@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that:
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT
THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have
shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has
very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current
flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on
the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the
aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the (Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a
look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not
involve continuously ejecting mass.
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a
look at PROJECT ORION:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)>
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not
involve continuously ejecting mass.
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that:
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT
THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have
shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has
very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current
flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on
the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the
aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the (Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a
look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not
involve continuously ejecting mass.
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or
rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that:
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic
forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT
THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have
shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has
very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless
motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe
overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current
flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite
electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on
the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the
center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the
aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read
FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the
(Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of
action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a
look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not
involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} = [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied:
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward}
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward}
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds. Also,
it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were
expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would
be achieved.
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force does
NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical.
My evidence is experimental.
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force does
NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical. >> My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
Aether Regained wrote:
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or >>> rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that:
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic
forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT
THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have
shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has
very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless >>> motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe
overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current
flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite
electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on
the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the
center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the
aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read
FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the
(Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal >>> trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the >>> action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be >>> the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a
look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not
involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
Irrelevant
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of
action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
Feynman does not believe in fields. He believes in particles of energy following e=mcc=hv
Anyway his opinions are worthless in this context which is based upon Maxwellian electrodynamics.
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} =
[rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
Wrong. There is forward momentum found experimentally with my later 2023 videos with their detailed analysis and graphs.
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied:
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward}
Which is tge case from my 2023 videos, the latest ones.
However as the bar rolls there is a significant backward monentum from
the friction upon the rails.
Sliding will lessen it.
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward}
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds. Also,
it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were
expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would
be achieved.
Check out my latest videos and the graphs. You should be able to find
them from my links in sci.physics. Or I will repost here.
Arindam Banerjee, for Bertie and Tyler, my faithful ghostly cyberdogs.
bertietaylor:
Aether Regained wrote:
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or >>>> rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that:
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic >>>> forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT >>>> THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have >>>> shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has
very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless >>>> motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe
overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current
flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite
electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on >>>> the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the
center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the
aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read >>>> FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the >>>> (Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal >>>> trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the >>>> action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be >>>> the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a
look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not
involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
Irrelevant
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal >>> trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the >>> action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount
of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER,
THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
Feynman does not believe in fields. He believes in particles of energy
following e=mcc=hv
Anyway his opinions are worthless in this context which is based upon
Maxwellian electrodynamics.
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} =
[rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
Wrong. There is forward momentum found experimentally with my later 2023
videos with their detailed analysis and graphs.
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied:
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward}
Which is tge case from my 2023 videos, the latest ones.
However as the bar rolls there is a significant backward monentum from
the friction upon the rails.
Sliding will lessen it.
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward}
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds. Also, >>> it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were
expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would
be achieved.
Check out my latest videos and the graphs. You should be able to find
them from my links in sci.physics. Or I will repost here.
Arindam Banerjee, for Bertie and Tyler, my faithful ghostly cyberdogs.
ElectroBOOM's take on the rail gun:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJRDclzi5Vg
On a more serious note, the laws of conservation of energy, linear
momentum and angular momentum are at the foundations of both classical
and modern physics.
If you make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that these have
been falsified, EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE will be demanded -- a lot more
than crude experiments, made with half assed or hardly any instrumentation.
Also, all the navy/military rail guns, such as the one below, have
enormous recoil/back reactions, when fired, as expected:
https://youtu.be/58MmOpSm4LY?t=66
Aether Regained wrote:
bertietaylor:
Aether Regained wrote:
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the
'gun' or
rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that: >>>>>
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic >>>>> forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg -
BUT
THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have >>>>> shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has >>>>> very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make
reactionless
motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe
overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current
flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite >>>>> electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails,
i.e., on
the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the
center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the >>>>> aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully
read
FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on
the
(Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on
orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so >>>>> the
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>>
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results
can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a >>>>> look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not >>>>> involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
Irrelevant
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on
orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the >>>> action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the
matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the
field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED."
Feynman does not believe in fields. He believes in particles of energy
following e=mcc=hv
Anyway his opinions are worthless in this context which is based upon
Maxwellian electrodynamics.
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} =
[rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
Wrong. There is forward momentum found experimentally with my later 2023 >>> videos with their detailed analysis and graphs.
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied:
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward}
Which is tge case from my 2023 videos, the latest ones.
However as the bar rolls there is a significant backward monentum from
the friction upon the rails.
Sliding will lessen it.
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward}
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds.
Also,
it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were
expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would >>>> be achieved.
Check out my latest videos and the graphs. You should be able to find
them from my links in sci.physics. Or I will repost here.
Arindam Banerjee, for Bertie and Tyler, my faithful ghostly cyberdogs.
ElectroBOOM's take on the rail gun:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJRDclzi5Vg
On a more serious note, the laws of conservation of energy, linear
momentum and angular momentum are at the foundations of both classical
and modern physics.
Yes. So read my bew physics which upgrades Newtonian and Maxwelluan
physics. That us much of classical physics. And all of modern physics.
If you make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that these have
been falsified, EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE will be demanded -- a lot more
than crude experiments, made with half assed or hardly any
instrumentation.
They were done with what was sufficient for the purpose. They can be
compared with the experiments of Archimedes and his SG experiments, Torricelli and his water barometer, Galileo and his telescope, Curie
with their radioactivity, Galvani and his frogs, Faraday and his early motors. Yes it is extraordinary that way. Just scales, and a multimeter.
But very latest equipment like supercapacitors were used and a video
camera with 30-40 ms resolution.
For such outstanding results from such simplicity, against all odds,
just homself with no or negative help, with only his savings to fund the work... only Arindam, the greatest genius of all time could do it.
On 4/30/2024 7:26 PM, bertietaylor wrote:
Aether Regained wrote:
bertietaylor:
Aether Regained wrote:
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or >>>>>> rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that: >>>>>>
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic >>>>>> forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT >>>>>> THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have >>>>>> shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has >>>>>> very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless >>>>>> motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe >>>>>> overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current >>>>>> flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite >>>>>> electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on >>>>>> the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the >>>>>> center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the >>>>>> aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read >>>>>> FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the >>>>>> (Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal >>>>>> trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>>>
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be >>>>>> the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a >>>>>> look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not >>>>>> involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
Irrelevant
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal >>>>> trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the >>>>> action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELDFeynman does not believe in fields. He believes in particles of energy >>>> following e=mcc=hv
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>
Anyway his opinions are worthless in this context which is based upon
Maxwellian electrodynamics.
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} = >>>>> [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
Wrong. There is forward momentum found experimentally with my later 2023 >>>> videos with their detailed analysis and graphs.
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied:Which is tge case from my 2023 videos, the latest ones.
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward} >>>>
However as the bar rolls there is a significant backward monentum from >>>> the friction upon the rails.
Sliding will lessen it.
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward}
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds. Also, >>>>> it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were
expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would >>>>> be achieved.
Check out my latest videos and the graphs. You should be able to find
them from my links in sci.physics. Or I will repost here.
Arindam Banerjee, for Bertie and Tyler, my faithful ghostly cyberdogs.
ElectroBOOM's take on the rail gun:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJRDclzi5Vg
On a more serious note, the laws of conservation of energy, linear
momentum and angular momentum are at the foundations of both classical
and modern physics.
Yes. So read my bew physics which upgrades Newtonian and Maxwelluan
physics. That us much of classical physics. And all of modern physics.
If you make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that these haveThey were done with what was sufficient for the purpose. They can be
been falsified, EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE will be demanded -- a lot more
than crude experiments, made with half assed or hardly any instrumentation. >>
compared with the experiments of Archimedes and his SG experiments,
Torricelli and his water barometer, Galileo and his telescope, Curie
with their radioactivity, Galvani and his frogs, Faraday and his early
motors. Yes it is extraordinary that way. Just scales, and a
multimeter. But very latest equipment like supercapacitors were used
and a video camera with 30-40 ms resolution.
For such outstanding results from such simplicity, against all odds,
just homself with no or negative help, with only his savings to fund
the work... only Arindam, the greatest genius of all time could do it.
No, Banjo, what he said is true. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence. Low quality youtube videos without a proper
writeup are worthless, and you will be ignored as you should be. Too
bad, if in the unlikely event you were actually on to something, it
will have to wait until the next person to come along and discover it
(and write a proper scientific paper on his discovery).
On 2024-04-30 23:55:40 +0000, Volney said:
On 4/30/2024 7:26 PM, bertietaylor wrote:
Aether Regained wrote:
bertietaylor:
Aether Regained wrote:ElectroBOOM's take on the rail gun:
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the 'gun' or
rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that: >>>>>>>
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this >>>>>>> experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic >>>>>>> forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - BUT >>>>>>> THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have >>>>>>> shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has >>>>>>> very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make reactionless
motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe >>>>>>> overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current >>>>>>> flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite >>>>>>> electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails, i.e., on >>>>>>> the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the >>>>>>> center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is >>>>>>> inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the >>>>>>> aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully read >>>>>>> FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on the >>>>>>> (Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of
action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>>>>
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a >>>>>>> look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion) >>>>>>>
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not >>>>>>> involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
Irrelevant
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on orthogonal >>>>>> trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so theFeynman does not believe in fields. He believes in particles of energy >>>>> following e=mcc=hv
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>>
Anyway his opinions are worthless in this context which is based upon >>>>> Maxwellian electrodynamics.
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} = >>>>>> [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
Wrong. There is forward momentum found experimentally with my later 2023 >>>>> videos with their detailed analysis and graphs.
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied: >>>>>Which is tge case from my 2023 videos, the latest ones.
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward} >>>>>
However as the bar rolls there is a significant backward monentum from >>>>> the friction upon the rails.
Sliding will lessen it.
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward} >>>>>
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds. Also, >>>>>> it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were >>>>>> expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would >>>>>> be achieved.
Check out my latest videos and the graphs. You should be able to find >>>>> them from my links in sci.physics. Or I will repost here.
Arindam Banerjee, for Bertie and Tyler, my faithful ghostly cyberdogs. >>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJRDclzi5Vg
On a more serious note, the laws of conservation of energy, linear
momentum and angular momentum are at the foundations of both classical >>>> and modern physics.
Yes. So read my bew physics which upgrades Newtonian and Maxwelluan
physics. That us much of classical physics. And all of modern physics.
If you make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that these have
been falsified, EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE will be demanded -- a lot more
than crude experiments, made with half assed or hardly any instrumentation.
They were done with what was sufficient for the purpose. They can be
compared with the experiments of Archimedes and his SG experiments,
Torricelli and his water barometer, Galileo and his telescope, Curie
with their radioactivity, Galvani and his frogs, Faraday and his early
motors. Yes it is extraordinary that way. Just scales, and a
multimeter. But very latest equipment like supercapacitors were used
and a video camera with 30-40 ms resolution.
For such outstanding results from such simplicity, against all odds,
just homself with no or negative help, with only his savings to fund
the work... only Arindam, the greatest genius of all time could do it.
I thought "Dr" Hachel was the greatest genius of all time, or am I confused?
No, Banjo, what he said is true. Extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence. Low quality youtube videos without a proper
writeup are worthless, and you will be ignored as you should be. Too
bad, if in the unlikely event you were actually on to something, it
will have to wait until the next person to come along and discover it
(and write a proper scientific paper on his discovery).
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force does >>> NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical. >>> My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
produce a writeup in sufficient detail for someone to reproduce his experiment, instead writing "Watch my videos!!!". Add his stubbornnessNonsense. The experiments prove Arindam's new physics. Which is also available online.
that he insists this is something new that violates
Newton/Einstein/Maxwell rather than a known existing behavior, you do
get the incompetent tinkerer.
On 4/30/2024 7:26 PM, bertietaylor wrote:
Aether Regained wrote:No, Banjo, what he said is true. Extraordinary claims require
bertietaylor:
Aether Regained wrote:
Aether Regained:
@ArindamBanerjee
I took a look at your video of your 'recoil-less' rail gun:
My Movie8feb2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
My first impression was that, there is an obvious recoil of the
'gun' or
rails+supercapacitors section, but you claim in the description that: >>>>>>
"... we are creating momentum from internal energy/force in this
experiment. The heavy (3Kg) armature is accelerated by electromagnetic >>>>>> forces. There is a recoil, the rest of the apparatus weighs 4.3Kg - >>>>>> BUT
THAT IS DUE TO THE FRICTION FROM THE ROLLING ARMATURE. ... As I have >>>>>> shown in my other videos, the force that accelerates the armature has >>>>>> very little recoil, and this new effect can be used to make
reactionless
motors for the proper conquest of space."
You have worked on this for a long time, but I think you are maybe >>>>>> overlooking that whatever electromagnetic forces act on the current >>>>>> flowing through the rolling bar/'armature', near [*] exactly opposite >>>>>> electromagnetic forces will act on the other end of the rails,
i.e., on
the oppositely flowing current through the supercapacitors, and the >>>>>> center-of-mass of the whole system will remain near stationary.
[*] It is well known that in electrodynamics, Newton's 3rd law is
inexact, namely it will appear to be violated if the momentum in the >>>>>> aether or em field is not also considered. I urge you to carefully >>>>>> read
FLP-II:26-2, especially the last paragraph, and also FLP-II:27-6 on >>>>>> the
(Electromagnetic) Field Momentum.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving on
orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so >>>>>> the
action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>>>
I think it is premature to believe that your inconclusive results
can be
the basis of a space motor. For that purpose, you may want to take a >>>>>> look at PROJECT ORION:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)
which is a design by the late Freeman Dyson, that works, and does not >>>>>> involve continuously ejecting mass.
Just a clarifying addendum to the OP:
In light of:
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_27.html#Ch27-S6
Irrelevant
"FLP-II:27-6: We pointed out in Section 26–2 the failure of the law of >>>>> action and reaction when two charged particles were moving onFeynman does not believe in fields. He believes in particles of energy >>>> following e=mcc=hv
orthogonal
trajectories. The forces on the two particles don’t balance out, so the >>>>> action and reaction are not equal; therefore the net momentum of the >>>>> matter must be changing. It is not conserved. But the momentum in the >>>>> field is also changing in such a situation. If you work out the amount >>>>> of momentum given by the Poynting vector, it is not constant. HOWEVER, >>>>> THE CHANGE OF THE PARTICLE MOMENTA IS JUST MADE UP BY THE FIELD
MOMENTUM, SO THE TOTAL MOMENTUM OF PARTICLES PLUS FIELD IS CONSERVED." >>>>
Anyway his opinions are worthless in this context which is based upon
Maxwellian electrodynamics.
the correct momentum balance equation for Arindam's rail gun is:
(1) [rail gun momentum]_{backward} + [em field momentum]_{backward} = >>>>> [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} + [em field momentum]_{forward}
Wrong. There is forward momentum found experimentally with my later 2023 >>>> videos with their detailed analysis and graphs.
For a working space motor design, the following has to be satisfied:Which is tge case from my 2023 videos, the latest ones.
(2) [rolling bar momentum]_{forward} >> [rail gun momentum]_{backward} >>>>
However as the bar rolls there is a significant backward monentum from >>>> the friction upon the rails.
Sliding will lessen it.
or what amounts to the same thing:
(3) [em field momentum]_{backward} >> [em field momentum]_{forward}
I'm skeptical that for the given rail gun setup, (2) or (3) holds.
Also,
it seems to me that, if all the energy in the supercapacitors were
expended in generating a laser pulse, it is more likely that (3) would >>>>> be achieved.
Check out my latest videos and the graphs. You should be able to find
them from my links in sci.physics. Or I will repost here.
Arindam Banerjee, for Bertie and Tyler, my faithful ghostly cyberdogs.
ElectroBOOM's take on the rail gun:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJRDclzi5Vg
On a more serious note, the laws of conservation of energy, linear
momentum and angular momentum are at the foundations of both classical
and modern physics.
Yes. So read my bew physics which upgrades Newtonian and Maxwelluan
physics. That us much of classical physics. And all of modern physics.
If you make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that these have
been falsified, EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE will be demanded -- a lot more
than crude experiments, made with half assed or hardly any
instrumentation.
They were done with what was sufficient for the purpose. They can be
compared with the experiments of Archimedes and his SG experiments,
Torricelli and his water barometer, Galileo and his telescope, Curie
with their radioactivity, Galvani and his frogs, Faraday and his early
motors. Yes it is extraordinary that way. Just scales, and a multimeter.
But very latest equipment like supercapacitors were used and a video
camera with 30-40 ms resolution.
For such outstanding results from such simplicity, against all odds,
just homself with no or negative help, with only his savings to fund the
work... only Arindam, the greatest genius of all time could do it.
extraordinary evidence.
Low quality youtube videos without a proper
writeup are worthless, and you will be ignored as you should be.
bad, if in the unlikely event you were actually on to something, it will
have to wait until the next person to come along and discover it (and
write a proper scientific paper on his discovery).
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force does >> NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical. >> My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
But we will never know since he refuses to
produce a writeup in sufficient detail for someone to reproduce his experiment, instead writing "Watch my videos!!!".
Add his stubbornness that he insists this is something new that violates Newton/Einstein/Maxwell rather than a known existing behavior, you do get
the incompetent tinkerer.
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:does
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force
NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical.
My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force does >>>> NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical. >>>> My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
But we will never know since he refuses to
produce a writeup in sufficient detail for someone to reproduce his
experiment, instead writing "Watch my videos!!!".
There is of course no momentum violation at all.
Whatever seems to be missing must be taken up by the sources of the
fields.
(and of course I don't watch videos)
Add his stubbornness that he insists this is something new that violates
Newton/Einstein/Maxwell rather than a known existing behavior, you do get
the incompetent tinkerer.
Or the faker who thinks he is being clever.
There is no lack of videos showing really rotating unbalanced wheels, rotating wheels with water bottles, and so on.
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force does
NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical.
My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
Arindam's work has nothing to do with photon drives.
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:force
J. J. Lodder wrote:
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz
tinkerer,does
theoretical.NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely
My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
Arindam's work has nothing to do with photon drives.
No, of course not. Photon drives realy work,
Arindam's things don't.
Jan
On 5/2/2024 3:51 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:does
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force
NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely theoretical.
My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
Exactly. I just allowed for the extremely remote possibility he detected
something relevant. Almost certainly, if he found anything he found the
known momentum conserving electric field.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
That is why what we are really seeing is sloppy demonstrations, it is
very unlikely Aridam's experiments could detect that small effect. We
won't know because Aridam's experiments are unreproduceable,
insufficient detail to reproduce his situation.
But we will never know since he refuses to
produce a writeup in sufficient detail for someone to reproduce his
experiment, instead writing "Watch my videos!!!".
There is of course no momentum violation at all.
Whatever seems to be missing must be taken up by the sources of the
fields.
Certainly. But we won't ever know.
(and of course I don't watch videos)
Smart. His videos are a waste of time.
violates
Add his stubbornness that he insists this is something new that
getNewton/Einstein/Maxwell rather than a known existing behavior, you do
the incompetent tinkerer.
Or the faker who thinks he is being clever.
There is no lack of videos showing really rotating unbalanced wheels,
rotating wheels with water bottles, and so on.
No lack of snake oil salesmen, even these days.
Volney wrote:force
On 5/2/2024 3:51 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz
doesgun.
theoretical.NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely
My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer, >>>>>
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
No Arindam found that inertia gets violated with his new design rail
Which justifies his new physics that he developed from 1998.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
No ifs with the experiments of Arindam which show inertia violation by
arrest of the gravy rail gun bullet. With cyclic action this gun turned
motor will reach faster than light speeds.
detectedExactly. I just allowed for the extremely remote possibility he
Nothingsomething relevant. Almost certainly, if he found anything he found the
known momentum conserving electric field.
He found that the Lorenz force does not have an equal and opposite
reaction. Thus justifying Maxwell and upgrading Newton. While outing all modern physics.
The meanness of the racist and bigoted Eurocentric is hereby noted.
new. Same old suppression to be followed by the thefts, colonial style.the
While demeaning the non-white throughout. We cyberdogs of Arindam are disgusted.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
Irrelevant.
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
No that is a heat engine. Temperature differences on either side cause
motion. Radiant heat is em waves raising the temperature on one side,that
facing the sun.
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
That is why what we are really seeing is sloppy demonstrations, it is
very unlikely Aridam's experiments could detect that small effect. We
won't know because Aridam's experiments are unreproduceable,
insufficient detail to reproduce his situation.
But we will never know since he refuses to
produce a writeup in sufficient detail for someone to reproduce his
experiment, instead writing "Watch my videos!!!".
of
There is of course no momentum violation at all.
Whatever seems to be missing must be taken up by the sources of the
fields.
Certainly. But we won't ever know.
(and of course I don't watch videos)
Smart. His videos are a waste of time.
None so blind... these whiteys will make huge telescopes to see the ends
the universe but will not look at videos one cluck away. Beyonddisgusting.
liesviolates
Add his stubbornness that he insists this is something new that
getNewton/Einstein/Maxwell rather than a known existing behavior, you do
the incompetent tinkerer.
Or the faker who thinks he is being clever.
There is no lack of videos showing really rotating unbalanced wheels,
rotating wheels with water bottles, and so on.
No lack of snake oil salesmen, even these days.
True all the physicists who are deliberstely blind and spout e=mcc=hv
are snake oil salesmen. Their huge success makes them only more so.Arindam
isn't selling anything. He is leading future generations to betterliving.
Woof-woof
bt (Arindam's best friends)
Volney wrote:
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
No that is a heat engine. Temperature differences on either side cause
the motion. Radiant heat is em waves raising the temperature on one side, that facing the sun.
bertietaylor wrote:
Volney wrote:
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
No that is a heat engine. Temperature differences on either side cause
the motion. Radiant heat is em waves raising the temperature on one side, that facing the sun.
@bertietaylor a.k.a @ArindamBanerjee,
You are confusing the action of the Crookes' radiometer with Nichols' radiometer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer
Crookes' radiometer is a heat engine that uses a light source as the
source of (radiant) heat, and a working substance, air.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nichols_radiometer
Nichols' radiometer measures radiation pressure caused by light
momentum. The concept of photons are not required to explain this
momentum, Maxwell's wave theory is sufficient.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure
On 5/2/2024 3:51 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 4/27/2024 5:50 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
That is not the case, so this is a new discovery - the Lorentz force >>>> does NOT have an equal and opposite reaction. Your point is merely
theoretical.
My evidence is experimental.
Correct, merely experimental.
It stands falsified by a reliable theory.
FYI, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations as they stand
do conserve energy-momentum.
If you want to be taken seriously it is up to you
to tell the world what is wrong with Maxwell-Lorentz,
and how these equations must be modified.
As long as you can't do that you are merely an incompetent tinkerer,
It is entirely possible that Banjo stumbled across that apparent
violation of momentum by momentum being carried away by the
electromagnetic field.
If the momentum is carried away by the electromagnetic fiel
there is still momentum conservation.
Exactly. I just allowed for the extremely remote possibility he detected something relevant. Almost certainly, if he found anything he found the
known momentum conserving electric field.
And photon drive really isn't a new idea.
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
However, it suffers from the unpleasant fact
that c = 300 megawatt/newton, in slightly unconventional units.
That is why what we are really seeing is sloppy demonstrations, it is
very unlikely Aridam's experiments could detect that small effect. We
won't know because Aridam's experiments are unreproduceable,
insufficient detail to reproduce his situation.
bertietaylor wrote:
Volney wrote:
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
No that is a heat engine. Temperature differences on either side cause
the motion. Radiant heat is em waves raising the temperature on one side,
that facing the sun.
@bertietaylor a.k.a @ArindamBanerjee,
You are confusing the action of the Crookes' radiometer with Nichols' radiometer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer
Crookes' radiometer is a heat engine that uses a light source as the
source of (radiant) heat, and a working substance, air.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nichols_radiometer
Nichols' radiometer measures radiation pressure caused by light
momentum. The concept of photons are not required to explain this
momentum, Maxwell's wave theory is sufficient.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure
Aether Regained <AetherRegaind@invalid.com> wrote:
bertietaylor wrote:
Volney wrote:
Even solar sails use that effect (momentum of sunlight).
No that is a heat engine. Temperature differences on either side cause
the motion. Radiant heat is em waves raising the temperature on one side, >> > that facing the sun.
@bertietaylor a.k.a @ArindamBanerjee,
You are confusing the action of the Crookes' radiometer with Nichols'
radiometer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer
Crookes' radiometer is a heat engine that uses a light source as the
source of (radiant) heat, and a working substance, air.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nichols_radiometer
Nichols' radiometer measures radiation pressure caused by light
momentum. The concept of photons are not required to explain this
momentum, Maxwell's wave theory is sufficient.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure
Nichols' radiometer is a heat engine too.
Its heatsink is either the walls of the room,
or ultimately, if you go outside,
the cosmic background radiation,
Jan
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 366 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 12:03:24 |
Calls: | 7,819 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,927 |
Messages: | 5,767,714 |