Help me Sup Forumsros. I need to figure out if this is possible for my physics class

Help me Sup Forumsros. I need to figure out if this is possible for my physics class.

It works.

If human powered anyways might as well use a giant hamster wheel instead of waterwheel

It would work if the people were going like 2000 miles per hour. Although it seems like it would break perpetual energy laws, it doesn't, since the people are exerting energy to get the water back to the top.

What wins ? a quintillion hamsters or a gravity ?

Your teacher may be looking to trick you though. A propeller won't work in space.

Who said anything about space you filthy jew

>push the rocket into deep space
>deep space
>space

>Reading the question

Not really, because the energy they're exerting to go to to the top is pushing the rocket down.

bringing water back ruins energy gain

The water and people are both moving up and down an equal distance, so that is balanced. The actual thrust is caused by the propeller.

>cannot into physics

The gears on going the wrong way.

Mechanically, bringing up the water stores kinetic energy. Letting it fall releases it. As a result, it spins the propeller. Sliding down the pole releases energy as well, but this is lost energy, as it doesn't do anything. Climbing the rocked puts an amount of force greater than your weight+water weight on the rocket. Therefore, this rocket cannot work

wait a sec , human burns calories to fuel propeller

It is not an isolated system where the same energy lost by dropping the water and people is used to pick them back up. The people have their own energy stored inside them, and every time they climb the ladder they exert this stored energy on the system.

Crap
Beat me to saying it while I was filling out the 2 hour captcha

Right, but what makes the propeller work is really gravity pulling the water past the water wheel.
This thing would stop working before it reached zero-G area.
Also, it doubt any amount of power directed via a propeller would be sufficient to get to space. Propellers generate thrust via air resistance and that is so much less at higher altitudes where air is thinner. Basic thrust components of a jet are sooo much better here.

You spaceship will be just a spinning beyblade without vertical propeller. That's why helicopters got propeller on the back. Otherwise excellent piece of engineering. I wonder why nasa never thought of that...

OP that rocket has about as much of a chance of getting to space as a kid getting to mars by using the big wheel as a fan.

If this thing is gonna be in deep space there isn't going to be a gravity to pull the water down the water wheel, along with the plethora of other issues like using a propeller to push you through a medium of nothing.

>gravity vs friction
No

Yes and no. It is an open system, ultimately deriving energy from human labor, so the propeller would spin and provide lift. However, not in sufficient quantity to actually lift the entire structure.
If there *was* enough power provided, once the structure lost contact with the ground, the house itself would start counter-rotating due to the x-component of the force actin on the propellers. This would slow the propellers' rotation relative to the surrounding air, thus lft would be lost.
You need to have a mechanism (such as a propeller) to counter this force (as single-shaft helicopters have).