Re: do you believe we can quantize gravity?

Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 3:42:13 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
 

Bertietaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
>
<snip old craP>
>

Fully agree so all decent scientists must carefully read and see the
physics works of Arindam. Then verify by repeating his rail gun

>
It seems that you haven't a clue what the word "railgun" means crackpot.
>
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
>
"A railgun or rail gun, sometimes referred to as a rail cannon, is a
linear motor device, typically designed as a weapon, that uses
electromagnetic force to launch high-velocity projectiles."
>
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rail%20gun
>
"an electromagnetic catapult designed to hurl projectiles at
extremely high speeds"
>
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/rail-gun
>
"a weapon consisting of a pair of parallel conductive rails, using a
magnetic field and electric current to launch projectiles at very
high velocity"
>
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/railgun
>
"a gun that uses electromagnetic force to propel a projectile at
very high speeds"
>
https://www.yourdictionary.com/rail-gun
>
"A weapon, consisting mainly of conducting metal rails, that uses
electromagnetic force to accelerate a projectile to a much greater
speed than that achieved by conventional chemical propellant weapons."
>
To be a railgun, the device has to launch a projectile.
>
All your videos clearly show that your device propels an armature down
a track at low speed where it falls off at the end. That is NOT a
railgun
and is nothing more than a linear motor.

 
It is most certainly a linear motor like a railgun but over 1000 times
more efficient with its new design.

The effiency of homopolar linear motors designed with 2 rails as in a
railgun is about 50%, so your motor is 50,000% efficient, crackpot?

<snip raving nonsense>