# [ExI] Experimental Null Test of Mach Effect

Mirco Romanato painlord2k at libero.it
Thu Feb 21 21:31:24 UTC 2013

```On NextBigFuture they had some news about a paper supporting Woodward
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/02/experimental-null-test-of-mach-effect.html#comment-789771059

People like GoatGuy and other continue to write about the possibility to
go over c or build a perpetual motion machine when Woodward and other
physicists have already analyzed the published theory and found no weak
spots.

For example, they say "at a constant acceleration" the ship should go
over c in a finite amount of time.

First, the drive should give up a constant force, not a constant
acceleration. A big difference when the speed go from zero to near c.
A constant force will push against an increasing mass, reducing the
acceleration so speed will never reach c.

Then ,as the ship speed go up to c, the time inside the ship would slow
down, slowing down the oscillation of the mass (from an external
observer POV). At the same time, the length of the ship (on the
acceleration axis) should go to zero (from an external observer POV),
reducing the amplitude of the oscillation.

So we have at least two, maybe three effects reducing the force
developed by the drive as it accelerate near c.

The same is true when they talk about attaching the drive to a wheel to
produce energy. They simplify the effect to a simple force adding
constantly velocity and, at the end, producing more energy than it consume.
Unfortunately, for them, the effect is not a simple force but a
combination of two forces averaging and the rotation of the wheel have
effects on how the drive work. The two forces are no more on the same
vector an in opposition, but are on different vectors, so only a
fraction of the original force is developed. And faster the wheel spin
smaller is the actual tangential force and greater the radial force. At
some point the tangential force will go to zero and, if the rotation
speed go further up, start to work against the rotation.

But apparently these skeptics never bothered to counter these objections.

Any comment?

Mirco

```

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list