Re: Getting there at last...

Liste des Groupes 
Sujet : Re: Getting there at last...
De : banerjeeadda1234 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Arindam Banerjee)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity sci.physics sci.math
Date : 02. Apr 2024, 09:38:40
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Nemoweb
Message-ID : <AwNHa33OTto93tgHGw_X4ucJZ-Y@jntp>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Nemo/0.999a
Le 02/04/2024 à 16:51, Thomas Heger a écrit :
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.
The research period was from 1998 - 2015.  It is development time now.  Thanks very much.
 So, hope the best for you, but see trouble ahead, because you are stepping on a lot of feet.
Never a truer word was said.  I am glad that at least one physicist in the universe is not mocking or ignoring me.  That is a start.
 It's interesting, anyhow.
Well, it will take a lot of money to make a working prototype of an internal force machine that will replace all rockets and jet engines.
How I can earn that money, is my present concern.  Let us see if my next project (making a very cheap "free energy" drive) works as my maths/intuition says is should. I have found no patents for that, and that is good.
 btw: I had 'published' my 'book' as google doc presentation, which worked quite well.
My book "To the Stars" was published in Jan 2000 in my new "adda" website. I presented my new formula e=0.5mVVN(N-k) to explain mass and energy relationships on a kinetic and non-destructive basis. It got some attention when in 2003 there was a global news release about this work relating to updating Newtonian laws, with deliberate inertia violation using Lorentz force, it that had no reaction.  Had I been taken seriously then, we would have been making daily trips to the Moon by now, and gearing up for space mining, etc.
Unfortunately for "modern physicists", as I right (from my inertia violation experiments) they are all wrong. I don't expect them to like being wrong, so resistance from their side is to be expected.  I can only appeal to their commitment to the scientific method, which has it that all knowledge is provisional, and so subject to revision or expulsion.
Look at the gains. Burning all the e=mcc=hv stuff and updating physics will create plenty of jobs for physicists and engineers, for all time to come!  No end of learning and finding, with new machines always going for new things.  Why stick to the old and rotten, the senseless and the constricting? May truth overcome the cunning of the globally established liars. With my physics, the universe gets infinite like human potential. Courage!
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
The violation of inertia with a new design rail gun in motor mode
Arindam Banerjee,
HTN Research Pty Ltd. Melbourne
10 Nov 2023
(All rights reserved)
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/VtFeGAkIABg/m/CLPzLRElAwAJ
***
Experiments (2022) showing my invention of a new kind of rail gun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYtyOMbgiZ0
Which is improved upon in, and its potential for ejecting matter into near space , and horizontal tunneling shown in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6pjy0Wvujs&t=19s
and the following shows how a new class of linear motor violating inertia can be developed by arresting the momentum of the armature and imparting that to the whole system, giving it an increased velocity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idsIuzEajTc&t=2s
*****
Introduction to "A New Look Towards the Principles of Motion"
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/1wmee5C8mFs/kJMPdnFkAwAJ
Section 1
Linear Motion, Momentum, Force, Energy, Internal Force Engines, and the design of Interstellar Spacecraft
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/GbpQC3a2d1Q/jSXQeb9kAwAJ
Section 1 (contd.)
Linear Motion, Momentum, Force, Energy, Internal Force Engines, and the design of Interstellar Spacecraft
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/P9ZiinIDhHU/ZtMQVyliBQAJ
Section 2
The Creation and Destruction of Energy
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/wY6_9V8ucSY/3nnJQk9iBQAJ
Section 3
The Structure of Heavenly Bodies
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/8jH-SQIFFDo/O1jn3HpiBQAJ
Section 4
The Nature of Explosion
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/7TkOVZigFHg/uv43_aZiBQAJ
Section 5
The forces involved in rotational motion
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/jhgcsTq-NrQ/ZBwG8S9jBQAJ
*******
2017 videos of rail gun experiments with theory in detail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqBfwAClVlg
IFE - 1 Ground Experiments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9eGq4Oiv9s
IFE - 2 Experimental setups
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3hC48BMrno
IFE - 3 Pendulum experiments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sSPxGsLkws
IFE - 4 Evolution of spaceship
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdM6UDPauU
IFE - 5 Hydrogen Transmission Network
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUAcx7rAplc
IFE - 6 Spaceship Design
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5Zbpvc3fdA
IFE - 7 Anti-Gravity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA9LUwqMhxY
IFE - 8 New Physics
****
The physics aphorisms of Arindam
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/8HgH3sbRe94/m/gYzu9OAkAgAJ
The cause of gravity https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/mmigkl3yZYc/m/8Rs16NCXAAAJ
Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 1
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/6UIGDNHH7n0/m/U0t-kYqgAAAJ
Explaining the nova and supernova phenomena with new physics theories - 2
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/CffbGTXV72c/m/5ONP6J6gAAAJ
*****

 This format is a little bit similar to usual websites. That's why I took it.
    TH

Date Sujet#  Auteur
21 Mar 24 * Re: ? ? ?49bertitaylor
23 Mar 24 `* Re: ? ? ?48Thomas Heger
23 Mar 24  +* Re: ? ? ?37bertitaylor
26 Mar 24  i+* Re: ? ? ?15Arindam Banerjee
26 Mar 24  ii`* Re: ? ? ?14Thean Nogushi Hatoyama
27 Mar 24  ii `* Re: ? ? ?13Arindam Banerjee
27 Mar 24  ii  +* Re: ? ? ?3Athel Cornish-Bowden
27 Mar 24  ii  i+- Re: ? ? ?1J. J. Lodder
27 Mar 24  ii  i`- Re: ? ? ?1Arindam Banerjee
27 Mar 24  ii  `* Re: ? ? ?9Jed László Barabás
27 Mar 24  ii   `* Re: ? ? ?8Arindam Banerjee
27 Mar 24  ii    `* Re: ? ? ?7Thaddeus Horiatis Demetrious
28 Mar 24  ii     `* Re: ? ? ?6Arindam Banerjee
28 Mar 24  ii      `* Re: ? ? ?5Yasmani Hasekura
28 Mar 24  ii       `* Re: ? ? ?4Arindam Banerjee
28 Mar 24  ii        `* Re: ? ? ?3Leland Behtenev Basov
28 Mar 24  ii         +- Re: ? ? ?1Arindam Banerjee
28 Mar 24  ii         `- Re: ? ? ?1Chris M. Thomasson
27 Mar 24  i`* Getting there at last...21Arindam Banerjee
28 Mar 24  i `* Re: Getting there at last...20Thomas Heger
28 Mar 24  i  `* Re: Getting there at last...19Arindam Banerjee
30 Mar 24  i   `* Re: Getting there at last...18Thomas Heger
30 Mar 24  i    `* Re: Getting there at last...17Arindam Banerjee
2 Apr 24  i     `* Re: Getting there at last...16Thomas Heger
2 Apr 24  i      +* Re: Getting there at last...4Arindam Banerjee
2 Apr 24  i      i`* Re: Getting there at last...3Chris M. Thomasson
3 Apr 24  i      i `* Re: Getting there at last...2Arindam Banerjee
8 Apr 24  i      i  `- Re: Getting there at last...1Thomas Heger
3 Apr 24  i      `* Re: Getting there at last...11Thomas Heger
3 Apr 24  i       +- Re: Getting there at last...1Yusney Turaev Momotov
4 Apr 24  i       `* Re: Getting there at last...9Arindam Banerjee
5 Apr 24  i        `* Re: Getting there at last...8Thomas Heger
6 Apr 24  i         `* Re: Getting there at last...7Arindam Banerjee
6 Apr 24  i          `* Re: Getting there at last...6Thomas Heger
6 Apr 24  i           +- Re: Getting there at last...1Python
6 Apr 24  i           +- Re: Getting there at last...1Jim Pennino
7 Apr 24  i           `* Re: Getting there at last...3Arindam Banerjee
7 Apr 24  i            `* Re: Getting there at last...2Thomas Heger
8 Apr 24  i             `- Re: Getting there at last...1Arindam Banerjee
23 Mar 24  `* Re: ? ? ?10Yatzyk Trampotova
25 Mar 24   `* Re: ? ? ?9Thomas Heger
25 Mar 24    +- Re: ? ? ?1Evasio Alexandropoulos
2 Apr 24    `* Re: ? ? ?7Jim Pennino
2 Apr 24     `* Re: ? ? ?6Jim Pennino
4 Apr 24      `* Re: ? ? ?5Jim Pennino
4 Apr 24       `* Re: ? ? ?4Jim Pennino
5 Apr 24        +* Re: ? ? ?2Colin Mcdonald
5 Apr 24        i`- Re: ? ? ?1Jim Pennino
5 Apr 24        `- Re: ? ? ?1Jim Pennino

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal