In many a sense Energy budgeting was what the sim-experiments were about wrt the horizontal swingers violating WEEP, and Noether symmetries, at the local level - where PE was gained ( Total Energy increased ) in a mechanical system ( Energy from the background ) which could then later be transformed into KE by releasing the PE into further movement - but the caveat was that the equal and opposite changers of acceleration given to the system had to come from momentum ( impulse ) sources thru a deep connection to that background ..
Good luck with the further experiments - it's not easy ( understatement ) to think up a mechanical method to isolate an up-change in Energy and reliably demonstrate it has a chance of being mechanically real in real-world ..
Thanks Fletcher!
Right, so let's have a good dive into my thought experiments about inertial brakes and inertial engines (never mind those doesn't exist yet).
Let's state that an inertial brake uses no friction of any kind, not at all, so it is basically a frictionless brake.
I suspected that the inertial brake will inflict a torque on its stand/support/background while braking. It wasn't much important for me so far, so I haven't tested that in detail. But lately I made a test out of curiosity, and yes... As expected it really puts a torque on the background into the direction of the brake's rotation, just like any usual brake would do. This way if the background can be rotated around, then it will be spin up until the speed of the brake is matched, and at that point the action will be dampened down.
This is fine so far. Kinetic energy is pumped into the background, and if we measured, most likely we should find that the total energy is conserved.
Now, continuing this thought experiment I imagined that an inertial engine would supposedly do the opposite action, so it should cause the background to be pushed away into the opposite direction, meaning it would put a counter torque on the stand/support instead of dragging it along. This is still consistent with our everyday understanding, like for example an electric motor would also cause this counter-torque effect.
So, the inertial engine would try to propel itself faster and faster, but is there a limiting factor here? Like in case the background is counter-spin up too much, then it can't accelerate itself higher anymore? Basically it couldn't push against the background anymore, and I think that might be also correct. Such would also happen with a normal motor, if the motor's support/frame would counter-accelerate, then in response the motor's axle would start to be less and less accelerated/efficient too.
It's not obvious where the energy would come in the case of an inertial engine, and that's potentially a red flag. But otherwise, this is all still fine.
And now comes the crazy part...
Let's say I put a 100 Kg platform (for example a heavy, thick steel sheet) into the vacuum of outer space. Then I install two identical inertial brakes onto the platform. However I install, orient, and/or connect them in such a way that all of their workings and actions are mirrored on the platform. Meaning that whatever effect or action they may cause onto or against the platform, all of those forces, torques, etc will be cancelled for the platform...
Now, imagine we start the brakes with the same initial KE, and they start to brake. The individual torques they cause on the platform will be equal in strength, but opposite in direction, so every effect will be cancelled, and the platform would stand still and motionless while the brakes will be braking towards zero RPM.
(This is similar to pushing two sides of a seesaw upwards with the same force, in that case there is no movement at all, but there can be material stress too.)
Ok, but where the energy goes now?
The platform stands still, and not rotated or accelerated. Either we assume that the energy disappeared… Or we theorize that the energy is dissipated into the material of the platform itself, in the form of material stress, molecular effects, or heat maybe?
But is that true, where the energy goes really?
And if it turned into molecular stress/heat, then an intricate heat sensor could supposedly measure that.
Now, if we consider two hypothetical inertial engines arranged in a similar mirrored fashion… Those could theoretically accelerate without limit, because the platform can't spin up to limit their motion, every effect for the platform will be cancelled. So, in that case where the energy comes from? The machines would channel/siphon out molecular stress or heat from the material of the platform itself? Perhaps that's the remaining option, otherwise we would have to accept that energy comes and goes ex nihilo… or there is something else unidentified at play.
But isn't this KE (without any frictional or other dissipative forces) turning into or arising from internal molecular stress/heat sounds very weird?
So, an inertial engine (if exist) would siphon out material stress/heat from the ground or Earth, especially when used in these mirrored pairs? Sounds very much sci-fi stuff to say the least! Let me tell, I am not convinced any one way or the other, I just pondered through all of this.
And now Fletcher... What about your swinger experiment?
Let's assume the swinger experiment/swinger wheel works for real and do produce a gain...
Imagine you put one of that swinger cart or wheel at the north pole, and another one at the south pole, then you do the experiment perfectly mirrored, so that every effect for Earth cancels out.
Now, Earth can't move for you, not even an unimaginably tiny bit.
Then what happens with the swinger wheels in this case?
Do they stop working in these conditions, or what?
Or, if the swinger wheels would still work, then what is the explanation?
Where does the energy come from and how would it be transferred in this case?
That was my thought experiment so far. Hope you like it! ;)
So, what do you think about all of these deep dive mindscapes?
