Needing a smart person to translate this for me

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionless_propulsion

  Quote

A reactionless drive or inertial propulsion engine (also reactionless thruster, reactionless engine, bootstrap drive, and inertia drive) is any form of propulsion not based around expulsion of fuel or reaction mass.

 

The name comes from Newton's Third Law of Motion, usually expressed as: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." Such a drive would use a hypothetical form of thrust that does not require any outside force or net momentum exchange to produce linear motion, and therefore necessarily violates the conservation of momentum, a fundamental principle of all current understandings of physics. In addition it can be shown that conservation of energy is violated.

 

In spite of their physical impossibility, such devices have been often proposed in recent history.

 

In a sentence: "The underlying problem [with reactionless drives] is that breaking the law of conservation of momentum shatters the entire mathematical framework [of physics]."[1] These devices by their very nature violate the law of conservation of momentum - if a ship with such a drive existed, then any motion of that ship, being unaccompanied by the motion of any other material, would cause the center of gravity of the universe to move with it. Furthermore, the total energy of the universe becomes reference frame dependent - energy can only be conserved in the presence of a reactionless drive in (at most) one reference frame, because in all other reference frames the change in kinetic energy of the ship differs from the power expended by the ship. Given that these two laws - the conservation of momentum and the principle of relativity - are so well established (and thoroughly verified) in physics, any ordinary mechanical system purporting to violate the laws is generally dismissed outright.[2]

 

(Even if we granted these violations, then it would not only change the sum of momentum in our nearby reference frame, but in fact render the concept of momentum entirely dependant of the observer. However it also means the movement of rotation of earth around itself, the sun and the milky way etc. etc. does not have to be taken into account, since all movement (and momentum, whatever it'd be in this scenario) happens in relation to the given point of observer in space. The earth moves in relation to other particles in space, not THROUGH the space as you may think.)

Much appreciated.

if you can manifest your own energy source without anything else to provide energy than the entire universe revolves around you

imagine if you had a map in which you could draw every force in the universe. now the conservation principle means that if you add all these the sum would be zero. now imagine in this map you pinpoint the center of gravity, that means averaging all the forces relative to a reference point position, this center only depends on the reference point because all forces cancel each other. now if such a propulsion engine existed then this center of gravity would move with the vessel because its position is affecting the average.

And there are working examples of the reactionless drives?

from your very own wiki article:

  Quote

In spite of their physical impossibility, such devices have been often proposed in recent history.

Or, to dumb that down.

NO CAN DO. BUT SOME PEOPLE STILL SAY GOOD IDEA.

Ah fuck this shit, science is bullshit

fucking scientists always be lying and shit.

Do spinning gyroscopes weigh less (than static ones) If so, why don't they use that on maglev trains so they can use a decreased electrical input?

Fuck Physics , Fuck Magnetism.

this thread should all be simple.wikipedia talk

take some EE courses to find out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyro_monorail

This ones genius.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCLLGqvpp7o&NR=1