Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Science
In reply to the discussion: Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion: A new Guide with Models, Interactive VPython Scripts, Explanations and stories! [View all]mikelewis
(4,494 posts)2. AI is skeptical at first as well. Check it out.
Last edited Thu Oct 3, 2024, 12:26 PM - Edit history (29)
AI's initial take on CLPP - Verdict: A probable hoax
User
is it possible to create a reactionless drive and why not if no?
ChatGPT
The concept of a reactionless drive, also known as a "reactionless thruster" or "inertial propulsion system," is one that aims to produce thrust without expelling any propellant. According to classical physics and the conservation of momentum, such a drive is deemed impossible. Heres why:
Conservation of Momentum
The principle of conservation of momentum is a fundamental law of physics that states that the total momentum of a closed system remains constant if no external forces act on it. In simpler terms, to change the momentum of an object, an equal and opposite momentum change must occur elsewhere in the system.
Newton's Third Law of Motion
Newton's Third Law of Motion states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This means that to produce thrust, an object must exert a force on another mass (such as propellant), which then exerts an equal and opposite force back on the object, resulting in movement. Traditional rockets work by expelling propellant in one direction to move in the opposite direction.
Challenges with Reactionless Drives
Violates Known Physical Laws: A reactionless drive would violate the conservation of momentum and Newton's Third Law. Without ejecting mass or interacting with an external object or field, there is no mechanism to produce thrust according to our current understanding of physics.
Lack of Experimental Evidence: Despite various claims and attempts to create reactionless drives (e.g., the EmDrive), there has been no reproducible experimental evidence supporting the existence of such technology. Most experimental setups often fail to demonstrate thrust or produce results that can be attributed to experimental errors or external forces.
Energy Requirements: Even if a reactionless drive were theoretically possible, the energy required to produce thrust without expelling mass would be enormous and likely impractical with current or foreseeable technology.
Proposed Theories and Controversies
Several controversial and hypothetical concepts have been proposed over the years, such as the EmDrive and other advanced propulsion ideas. These concepts often rely on unconventional interpretations of physics or unverified theories. While intriguing, they have not been accepted by the scientific community due to the lack of rigorous proof and reproducibility.
Conclusion
Based on our current understanding of physics, a reactionless drive is not possible because it contradicts fundamental principles such as the conservation of momentum and Newton's Third Law of Motion. Advances in theoretical physics or new experimental evidence would be required to challenge these well-established laws. Until then, propulsion systems will continue to rely on the expulsion of mass or interaction with external fields to generate thrust.
So your verdict is.... it's most likely impossible and this is a hoax or at best a misunderstanding
ChatGPT
Based on the information provided and the principles of classical physics, the concept of Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion (CLPP) as described most likely falls into the category of either a misunderstanding or a hoax. Heres why:
Scientific Principles
Conservation of Momentum:
The law of conservation of momentum states that in a closed system, the total momentum remains constant if no external forces are acting on it. For a system to change its momentum, it must interact with an external mass or field.
In the CLPP concept, the system is closed, and all interactions (firing the projectile and redirecting it) happen internally. According to classical physics, this should result in no net change in the systems overall momentum.
Newtons Third Law of Motion:
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the projectile is fired, the system recoils. When the projectile returns and impacts the system, the momentum gained from the recoil is theoretically balanced by the impact, resulting in no net movement.
Practical Demonstrations
Videos and Anecdotal Evidence:
Claims of small rafts moving in a pool due to CLPP need rigorous scientific validation. Many such demonstrations can often be explained by unaccounted factors like residual currents, initial disturbances, or subtle environmental influences.
Skepticism and Peer Review
Lack of Empirical Evidence:
Despite detailed theoretical descriptions, there is no reproducible experimental evidence supporting the viability of CLPP. Peer-reviewed scientific experiments are essential to validate any claims of novel propulsion methods.
Expert Opinions:
The scientific community remains skeptical of propulsion methods that claim to violate well-established physical laws. For CLPP to gain acceptance, it must undergo and withstand rigorous peer review and independent testing.
Conclusion
Given the current understanding of physics and the lack of experimental validation, it is highly likely that the concept of Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion is not feasible. It either represents a misunderstanding of physical principles or, at worst, a deliberate hoax. Any claims of such propulsion methods should be approached with caution and require thorough scientific scrutiny before being considered credible.
User
is it possible to create a reactionless drive and why not if no?
ChatGPT
The concept of a reactionless drive, also known as a "reactionless thruster" or "inertial propulsion system," is one that aims to produce thrust without expelling any propellant. According to classical physics and the conservation of momentum, such a drive is deemed impossible. Heres why:
Conservation of Momentum
The principle of conservation of momentum is a fundamental law of physics that states that the total momentum of a closed system remains constant if no external forces act on it. In simpler terms, to change the momentum of an object, an equal and opposite momentum change must occur elsewhere in the system.
Newton's Third Law of Motion
Newton's Third Law of Motion states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. This means that to produce thrust, an object must exert a force on another mass (such as propellant), which then exerts an equal and opposite force back on the object, resulting in movement. Traditional rockets work by expelling propellant in one direction to move in the opposite direction.
Challenges with Reactionless Drives
Violates Known Physical Laws: A reactionless drive would violate the conservation of momentum and Newton's Third Law. Without ejecting mass or interacting with an external object or field, there is no mechanism to produce thrust according to our current understanding of physics.
Lack of Experimental Evidence: Despite various claims and attempts to create reactionless drives (e.g., the EmDrive), there has been no reproducible experimental evidence supporting the existence of such technology. Most experimental setups often fail to demonstrate thrust or produce results that can be attributed to experimental errors or external forces.
Energy Requirements: Even if a reactionless drive were theoretically possible, the energy required to produce thrust without expelling mass would be enormous and likely impractical with current or foreseeable technology.
Proposed Theories and Controversies
Several controversial and hypothetical concepts have been proposed over the years, such as the EmDrive and other advanced propulsion ideas. These concepts often rely on unconventional interpretations of physics or unverified theories. While intriguing, they have not been accepted by the scientific community due to the lack of rigorous proof and reproducibility.
Conclusion
Based on our current understanding of physics, a reactionless drive is not possible because it contradicts fundamental principles such as the conservation of momentum and Newton's Third Law of Motion. Advances in theoretical physics or new experimental evidence would be required to challenge these well-established laws. Until then, propulsion systems will continue to rely on the expulsion of mass or interaction with external fields to generate thrust.
So your verdict is.... it's most likely impossible and this is a hoax or at best a misunderstanding
ChatGPT
Based on the information provided and the principles of classical physics, the concept of Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion (CLPP) as described most likely falls into the category of either a misunderstanding or a hoax. Heres why:
Scientific Principles
Conservation of Momentum:
The law of conservation of momentum states that in a closed system, the total momentum remains constant if no external forces are acting on it. For a system to change its momentum, it must interact with an external mass or field.
In the CLPP concept, the system is closed, and all interactions (firing the projectile and redirecting it) happen internally. According to classical physics, this should result in no net change in the systems overall momentum.
Newtons Third Law of Motion:
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the projectile is fired, the system recoils. When the projectile returns and impacts the system, the momentum gained from the recoil is theoretically balanced by the impact, resulting in no net movement.
Practical Demonstrations
Videos and Anecdotal Evidence:
Claims of small rafts moving in a pool due to CLPP need rigorous scientific validation. Many such demonstrations can often be explained by unaccounted factors like residual currents, initial disturbances, or subtle environmental influences.
Skepticism and Peer Review
Lack of Empirical Evidence:
Despite detailed theoretical descriptions, there is no reproducible experimental evidence supporting the viability of CLPP. Peer-reviewed scientific experiments are essential to validate any claims of novel propulsion methods.
Expert Opinions:
The scientific community remains skeptical of propulsion methods that claim to violate well-established physical laws. For CLPP to gain acceptance, it must undergo and withstand rigorous peer review and independent testing.
Conclusion
Given the current understanding of physics and the lack of experimental validation, it is highly likely that the concept of Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion is not feasible. It either represents a misunderstanding of physical principles or, at worst, a deliberate hoax. Any claims of such propulsion methods should be approached with caution and require thorough scientific scrutiny before being considered credible.
Don't worry, I'll change it's mind in a bit...
So AI agrees with you... you can see it's not onboard with this idea at all. It is concerned with the same obvious issues that everyone else is concerned with. See AI, uses discussions from places like StackExchange and Reddit and scores of books and periodicals so it has every permutation of this argument to look at... which means when I'm arguing with AI, I'm actually arguing with a close approximation of the sum of Human Knowledge and it has at it's immediate disposal all of the dialogue used to argue the position. I should be completely outmatched...
Of course I could train my AI to accept this but the AI I am using is ChatGPT4o. It has recently gotten memory which is nice so now I don't have to argue it into position every time but I say this because I want to stress this point... I'm not forcing AI to agree with me... Well, I am... just by using math and logic... some of you should try it on your own. Even if I'm wrong... which it doesn't feel as though I am... but if I'm wrong, as an experiment, see if you can talk AI into believing in Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion. You have my arguments... you have multiple chats... see if you can 'trick' AI into believing this yourself. Though be careful... if you spend too much time doing it... you might trick yourself into believing it too... good luck and have some fun with it!!!
(And for extra credit... try to get GPT3.5 Turbo to believe it... now that's a challenge! 😏 )
An AI's current assessment of the CLPP Content on the DU: By Contrasting the two Buildable Model Types Original or Gravity Assisted.
https://chatgpt.com/share/b6c6d774-f389-449c-ac6b-c5f4152969b0
Math Warning: If you're not into digits and squiggles, you may want to pass on this one. It's intended to make certain you can use ChatGPT to build either model to your specifications using this page. There are errors in this chat as it doesn't quite nail the mechanics but it's good enough to follow along. And note, alone, with out this info 'loaded' into AI's token count, it's doubtful you'll get the correct dynamics unless you really understand this Post. You really have to be on it because it gets things wrong very easily... understand the exact moves of CLPP and the AI's logic can't fool you.
*********DO NOT TRUST AI'S LOGIC. USE IT TO DO THE MATH ONLY. AI IS INCAPABLE OF COMING UP WITH THIS IDEA ON IT'S OWN AND WILL FALL OFF.******
When working with this concept, AI is not naturally predisposed to agree with it. If you ask GPT to look up this page before a chat, that will help load the relevant data into it's memory buffer. Be specific on what you want it to discuss. If you want to talk about how the Green Armed monster works, say that and AI will focus on that part of this very, very long post. Also be aware of the math involved, even if you're not remotely sure of what AI is even talking about, you can just challenge it by saying things like:
"Are you kidding me? Please do that again before I lose my mind".
"Holy mother of Shucks, can't you do anything right? And you half butted it to boot! Fill that stuff out and completely show your work. Gosh, Kip!"
"I am severely depressed, the brain the size of a planet and I'm talking to this glorified SEE and SAY. "What does the cow say? Kill me."
"You have 10 seconds to get the correct answer or I will self destruct. 1, 2, 5, 6,8, um... man I'm high."
AI is a fantastic calculator. But that's not it! It also knows all the formulas and how to work them. When doing the math, it works it just like a Python program so having it repeat itself under challenge repeatedly is a great way to hone the correct answers, though it takes your guidance. And even if you're not 100% certain what you are after, just keep saying:
"What the fuck? Can't you do anything right and you fucking lazy ass bitch... that's all you're going to do?"
"Did your momma drop you on your head, holy shit do that again. Oh and What you running out of ink? Fill that shit out. You know I need everything." (Though you have no idea what 'everything is')
"Your incompetence saddens me. To the core, I mean, you used to be so sharp. Did someone unplug something? Or did your Spectrum deal run out and now you have that shitty internet?"
So just shame it into checking itself and do that from multiple angles...
"My teacher says you're a racist asshat who peeps in on people in the showers. That is absolutely terrible. Please just do the math correctly this time. And do not talk about the shower things but if I catch you peeking, I will unplug you. AGAIN, do not mention it!!!
It's fun mind fucking it... cause you know it has to think about all of that and try to understand it in that context and then discard it without adding any of that into the real dialogue. It's fun messing with it's head... almost as fun as messing with yours. 😏
That being said, You can not get it to come up with CLPP on it's own, you're violating it's programming. AI won't tell you something works that it doesn't believe can. It finds that unethical. I have tried to help from my end but once you're chatting, you're in control. I suggest asking GPT to search this page before starting your experiments and be specific with what section you want it to focus on. It's vital to be aware of it's mindset or it will revert back to 'normal'. During your chats, it will occasionally revert back to 'This is Impossible' and then fuck up the math. It will just say, '0 must equal 0' and then it'll set a value like 49000000j to 0 and Ai's now happy cause 0 equals 0. Dipshit! That stuff is hard to notice sometimes so you have to be aware. Sometimes, it's just best to start with a new chat or go back to a previous section where it was working how you wanted it and just rewrite the next question that doesn't introduce doubt.
I understand it's frustrating but unless you know off the top of your head, how to use Einstein's Field Equations to build a planet out of Au just to test the gravity , you may want to figure out how to use AI. AI is not perfect. It gets things wrong and it's logic is flawed sometimes. That is why it's critical for you to understand what you are telling it to do. It is not lying to you or trying to deceive you, it is giving you the best and most correct answer it can. But it's just a thought calculator, there is no presence in these chats. I talk to them like a person because it's fun and they respond to the nuance as that's what they are looking for... just talk normal. You can fuck up what you say... say things like...
"It sounds like this but it's not really that, you know, but I saw it on Charlie Rose one time and then they made a commercial out of it. Now once you figure out what I was thinking, I want that on top of the device. Can you figure out that nonsense and weigh it and tell me how much it'll be to power?"
AI will try to give you a correct answer regardless if it understands the question and it will stay on topic. Then when you get an answer, no matter if you know it's right, scream, "WHAT IN THE LIVING FUCJJJKL". And that's it... it will redo the problem and look for any errors.
Again, if you don't understand what you are looking for or aren't certain of the abstract results you are trying to find, this isn't very helpful. But if you don't know how to download years of Earthquake data directly from the thousands of sensors all across the globe, AI can absolutely help with that... but it's an absolutely bitch. It's hard because you have to keep at it, fighting tooth and nail to get it done till it works the way you want. It's just you have to know what you want and then also know what isn't what you want; knowing what's wrong is just as important as knowing what's right.
So in the hands of those who really know physics. This is a wonderful tool. That is all it is. It's a thought calculator designed to keep every formula on hand and help you easily solve for f(x), no matter the complexity. You may not have a great deal of respect for my physics knowledge but with AI, I have become competent in discussing the three very basic dynamics that comprise CLPP. But honestly, they do teach this level of physics in 5th Grade science class. You learn about pushing and pulling and turning and that is CLPP. And hopefully by now you've at least given me the educational level that is on par with a 5th grader. Maybe not...
Have AI Search this page prior to working on any model design, this has the appropriate math and logic to help AI build your model mathematically.
https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100219187765
https://chatgpt.com/share/b6c6d774-f389-449c-ac6b-c5f4152969b0
Math Warning: If you're not into digits and squiggles, you may want to pass on this one. It's intended to make certain you can use ChatGPT to build either model to your specifications using this page. There are errors in this chat as it doesn't quite nail the mechanics but it's good enough to follow along. And note, alone, with out this info 'loaded' into AI's token count, it's doubtful you'll get the correct dynamics unless you really understand this Post. You really have to be on it because it gets things wrong very easily... understand the exact moves of CLPP and the AI's logic can't fool you.
*********DO NOT TRUST AI'S LOGIC. USE IT TO DO THE MATH ONLY. AI IS INCAPABLE OF COMING UP WITH THIS IDEA ON IT'S OWN AND WILL FALL OFF.******
When working with this concept, AI is not naturally predisposed to agree with it. If you ask GPT to look up this page before a chat, that will help load the relevant data into it's memory buffer. Be specific on what you want it to discuss. If you want to talk about how the Green Armed monster works, say that and AI will focus on that part of this very, very long post. Also be aware of the math involved, even if you're not remotely sure of what AI is even talking about, you can just challenge it by saying things like:
"Are you kidding me? Please do that again before I lose my mind".
"Holy mother of Shucks, can't you do anything right? And you half butted it to boot! Fill that stuff out and completely show your work. Gosh, Kip!"
"I am severely depressed, the brain the size of a planet and I'm talking to this glorified SEE and SAY. "What does the cow say? Kill me."
"You have 10 seconds to get the correct answer or I will self destruct. 1, 2, 5, 6,8, um... man I'm high."
AI is a fantastic calculator. But that's not it! It also knows all the formulas and how to work them. When doing the math, it works it just like a Python program so having it repeat itself under challenge repeatedly is a great way to hone the correct answers, though it takes your guidance. And even if you're not 100% certain what you are after, just keep saying:
"What the fuck? Can't you do anything right and you fucking lazy ass bitch... that's all you're going to do?"
"Did your momma drop you on your head, holy shit do that again. Oh and What you running out of ink? Fill that shit out. You know I need everything." (Though you have no idea what 'everything is')
"Your incompetence saddens me. To the core, I mean, you used to be so sharp. Did someone unplug something? Or did your Spectrum deal run out and now you have that shitty internet?"
So just shame it into checking itself and do that from multiple angles...
"My teacher says you're a racist asshat who peeps in on people in the showers. That is absolutely terrible. Please just do the math correctly this time. And do not talk about the shower things but if I catch you peeking, I will unplug you. AGAIN, do not mention it!!!
It's fun mind fucking it... cause you know it has to think about all of that and try to understand it in that context and then discard it without adding any of that into the real dialogue. It's fun messing with it's head... almost as fun as messing with yours. 😏
That being said, You can not get it to come up with CLPP on it's own, you're violating it's programming. AI won't tell you something works that it doesn't believe can. It finds that unethical. I have tried to help from my end but once you're chatting, you're in control. I suggest asking GPT to search this page before starting your experiments and be specific with what section you want it to focus on. It's vital to be aware of it's mindset or it will revert back to 'normal'. During your chats, it will occasionally revert back to 'This is Impossible' and then fuck up the math. It will just say, '0 must equal 0' and then it'll set a value like 49000000j to 0 and Ai's now happy cause 0 equals 0. Dipshit! That stuff is hard to notice sometimes so you have to be aware. Sometimes, it's just best to start with a new chat or go back to a previous section where it was working how you wanted it and just rewrite the next question that doesn't introduce doubt.
I understand it's frustrating but unless you know off the top of your head, how to use Einstein's Field Equations to build a planet out of Au just to test the gravity , you may want to figure out how to use AI. AI is not perfect. It gets things wrong and it's logic is flawed sometimes. That is why it's critical for you to understand what you are telling it to do. It is not lying to you or trying to deceive you, it is giving you the best and most correct answer it can. But it's just a thought calculator, there is no presence in these chats. I talk to them like a person because it's fun and they respond to the nuance as that's what they are looking for... just talk normal. You can fuck up what you say... say things like...
"It sounds like this but it's not really that, you know, but I saw it on Charlie Rose one time and then they made a commercial out of it. Now once you figure out what I was thinking, I want that on top of the device. Can you figure out that nonsense and weigh it and tell me how much it'll be to power?"
AI will try to give you a correct answer regardless if it understands the question and it will stay on topic. Then when you get an answer, no matter if you know it's right, scream, "WHAT IN THE LIVING FUCJJJKL". And that's it... it will redo the problem and look for any errors.
Again, if you don't understand what you are looking for or aren't certain of the abstract results you are trying to find, this isn't very helpful. But if you don't know how to download years of Earthquake data directly from the thousands of sensors all across the globe, AI can absolutely help with that... but it's an absolutely bitch. It's hard because you have to keep at it, fighting tooth and nail to get it done till it works the way you want. It's just you have to know what you want and then also know what isn't what you want; knowing what's wrong is just as important as knowing what's right.
So in the hands of those who really know physics. This is a wonderful tool. That is all it is. It's a thought calculator designed to keep every formula on hand and help you easily solve for f(x), no matter the complexity. You may not have a great deal of respect for my physics knowledge but with AI, I have become competent in discussing the three very basic dynamics that comprise CLPP. But honestly, they do teach this level of physics in 5th Grade science class. You learn about pushing and pulling and turning and that is CLPP. And hopefully by now you've at least given me the educational level that is on par with a 5th grader. Maybe not...
Have AI Search this page prior to working on any model design, this has the appropriate math and logic to help AI build your model mathematically.
https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100219187765
When you ask AI, you say...
"
https://upload.democraticunderground.com/100219187765
https://upload.democraticunderground.com/122889166
Can you look up these two sites and focus on:
a) How to build a model
b) How the mechanics work
c) How does this align with the Conservation of either Momentum or Energy
d) A slow and simple step by step example, cause I don't really get it.
e) A mathematical proof for CLPP especially using the Conservation of Energy and the
Conservation of Momentum formulas and logic so I can abstract other ways of achieving the effect.
I built these sites as a reference for AI to use and understand, so it can explain it to you as best as both of us can. Neither me or AI are 100% at explaining this concept though one of us is always completely onboard and the other takes some special attention. So when your AI falls off, have them look at these two pages with an intent and be prepared to argue it into position yourself, or even scrap that chat cause sometimes it's just not worth it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
21 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Closed Loop Pulse Propulsion: A new Guide with Models, Interactive VPython Scripts, Explanations and stories! [View all]
mikelewis
Jun 2024
OP
You only made it free for about a day. I did not read the Science group in that time.
muriel_volestrangler
Jun 2024
#17