Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net>
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Arindam Banerjee's peer-reviewed 2013 paper
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 07:51:15 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <h0po2l-pdah2.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net>
References: <vivjmk$1m4s8$1@dont-email.me> <a6e2eb95631b7c655d8f67ceecad9d0b@www.novabbs.com> <829d9004f20fdfa2f6d626a89ff1cfec@www.novabbs.com> <rfdj2l-c8492.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net> <14ef7000e489f3684eeeaa9d69a64b5b@www.novabbs.com> <o40m2l-86vc2.ln1@gonzo.specsol.net> <8ddc01118204e64b5e2e54eda3549fab@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 17:01:04 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e8853a5cbeeca745baf2a6207d6b6200";
	logging-data="1705846"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19eb8ysNo0+yR5KepwjJhYB"
User-Agent: tin/2.6.2-20220130 ("Convalmore") (Linux/5.15.0-126-lowlatency (x86_64))
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Fxu62+e6HtBsDRptYJFSnV9PY0w=
Bytes: 2685

Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:34:34 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
> 
>> Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:03:57 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
>>>
>>>> bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Woof-woof, Arindam allowed me to post the background info. about rail
>>>>> guns in his 2013 seminal paper on the rail gun.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Arindam Banerjee and Dr. P J Radcliffe
>>>>> School of Electrical and Computer Engineering
>>>>> Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
>>>>> Melbourne, Australia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Abstract—Recent experimental work on model rail guns shows very little
>>>>> recoil upon the rails for the static case, where the armature or
>>>>> projectile does not move.
>>>>
>>>> Of course there is no recoil in this case because recoil requires
>>>> *MOTION*
>>>> as in Newton's laws of *MOTION*, crackpot.
>>>
>>> Not so, ridiculous fool. Motion relates to velocity and momentum whereas
>>> recoil is a force measured by mass and acceleration.
>>
>> And acceleration is the first derivative of velocity, crackpot!
> 
> Wow penisnino you have heard about derivatives but have no clue about
> what they mean.

I know very well what they mean while you obviously don't when you 
spout utter nonsense such as static recoil, crackpot.