>-----Original Message-----
>From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] 
>Sent: 21 September 2006 19:03
>To: piclist@mit.edu
>Subject: Re: [EE]: Reactionless Drive
>
>
>Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:
>
>>>> Only if you let go the stone, whereupon it's potential energy is 
>>>> converted into kinetic energy.  If you put the stone on a shelf it 
>>>> would stay there, and you don't have to provide power to a 
>shelf do 
>>>> you?
>>> 
>>> But you have to provide force. Movement is not only about 
>energy, it 
>>> is primarily about (resulting) force.
>> 
>> Work = Force x Distance
>> 
>> Remove either force or distance and work = 0.  There is no primary 
>> dependance on either force or motion.
>
>??? 
>
>Distance is a consequence of motion. Motion (or its absence) 
>is what creates (or not) the distance. So if you are saying 
>that distance = 0, you assume that there is no movement. And 
>that there is no resulting force. 


What I am saying is that if distance=0 then force could be infinite, but no work is needed.  i.e., given a strong enough support, you can hold up any amount of mass without performing any work.

Regards

Mike

=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist