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

Le 06/05/2024 à 07:18, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) a écrit :

Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> wrote:
 

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).

 Radiation pressure must be taken into account
when calculating corrections to satellite orbits.
 And it costs real dollars, in fuel expended for station keeping
for geostationary sats, so it is really real.
And it was also found to be the cause of the Pioneer anomaly.
 

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.

 Arindam's errors in his original demonstrations
of momentum non-conservation are trivial.

The inertia violations are obvious. There are no errors.
That experiments upsets dearly held theories, reducing them to wrong conjectures.
Science gets the same sort of boost as with the discovery of electricity, air pressure, radioactivity...

A bright high school kid can spot them.

So far none has.
You may try.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

 Jan