Lets say you have a centrifuge in space, consisting of a long, hollow tube with a weight, a piston in this case, free to move from one end of the tube/shaft to the other.
For 270 degrees of its' rotation you expose the piston, through the tube/shaft at its' center rotational point, to the vacuum of space.
The piston is held at or near the center point due to the vacuum, with a certain inertial mass.
For 90 degrees you close off the vacumm of space allowing the centrifugal force to move the piston outward towards the end of the tube/shaft, increasing the inertial mass of the piston.
At the end of the 90 degrees, you again expose the piston, through the tube/shaft, to the vacuum of space for 270 degrees, drawing it again towards the center of the centrifuge, reducing the piston's inertial mass.
Rotational speed kept constant during cycles.
Keep repeating the cycle.
Reactionless drive or not?
56 posted on
11/28/2014 7:53:51 PM PST by
The Cajun
(Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Mike Lee, Louie Gohmert....Nuff said.)
If the piston can move freely, the rotation will send the piston to the end of the tube farthest from the axis of rotation whether it's exposed to vacuum or not.
[
The center of mass of the piston is actually a point of unstable equilibrium. Theoretically the piston would remain in the middle if it started there if it were a point mass, but even in that case it would not move from the point of unstable equilibrium when the tube is opened or closed to space.
In real life, the piston is not a point mass, and cannot be perfectly balanced, so, like a pencil being balanced on its point it it will leave the point of unstable equilibrium and move toward the end of the tube where the rotational inertia of the piston is greatest. That end of the tube is one of two points of stable equilibrium, and it will remain there as long as the tube spins, vacuum or no vacuum.
]