On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design, an invention that uses low voltage and a heavy slow armature, as opposed to the high voltage and light fast armatures of normal rail guns.led me to new theories about the nature of energy, and the theoretical consequences of internal energy creating unlimited acceleration.
That was done to show conclusively whether a rail gun shows recoil, or not. Many years ago, in this newsgroup, I had come across posts that indicated that rail guns may not have recoil. That finding has influenced me greatly for the past 24 years. It
What was theoretical, became fact on 8 Feb 2022. Unquestionably, the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature. In 2015, i had found this effect, but it was not pronounced
although it repeated reliably.
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature.
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
--
Jos
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current pathExperiment shows otherwise.
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
--
Jos
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
Experiment shows otherwise.
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
Experiment shows otherwise.
So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
because of experiments?
I did not believe anything.
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
Experiment shows otherwise.So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
because of experiments?
--
Jos
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature!
If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
--
Jos
On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>> On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
Experiment shows otherwise.
So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
because of experiments?
I did not believe anything.And now? Do you still not believe anything?
--
Jos
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:And now? Do you still not believe anything?
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>> On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
Experiment shows otherwise.
So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
because of experiments?
I did not believe anything.
Religion is about belief.
Science is not about belief.
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:...
On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>> On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>>>> On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path >>>>>>>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM >>>>>>>> theory that's obvious.
Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
on the material parts of the gun.)
There is no balancing momentum
What i want us to sell ny apparatus along with a series of lecture demonstrations to the highest bidder.
On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>> On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:And now? Do you still not believe anything?
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>> On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.
Experiment shows otherwise.
So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
because of experiments?
I did not believe anything.
Religion is about belief.
Science is not about belief.We must go back to the wording I started with: Why did you *expect*
recoil on the armature?
geometry you have, only two parallel rails cannot feel recoil since
magnetic force is just perpendicular. But if you start including
more, and eventually the complete current loop is included, then
the recoil can be felt.
So is it just a word game about what you include in "armature"?
Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
on the material parts of the gun.)
--
Jos
On 22/02/14 10:36 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:...
On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>> On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>> On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path >>>>>>>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM >>>>>>>> theory that's obvious.
...
Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
on the material parts of the gun.)
There is no balancing momentumWhy do you believe there is no balancing momentum?
nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
it could be in invisible form. An EM pulse, or a pulse of
neutrinos, or maybe it is in gravitational waves?! Did you
test those things?
...
What i want us to sell ny apparatus along with a series of lecture demonstrations to the highest bidder.
Then don't wait too long, but also don't sell too soon!
--
Jos
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 08:45:33 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/14 10:36 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:There is no balancing momentum
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>> On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>>>> On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
Why do you believe there is no balancing momentum?
Because there is no backward momentum and so when not allowed to escape from the barrel, the armature pushes the whole system forward.
The theoretical issues are intricate when we go to the details, like the theories of transmission lines. That needs a series of lectures, a proper engineering course for inly the brightest.
Until now
nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
True, thanks for this admission
... but what you say is only true for the rest of the world, not for my original work on this subject of momentum gain by electrical force which was presented in 2017.
The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
It does not.
But
it could be in invisible form. An EM pulse, or a pulse of
neutrinos, or maybe it is in gravitational waves?! Did you
test those things?
I do not need to test anything invisible,
for this case. The invisibles I deal with - in my poetic works - relate to emotion, not modern physics. Someone else may try on the lines you suggest., but I would not advocate such waste. I would rather they support me.
On 22/02/14 11:57 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 08:45:33 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/14 10:36 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>> On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no balancing momentumOn Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>>>> On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
Why do you believe there is no balancing momentum?
Because there is no backward momentum and so when not allowed to escape from the barrel, the armature pushes the whole system forward.
The theoretical issues are intricate when we go to the details, like the theories of transmission lines. That needs a series of lectures, a proper engineering course for inly the brightest.
Until now
nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
True, thanks for this admissionYou are welcome.
... but what you say is only true for the rest of the world, not for my original work on this subject of momentum gain by electrical force which was presented in 2017.
OK but then I think the great day was in 2017, not on 8 Feb 2022.
Breaking momentum conservation is of much greater importance than
just making some kind of gun. (You can now also make reaction-
less drives, or flying saucers. Probably also free energy!)
The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
It does not.If you break momentum conservation it doesn't.
But
it could be in invisible form. An EM pulse, or a pulse of
neutrinos, or maybe it is in gravitational waves?! Did you
test those things?
I do not need to test anything invisible,OK, none of the great pioneers of physics really *needed* to
do their investigations. (Some were even strongly opposed by
their contemporaries, but they still did it!)
for this case. The invisibles I deal with - in my poetic works - relate to emotion, not modern physics. Someone else may try on the lines you suggest., but I would not advocate such waste. I would rather they support me.
If the construction works better than the alternatives and is
not too expensive, they surely will. (Would be my prediction..)
--
Jos
On Wednesday, 16 February 2022 at 09:54:54 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:matters in physics. Energy is for businessmen. But that is another story.
On 22/02/14 11:57 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 08:45:33 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/14 10:36 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote: >>>> On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no balancing momentumOn Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
Why do you believe there is no balancing momentum?
Because there is no backward momentum and so when not allowed to escape from the barrel, the armature pushes the whole system forward.
The theoretical issues are intricate when we go to the details, like the theories of transmission lines. That needs a series of lectures, a proper engineering course for inly the brightest.
Until now
nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
True, thanks for this admissionYou are welcome.
... but what you say is only true for the rest of the world, not for my original work on this subject of momentum gain by electrical force which was presented in 2017.
OK but then I think the great day was in 2017, not on 8 Feb 2022.No, the first time I did that was in October 2015. I have the video of the earliest experiment. That apparatus was crude but nevertheless indicated the violation if momentum.
The results of 8 Feb were verified by my wife, so it was a great day. She had not been impressed before, like the rest of the planet. Science is about objectivity, which means more than one person has to agree about something related to experiment.
Breaking momentum conservation is of much greater importance thanWhen you break that law of conservation if momentum you automatically make reactionless drives, flying saucers, and yes energy as from the way it is created by the universe which also being infinite swallows it up. Of course, there is only force which
just making some kind of gun. (You can now also make reaction-
less drives, or flying saucers. Probably also free energy!)
Yes in 2015 I did just that with my ancient rail gun of low voltage and heavy armature, a totally new invention. I updated Newtonian laws following my theoretical works developed back in 1999.Since then, i have developed both the theory and thesupporting experiments.
the static force-producing circuitry. This new-found effect causes momentum conservation violation, leading to a new class of reactionless motors when further developed on the updated physics. Repeated violations on a cyclic basis will create unlimitedThe recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
Thanks for this, a first from any scientific platform.It does not.If you break momentum conservation it doesn't.
But
it could be in invisible form. An EM pulse, or a pulse of
neutrinos, or maybe it is in gravitational waves?! Did you
test those things?
My pioneering works follow engineering goals, for my company HTN Research, like making a new class of electric motoe for superior travel.I do not need to test anything invisible,OK, none of the great pioneers of physics really *needed* to
do their investigations. (Some were even strongly opposed by
their contemporaries, but they still did it!)
From the science perspective all I wanted to show, and have so done, as will be very evident from video evidence, is that the electromagnetic force which accelerates an armature in a certain configuration does not automatically create a reaction upon
Now I want to raise money for such work by selling my apparatus to the highest bidder, and for that I wish for good luck, like any seller.
for this case. The invisibles I deal with - in my poetic works - relate to emotion, not modern physics. Someone else may try on the lines you suggest., but I would not advocate such waste. I would rather they support me.
If the construction works better than the alternatives and isI most certainly hope so. Well we will see. I will post the videos soon. Cheers,Arindam Banerjee
not too expensive, they surely will. (Would be my prediction..)
Director,
HTN Research Pvt. Ltd.
Melbourne
--
Jos
On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 08:01:32 UTC+11, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:which matters in physics. Energy is for businessmen. But that is another story.
On Wednesday, 16 February 2022 at 09:54:54 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/14 11:57 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 08:45:33 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/14 10:36 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:30 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:There is no balancing momentum
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 1:04 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/13 10:49 AM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
On 22/02/11 10:07 PM, banerjee...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
...
Why do you believe there is no balancing momentum?
Because there is no backward momentum and so when not allowed to escape from the barrel, the armature pushes the whole system forward.
The theoretical issues are intricate when we go to the details, like the theories of transmission lines. That needs a series of lectures, a proper engineering course for inly the brightest.
Until now
nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
True, thanks for this admissionYou are welcome.
... but what you say is only true for the rest of the world, not for my original work on this subject of momentum gain by electrical force which was presented in 2017.
OK but then I think the great day was in 2017, not on 8 Feb 2022.No, the first time I did that was in October 2015. I have the video of the earliest experiment. That apparatus was crude but nevertheless indicated the violation if momentum.
The results of 8 Feb were verified by my wife, so it was a great day. She had not been impressed before, like the rest of the planet. Science is about objectivity, which means more than one person has to agree about something related to experiment.
Breaking momentum conservation is of much greater importance thanWhen you break that law of conservation if momentum you automatically make reactionless drives, flying saucers, and yes energy as from the way it is created by the universe which also being infinite swallows it up. Of course, there is only force
just making some kind of gun. (You can now also make reaction-
less drives, or flying saucers. Probably also free energy!)
supporting experiments.Yes in 2015 I did just that with my ancient rail gun of low voltage and heavy armature, a totally new invention. I updated Newtonian laws following my theoretical works developed back in 1999.Since then, i have developed both the theory and the
the static force-producing circuitry. This new-found effect causes momentum conservation violation, leading to a new class of reactionless motors when further developed on the updated physics. Repeated violations on a cyclic basis will create unlimitedThe recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
Thanks for this, a first from any scientific platform.It does not.If you break momentum conservation it doesn't.
But
it could be in invisible form. An EM pulse, or a pulse of
neutrinos, or maybe it is in gravitational waves?! Did you
test those things?
My pioneering works follow engineering goals, for my company HTN Research, like making a new class of electric motoe for superior travel.I do not need to test anything invisible,OK, none of the great pioneers of physics really *needed* to
do their investigations. (Some were even strongly opposed by
their contemporaries, but they still did it!)
From the science perspective all I wanted to show, and have so done, as will be very evident from video evidence, is that the electromagnetic force which accelerates an armature in a certain configuration does not automatically create a reaction upon
Now I want to raise money for such work by selling my apparatus to the highest bidder, and for that I wish for good luck, like any seller.
for this case. The invisibles I deal with - in my poetic works - relate to emotion, not modern physics. Someone else may try on the lines you suggest., but I would not advocate such waste. I would rather they support me.
If the construction works better than the alternatives and isI most certainly hope so. Well we will see. I will post the videos soon. Cheers,Arindam Banerjee
not too expensive, they surely will. (Would be my prediction..)
Director,
HTN Research Pvt. Ltd.
Melbourne
The video with some notes and links posted in my facebook page https://www.facebook.com/arindam.banerjee.31149359/--
Jos
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 427 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 36:30:41 |
| Calls: | 9,029 |
| Files: | 13,384 |
| Messages: | 6,008,994 |