Why wouldn't this idea work?

Please tell me you're serious. That will make this funnier.

Then you'd be inputting energy which would kind of defeat the concept of this car.

Sit in a wagon, and pull your left arm with your right towards the direction you want to go.

Version 2. This must work!

Magnets won't work but optical lenses might.

It would, but it wouldn't save any energy. Car 1 would have to work way harder than normal.

The car is attached to the magnet, the boom is holding it back from moving to the magnet.

So you make the front car invisible, free energy for car in front!

guys... guys what if we used the exhaust gas to push a sail to make the car go forwards

technically it's already done with turbos.

The answer is nuclear energy.

you would need ENORMOUS magnets for this to work, and then what happens if you stray too close to a crash barrier or lamp post? you'd be up fucked-in-the-ass creek without lube.

...

fucking kek

Yes, it would work exactly like a tow strap. Just way more complicated and expensive, while equally dangerous.

Thats literally how turbos work

Because the magnet on the car will infinitely pull the hanging magnet backwards. Congratulations, you've just reversed back into your garage wall.

This is what your autism mobile would look like.

...

Wait a minute. Why haven't auto makers used this to prevent rear end collisions?

are you fucking dense?

Because the magnet pulls the other one, thus moving the car.

...

So just put a bigger, stronger magnet on the front part so that it pulls the other one more. Obviously equal sized magnets wouldn't work.

It's like I'm on an old /b/ troll physics thread

Why does this not work

seems like a lot of work and plus it makes your car look stupid

free energy is achievable by simply mounting the front wheels lower than the rear but the reptilians will have you believe it's a stupid idea

cuz dem magnits weigh less than the metal plate.

This would work with strong enough magnets and low gravity.

Because you're too fat

...

crowdfund it

maybe for a few seconds after it ripped your legs off.

Not sure if you guys are trolling or just cant into basic physics

Because it would only repel front to rear, front to front and vice versa would attract like a motherfucker due to polarity.

that would only work if both magnets weren't attached to the car dickhead

Or does the car just pull the hanging magnet towards it?

>someone took the time to model OPs autism in 3D
lmao
>filename
double lmao

It doesn't even look the same.

Well you see

Meow meow meow, meow meow meow. Meow meow, meow meow meow meow! Meow meow (meow meow meow meow) meow.

This would work but you could only travel north and south because of the way magnets work, so you need to work on it some more.

Tha....that....okay.

Even though that is fucking retarded, it actually looks convincing enough to be a working model because the way you depicted it is so well done.

If you do this with magnets in your hand why don't you just fly off into the atmosphere.

Guise, I worked it out! OP was on the right track.

There's a pivot and a hydraulic cylinder, like on a digger arm. Hydraulic makes the magnet swing back and forth, creating magnetic wave pulses that jerk the car forwards.

Instead of being a copyright jew, I give this away for free.

I sent this picture to the head of the physics department at my school and asked him if it was possible.

He told me to build a model with a Hot Wheels and publish my results.

that... might actually work...
user...

But what if all the bumpers front and back were the same polarity

You'd need a motor to run the hydraulics tho

hmmm you may be on to something here...

All I see is sonic

so i guess this is the car equivalent of an airplane on a treadmill?

rly meks u thenk

Ok sidebar
If the full curve effect diagram shows the one "beam" bending around the moon. Wouldn't the distorted rays, waves, individual photons, lines whatever you want to call them. Wouldn't they have a stacking effect? As in the celestial object causes the light in it's immediate path to deflect around, wouldn't the deflection cause a domino effect distorting all light on plane with the object.

Don't joke about this shit. This might be what cars actually look like in the future.

pedals might work to.

...

I guess WAT sells tow straps now

What if we put magnets in the road?

NO. Holy fuck no it can't.

The thing that creates lift is the air flowing over the wings.
Also the engines move the plane in respect to the solid ground, not a treadmill, so the wheels would just be spinning twice as fast as the plane moves forward on the treadmill.
If the treadmill was as long as a normal runway and the plane started at the back, it would take off at the front as if it was a normal runway. The wheels are only a structure to hold the plane off the ground. They supply zero thrust.

Didn't we have a thread on solar panel car last week? Are more threads coming like this? It sure seems fun because all here are discussing science which is awesome.

Reddit must go

>itt: people who have never seen troll physics threads before

...

>wouldnt
Thats how airplanes work retard

I'd assume it would take slightly longer to take off due to the increased friction within the wheels and bearings. Now on a much smaller plane you may actually be able to take off sooner due to boundary airflow created by the treadmill.

>implying the treadmill wouldnt have to run so fast that would create a current of air due to surface friction providing the aircraft the necessary lift

What are the benefits over just running into the car in front?

You're probably right, but I'm under the impression that the change in runway distance used would be small enough to be considered null.

A lot of shit is hypothetical here, ya know like the ridiculously long treadmill that would need to be made of asphalt and have substantial structural reinforcement as to hold up a Boeing 737.
The airflow created by a the surface friction of a massive stretch of asphalt is not something I'm taking into consideration. I can tell you from my experience, it will not provide enough lift for the plane.
Even if it did, then the plane would only make it a few feet off the ground and would appear to just be hovering, still unable to take off.

>You don't need to touch the car in front of you.

That's about it as far a benefits go. There's also the side effect of having what is essentially a bumper made from rock. Goodbye weight savings and handling characteristics.

This is epic! Cann you please incluse me in the screenshot?

The planes engine pushes against the air, not the tarmac like a car engine.

It would take off unless the pilot has the brakes on.

For it not to take off you'd need a wind tunnel instead of a conveyor belt.

...

This thread

>bottom left works just fine though, a bit slow perhaps

the treadmill is running at the opposite speed to the thrust of the engines, the plane is stationary, it's not taking off ever. the whole point of this question is to make fun of stupid people and those stupid fat cunts at mythbusters fell for it and didn't even do it properly.

stand in place and move by pushing yourself without taking a step

The plane isn't attached to the treadmill though. The wheels are free spinning. All that would happen is the wheels would spin 2x faster. It's like if you drive an RC car on a treadmill vs if you push it with your hand.

>Nuclear pulse propulsionorexternal pulsed plasma propulsion, is a hypothetical method ofspacecraft propulsionthat usesnuclear explosionsforthrust.[1]

why not adapt this to cars?

...

>"according to Newton's third law, every action has an equal and opposite reaction"
lmao user
There is still no such way to literally make energy out of thin air, if it were real it already would've been done
Free energy is a myth

...

Well, if a car DOESN'T have this mechanism, it would be attracted to it even harder. That and parking near anything metal might prove problematic.

>the treadmill is designed to match the speed of the wheels
Not the speed of the entire plane you retard. The treadmill will just make sure the wheels remain stationary, the plane will still move forward because of it's fuckhuge engines. For it not to take off the treadmill would have to spin fast enough to cause enough force to offset the engines through the wheels, which would mean it is spinning significantly faster than the wheels, but a given is that it spins at the speed of the wheels in the opposite direction, so that's off the table.

tl;dr it takes off

Yeah of course try to lift yourself with your left hand works the same

The fundamental problem is that the boom resolves all of the forces involved. Its internal compression and bending forces are symmetrical - they cancel each other out, which means no acceleration. (F=ma, and the net F on the boom is zero so acceleration 'a' is zero. That means no movement.)

Think of it as the car attracting the magnet on the boom towards it, but the boom is holding it back. Or the magnet on the boom is attracting the car, but the boom holds the car back.

If you want a cheaper version just make the car behind rear-end the car in front! 100% works!

You're thinking of this the wrong way.
The planes engines provide thrust, hence they push the plane forward.
The engines provide ZERO lift. They do not ever make the plane go up, they only make it go forward.
The thing that makes the plane go up, or gives it lift, is the fast moving air over the entire wing. Without that fast moving air, you have zero lift. With lift, you can't get off the ground.
There are two ways to get air to move quickly over the wings. Either you move the plane very fast in relation to the stationary air, or you move the air very fast in relation to a stationary plane (wind tunnel).

If you aren't in a wind tunnel, then you need to be moving fast through the air to generate any lift.
If you're on a treadmill, you're not moving forward through the air. The entire concept of a treadmill is that you get to push against the ground in one spot. Pushing against the ground doesn't help planes fly.

Exactly as I had said, theoretically, a treadmill as long as a runway would be no problem for a plane to takeoff on. It's wheels would just spin at twice the normal speed.

The problem with the question is it's formatted to make the reader believe the question being asked is, will the plane retain it's x and y coordinates but move in the positive z direction? The answer to that is no. It's not going to lift off like a helicopter or harrier.

Which is why he's right. Your not adding or losing energy from the system (the car with magnets) so how would it ever do anything?

The only way humans have been able to move forward, is by leaving something behind, because of Newton's third law. You always leave something behind.

ITT: troll physics

The question might have been meant that way, but what's really on paper is the wheels, which means it takes off. Although if it did say that the plane itself remained stationary, you'd be right.

Magnets don't produce emissions, retard. There is nothing to be consumed or emitted

>There is nothing to be consumed or emitted
lol how do I thermodynamics