About the draw, it can actually be taken as a physical problem and even be tested at earth, as I posted before, and the transfer would still happen, and if not, my device would not work, so as a pragmatical physicial problem, we can give numbers to this question, but the heart of the question would be. If the container A with wheels, is going away at a constant velocity from the stationary container B and we do the transfer at a constant speed with no force pushing on it, when the fluid is arriving and filling the stationary container B, will it begin to move in direction to the container A and increase its acceleration as more fluid arrives on it? easy answer, yes or no. If container B does not move then the device works and if it moves gradually as the fluid arrive, then the device does not work at all. So show me mathematically giving numbers to the weights of the containers, and the total fluid and the fluid transfered, and find any equation that fits the purpose, and you will see that not equation can give you and answer unless its tested as I posted, with a pumper of water placed in a truck and on earth a container with wheels and lets see if it moves as the truck in movement makes the transfer bumping the water. You can hold the hose as the truck moves and you can see by yourself that the water will still go out normally as if it was static. I tried to find similar problems, but have not found any example to bring it to the table. Somebody have a solution to the problem?

And answering to Mr. Ghideon to his first question, well you have to consider that on the right there is exactly the same thing, a pipe of exactly the same length and container C full of fluid, so the forces are the same, but it can be more efficient, if during the constant velocity the transfer is madebeacuse container A will lose mass and it will slow down more than its opposite container C, so Container C will be able to have much more force than container A before hitting its wall. But if that dont convince you, we can put extendable devices that hold some parts of the pipe and moves at the same speed as container A and B, so there is no drag at all, every thing is as Newton describes at the point. Consider that the transfer will occure when the pipe will be totally extended also, if that helps the bending problem that you have placed.

And the bending will not affect the pressure, I mean if there is a lot of bending it will break up, before losing pressure. Its a liquid and there is no way to compress it in any mechanical way. But you can see pipes and hoses all around machines that operates with Pascal laws like bulldozers excavators etc etc, and the pipes or tubes are bended , so from an engineering point of view, this would not would be a problem at all. Even the hole process could be done in 3 seconds or less. Imagine how an Airbag works on that speed, so the fluid could be done in second, and the pipe with the fluid inside can represent also the 10% of the total weight of the moving container A, so that wont be also a big problem. But anyway, I am preparing another example about how to use pascal laws to create throttle with mathematical proves and has nothing to do with this example that I posted.

On 3/15/2019 at 4:09 PM, Ghideon said:

Hello. I'll try to understand more of the proposed setup, I'll begin with some initial questions in addition to those posted by other members.

Step 2 contains container A moving at constant velocity. The distance between A and B increases so A is dragging the pipe along? The fluid in the pipe has mass, have you accounted for the acceleration of that mass when A is moving away from B?

The pipe seems to twist and bend to be able to connect A and B when A is moving away from B. How is the pressure P1=P2 guaranteed?

Even in an idealised case where the pipe is massless, the fluid mass still has to be taken into account into my two questions above?

Please not that I have edited my post, because I found mistakes. Sorry for the language problem.

Edited by esposcar

##### Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, esposcar said:

Good morning, let me first answer Mr. Swansont, in real life the machines that uses Pascal principles are in constant movement and with gravity applied to them, and they are still very efficient. Inside the containers and the hose or pipe that link them, will be an static fluid. Please note that pressure in an enclosed fluid can be considered uniform throughout a practical system. There may be small differences arising from head pressures at different heights, but these will generally be negligible compared with the system operating pressure. And we talk about a system in earth considering gravity. But we can go to practical examples, for example us, our circular system (blood), works as an enclosed Pascal system, and the prove is that we can be runing, moving and dancing, and if we take the pressure of one point of our body, it will represent the hole body pressure. We can turn around in a rotatory motion, to have the centrifugal force acting on our body like the NASA tests for astronauts, and still, taking the pressure of one point of the body like the nake, they will know the pressure in all the body, meanwhile the astronaut is having a constant acceleration.

I think you are over-simplifying here. Our circulatory system is not such an example. You would want to use Bernoulli’s equation. There are pressure differences owing to height, and to flow. Pressure varies with time and location within the body.

23 minutes ago, esposcar said:

About the draw, it can actually be taken as a physical problem and even be tested at earth, as I posted before, and the transfer would still happen, and if not, my device would not work, so as a pragmatical physicial problem, we can give numbers to this question, but the heart of the question would be. If the container A with wheels, is going away at a constant velocity from the stationary container B do the transfer at a constant speed with no force pushing on it, when the fluid is arriving and filling the stationary container B, will it begin to move in direction to the container B and increase its acceleration as more fluid arrives on it? easy answer, yes or no. If container B does not move then the device works and if it moves gradually as the fluid arrive, then the device does not work at all. So show me mathematically giving numbers to the weights of the containers, and the total fluid and the fluid transfered, and find any equation that fits the purpose, and you will see that not equation can give you and answer unless its tested as I posted, with a pumper of water placed in a truck and on earth a container with wills, and see if it moves as the truck moves. I tried to find similar problems, but have not found any example to bring it to the table. Somebody have a solution to the problem?

(Emphasis added) Showing the operation mathematically is your responsibility here. It is an expected part of any proposal.

##### Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, swansont said:

I think you are over-simplifying here. Our circulatory system is not such an example. You would want to use Bernoulli’s equation. There are pressure differences owing to height, and to flow. Pressure varies with time and location within the body.

(Emphasis added) Showing the operation mathematically is your responsibility here. It is an expected part of any proposal.

Well, it partially works with Pascal system, you are right but in our case it might (Bulldozers etc etc the prove you have it in how those machines hold up and down weights moving on acceleration, dessacelerations and all kind of movements) rest efficiency but it would still work. And well yes, I would love to find the right equations that describes my draw, but despite this might sound very very idiot, but how about, if an equation that fits this purpose has not been invented or simply does not exist because it dont have sense to solve a different problem that was never placed? I can post a youtube video with the hose and the truck showing how the water will go out, its my only prove or I can ask the fireman of my place Lol. But if works, my idea could work. Anyway I am working in another example with mathematical proves as I will post and this example dont uses fluid transfer but still uses Pascal principle.

Edited by esposcar

##### Share on other sites
6 hours ago, esposcar said:

Well, it partially works with Pascal system, you are right but in our case it might (Bulldozers etc etc the prove you have it in how those machines hold up and down weights moving on acceleration, dessacelerations and all kind of movements) rest efficiency but it would still work. And well yes, I would love to find the right equations that describes my draw, but despite this might sound very very idiot, but how about, if an equation that fits this purpose has not been invented or simply does not exist because it dont have sense to solve a different problem that was never placed?

You’d be out of luck if the equation didn’t exist, but Bernoulli is an equation of energy conservation, so that would mean some other energy is present.

6 hours ago, esposcar said:

I can post a youtube video with the hose and the truck showing how the water will go out, its my only prove or I can ask the fireman of my place Lol. But if works, my idea could work. Anyway I am working in another example with mathematical proves as I will post and this example dont uses fluid transfer but still uses Pascal principle.

Whether or not you can post a video isn’t the issue. This is a science site, and we require some scientific rigor.

For example, you could try and make the case that the flow term is small, but since you’re trying to do propulsion, that seems unlikely.

##### Share on other sites
3 hours ago, swansont said:

You’d be out of luck if the equation didn’t exist, but Bernoulli is an equation of energy conservation, so that would mean some other energy is present.

Whether or not you can post a video isn’t the issue. This is a science site, and we require some scientific rigor.

For example, you could try and make the case that the flow term is small, but since you’re trying to do propulsion, that seems unlikely.

Instead I will post the other version of my device showed mathematically. This time there is a scientific rigor. Equations etc. I think I dont miss anything. Friction was not introduced in the forces, because as you can see it dont need it.

This is the first model in history of a workable reactionless device without any doubt. Tell me what you miss here. Thing to consider. The black balls are inelastic, so they will get attached to their correspondant piston-pushers after the hit. The white balls are elastic, and will get the force and the momentum fully, as when a ball hits another in billiards. And finally the white balls will hit a type of hydraulic stopper to stop the balls soft and absorb all the momentum. The balls are floating because there is no gravity, the enviroment is space. The hole system will have an extra force coming from no Newton reaction of 20 Newtons to the right. Of course it can generate much more force, just make one of the input pistons much more smaller than its pair and propulse the black balls much more fast to have a higher force of pushing.

Edited by esposcar