Re: On Arindam Banerjee's recoil-less rail gun and Newton's 3rd Law violations in electrodynamics

Volney wrote:

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 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.
 

No, Banjo, what he said is true. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Which Arindam has provided for the whole world to see. It is not his fault that his genius ideas and experimental eork is dismissed by the vested interests. Nothing new here, of course.

Low quality youtube videos without a proper writeup are worthless, and you will be ignored as you should be.

They are not low quality. That is a typical lie. They are conclusive evidence of Arindam's ideas which is obvious to all honest and scientific people. They are detailed painstakingly. All information is oresented online and is free to all. Much better than any paper in a journal. The experiments can be easily repeated by anyone and the results and conclusions verified. That way it is novel. One gets out of the clutches of the estanlishments. Freedom. 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).

No doubt there will be efforts to steal Arindam's work as you suggest. Thieves rule. However youtube gives wide publicity and that should deter the thieves. Like if one thief claims the genius work then the others will say no, Arindam has done it starting from 2015. Online publication naturally outs plagiarism. There are too many onlookers.
bt (Arindam's ghostly cyberdogs and his best friends)