Re: Getting there at last...

Le 03/04/2024 à 16:58, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am 02.04.2024 um 09:07 schrieb The Starmaker:

Thomas Heger wrote:

>
Am 30.03.2024 um 11:38 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:

Le 30/03/2024 à 18:48, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am 28.03.2024 um 08:09 schrieb Arindam Banerjee:
>

>
Maybe you like my 'book'
>
>
>
 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
>
>
TH

>
  From your book, the following quote
***
This project was started as a search for the connection between QM and
GR. The connection was hypothesized and assumed to exist (without
knowing it's specific features), since nature has to be understood as an
undivided system. So all theories should describe the same world, but
possibly different aspects. Spacetime is a physical system, hence should
be build out of 'elements' (what are the 'building blocks'). ***
>
Any connection between two theoretical (conjectural, impractical as yet)
notions as QM and GR must necessarily be theoretical as well.

>
Sure.
>
If you try to find a way between to spots (let's call them 'QM' and
'GR'), you need to assume, those spots do in fact exist.
>
It's not the duty of the pathfinder, to prove the existence of the two
endpoints of the way found.
>
If there is actually nothing at these positions, it's actually not his
fault.
>

In theory, the Moon is green cheese with cows jumping over it.

>
No, not really. At least I've never heard of such a theory.
>

People were burnt to death for not believing that the stars moved in
crystal spheres, and the stars were holes in those spheres to let
heavenly light in.

>
Well, that's not quite true, neither.
>
Unfortunately, the catholic church had killed several scientists in
the middle ages, but not because of their discoveries, but because
they were questioning the authority of the church.
>
That authority was meant to be absolute and ANY disobedience could be
punished by death.
>
This has changed significantly and today the pope does not intervene
in physics anymore.
>

>
The justification for QM and GR as practical let alone scientific is not
there.

>
Well, yes, because that was NOT my topic.
>

While there is charm in seeing the moon as green cheese with cows
jumping around it, and there is profit in all the heaven stuff, I see
neither pleasure nor profit from QM and GR, save for the careerists and
their dupes blown by math mumbo-jumbo. I know this is the most powerful
nonsense ever to be globally accepted, in our times, and that deserves
respect.

>
You may rightfully critizise QM and GR, and in a way I would
understand you, but this was not the subject of my 'book'.
>

Those really into physics better study my videos and texts relating to
physics. The US Navy, I find, has appropriated my new design rail gun
for their ships. The Chinese are using a version of that to launch their
warplanes from navy carriers. Facebook is so useful, to present new
discoveries and inventions, and see how they get stolen.

>
You invented the railgun? ? ? ?

>
Yes, I invented a new design railgun, where the bullet is heavy,
perpendicular to the rails, and the voltage is low. Overall, this design
is 10-100 more efficient than the earlier rail guns of the US as shown
in their pre 2015 videos. So it is practical and has been known since my
first paper on it in 2013. I showed that to my PhD supervisor in 2015,
and I suspect that it was transmitted to the relevant people from that
time. In 2017 I published the details of the invention in a series of
youtube videos.
My idea behind my PhD work (btw I am not a PhD as in the final viva they
said I had not made a working model of a rail gun, which was not what my
supervisor had been saying) was to show that the Lorentz force
accelerating the bullet had no ELECTRICAL reaction.  (Since I have used
a rolling bullet/armature in my videos, there is apparently some
reaction but that is mechanical, due to the treadmill effect.) My
detailed analysis shows inertia violation.

>
I had always thought, that my 'book' was 'revolutionary'.
>
But your research is far more revolutionary than mine.
>
So, hope the best for you, but see trouble ahead, because you are
stepping on a lot of feet.
>
It's interesting, anyhow.
>
btw: I had 'published' my 'book' as google doc presentation, which
worked quite well.
>
This format is a little bit similar to usual websites. That's why I took it.
>
TH

>
a new design railgun is not the invention of a railgun.

I did not claim to invent what someone else did, long ago, very inefficiently. wiki gives details. It was your idea that I had invented the railgun, not mine. Mine is a new invention, which is what I claimed.  It follows the basic theory of the earlier railgun designs, but the construction is different, so a light version was indeed possible, to investigate whether or not it had reaction like normal guns.  The answer is no, it does not have any electrical reaction, but there are mechanical reaction effects due to the rolling treadmill effect.
Indeed it is very different to the kind of rail gun which was in vogue around the time I made my invention (the first working model in 2015, then improved in 2017 with full explanations.  Latest in 2023.
It uses low voltage, heavy armature and most importantly the bullet is perpendicular to the rails.
Now that new design of mine, which was a working model but as I said with full theory and experiment given in the 2017 videos, has been appropriated by the US Navy and shown in a facebook post. Good.
https://www.facebook.com/arindam.banerjee.31149359/posts/pfbid02NPjtVodQnUvrB8NW6Tj2cbstBpNAVgK25fPWmW6YKZXVdSj7h3EqaL6B7HJvscwal?comment_id=1357162701648909&notif_id=1711981440917123&notif_t=feedback_reaction_generic&ref=notif
See if you can get the link above, and check out the comments.  See the shape of the barrel.
It is some 100 times better than the one used before.  Much less power consumption, far more force on the bullet which could be a guided missile at hypersonic speeds.
As for my gun, check out
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/VtFeGAkIABg/m/CLPzLRElAwAJ
Follow the link to the 2-sec video.

>
and trying to connect QM and GR is...apples and oranges.

Both are nonsense to me.
When inertia is busted, entropy and relativity and quantum are also busted.
Aether is back, filling the infinite universe.
I hope you realise that one day.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee