Re: Cheap Shots,

Date: Mon Jun 12 2000 - 10:20:09 MDT

Mike Lorrey writes, quoting Hal:
> > I thought your gadget was something which you could put in empty space,
> > turn it on, and it would start accelerating off in some direction,
> > without shooting anything back the other way. It acquires net momentum,
> > doesn't it?
> From energy. This is why Cramer beleives it can work with masses working
> at near relativistic velocities, because of the dissonance between
> momentum and velocity at those speeds. If there is such a dissonance,
> then Special Relativity also violates your strict interpretation of
> conservation of momentum...

I didn't ask where it got momentum, only whether it acquired net momentum.
The answer is yes, I believe, and that is enough to tell us that it
doesn't work. No more discussion is needed about whether momentum can
come from energy, or from wishing, or from any other unlikely place.
Momentum comes from momentum, and if it comes from somewhere else then
momentum is not conserved.

Special Relativity satisfies conservation of momentum in the strictest
possible terms. Momentum equals m * v * sqrt(1 - (v/c)^2).


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:13:09 MDT