Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<49bb9bb5d3ec5f2fb1964f5b414deb4d@www.novabbs.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertietaylor) Newsgroups: sci.physics Subject: Re: do you believe we can quantize =?UTF-8?B?Z3Jhdml0eT8=?= Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 20:47:05 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Message-ID: <49bb9bb5d3ec5f2fb1964f5b414deb4d@www.novabbs.com> References: <j9oiptyjxgxi$.dlg@tomato.potato> <lqsstk-85j62.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net> <678b32e2a0eba553fdcf24b9489cc5d5@www.novabbs.com> <4e36753b-0086-f154-ff9f-9569905d4d03@ichigo.kinoko.kuri> <8a2fec3afd134f31003049fa8aa4d201@www.novabbs.com> <j9p3uk-1isg2.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net> <e8c2adfd5adcc814df0a29c26f68f3d9@www.novabbs.com> <09n8uk-v4h6.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net> <d641367af84e80efbc3322286f2d7660@www.novabbs.com> <hn29uk-cap6.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2643198"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="4CIDjmRjWbqC4EEN5EcU+HA+pIaOwwy51Z63DnRPIoA"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 X-Rslight-Posting-User: d1111375bdddd1d0b42e6fbe96c9934b24d8a010 X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$G3ZJ/GEaqQrl535NdhlQW.I0YGl/laIOuefXs1cUVceYTRJ2FlcOi Bytes: 2988 Lines: 41 On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 3:53:55 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote: > Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote: >> You are incapable of comprehension, Penisnino. > > You said your device has 1000 times better efficiency while I pointed > out that exiting devices have about 50% efficiency, Idiot you have no clue about engineering. There are many parameters related to efficiency not just making up figures on the fly as you did. Arindam's design is certainly 1000 times at least better as it can be used for making practical reactionless motors for outer space and very fast near space travel. Infinitely better really for there is no hope from existing designs for anr reactionless motor mode. As a gun it will be a infinitely better for with very heavy and slow armature it can be used for mining and construction by impact drilling. Not possible with existing designs. As a weapon it will cause - well Arindam does not want to go into that unless the Australian Govt wants superior air defence. But given lack of barrel wear, capability to launch not just heavy bullets but missiles at supersonic speeds, comparatively low voltages for the high currents, far greater L factor with new maths, easy scalability - yes it will be at least 1000 times better from overall performance efficiency as a weapon. Woof-woof Bertietaylor (Arindam's celestial cyberdogs) which means your > device has a 50,000% effiency, which is obviously ridiculous crackpot. Go away, Penisnino, and chant your simple mantra e=MCC 300000000 times. All you show is that you are > > <snip delusional raving unread>