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

Aether Regained wrote:
 

@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.

 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.
 

[*] 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.

 I urge you to repeat my experiments honestly and competently instead of persisting with theory proved wrong.
 

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."

 Blah blah. Theoretical stuff. One may as well say the sun goes around the Earth because holy books and great people and Aristotle say so.
 

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.

 Diversion, how unscientific.  Disgusted.
 bt (The ghostly cyberdogs of Arindam who know better physics than Nobel laureates)