Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertietaylor)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: On Arindam Banerjee's recoil-less rail gun and Newton's 3rd Law
 violations in electrodynamics
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 02:40:00 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <d68037a841847b41d26b90d1af8def77@www.novabbs.com>
References: <uvb7db$2bj35$1@tor.dont-email.me> <v06bmr$13rob$1@tor.dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2483751"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="jh4HcpQ+hhhSYfMNELHwaYsVz4DxLTJw0pxiKoD05d4";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: cdf973c28ddff5d1d1235bf54e7ff9676b462801
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$lMDJGLjR4ZXGDXlWI8hxPu53h4T1Jx0ZRnitlkTFPTYZWNOzvpDQS
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 6010
Lines: 104

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.