Refrigerators are like rockets, right?

In summary, the refrigerator does not need to be tied to the wall to prevent recoil from the momentum it loses out the back because the kinetic energy of hot objects is random and there is no recoil in one specific direction. Additionally, the losses of momentum and energy in other directions balance each other out, resulting in a negligible overall effect on the refrigerator's movement.
  • #36
brainstorm said:
Why, because they both send out discrete packages of luminosity that require chemical propellant to achieve subsonic velocity and then fade away after @50ft?

Or because they're both cylindrical and produce illumination?

Because both produce thrust.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
DaveC426913 said:
Because both produce thrust.

Ok, let's assume you were trying to come up with a propulsion system that uses EM radiation. Obviously you want it as efficient as possible in terms of unit energy to unit propulsion. What would the variable parameters be for waste? Would there be certain wavelengths that would generate more thrust than others?
 
  • #38
brainstorm said:
Ok, let's assume you were trying to come up with a propulsion system that uses EM radiation. Obviously you want it as efficient as possible in terms of unit energy to unit propulsion. What would the variable parameters be for waste? Would there be certain wavelengths that would generate more thrust than others?

My post 34 consists of exactly 4 words. Of those 4 words, it seems I have the need to repeat two of them:

In principle.

:wink:
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
914
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top