On Wednesday, 16 February 2022 at 09:54:54 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
> On 22/02/14 11:57 PM,
banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 08:45:33 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
> >> On 22/02/14 10:36 PM,
banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 15 February 2022 at 05:48:22 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
> >>>> On 22/02/13 10:30 PM,
banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 23:09:17 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
> >>>>>> On 22/02/13 1:04 PM,
banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 22:14:01 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 22/02/13 10:49 AM,
banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 13 February 2022 at 03:09:14 UTC+11, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 22/02/11 10:07 PM,
banerjee...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design,
> >>>>>>>>>>> ...
> >>> There is no balancing momentum
> >>
> >> Why do you believe there is no balancing momentum?
> >
> > Because there is no backward momentum and so when not allowed to escape from the barrel, the armature pushes the whole system forward.
> > The theoretical issues are intricate when we go to the details, like the theories of transmission lines. That needs a series of lectures, a proper engineering course for inly the brightest.
> >
> >> Until now
> >> nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
> >
> > True, thanks for this admission
> You are welcome.
>
> > ... but what you say is only true for the rest of the world, not for my original work on this subject of momentum gain by electrical force which was presented in 2017.
>
> OK but then I think the great day was in 2017, not on 8 Feb 2022.
No, the first time I did that was in October 2015. I have the video of the earliest experiment. That apparatus was crude but nevertheless indicated the violation if momentum.
The results of 8 Feb were verified by my wife, so it was a great day. She had not been impressed before, like the rest of the planet. Science is about objectivity, which means more than one person has to agree about something related to experiment.
> Breaking momentum conservation is of much greater importance than
> just making some kind of gun. (You can now also make reaction-
> less drives, or flying saucers. Probably also free energy!)
When you break that law of conservation if momentum you automatically make reactionless drives, flying saucers, and yes energy as from the way it is created by the universe which also being infinite swallows it up. Of course, there is only force which matters in physics. Energy is for businessmen. But that is another story.
Yes in 2015 I did just that with my ancient rail gun of low voltage and heavy armature, a totally new invention. I updated Newtonian laws following my theoretical works developed back in 1999.Since then, i have developed both the theory and the supporting experiments.
> >> The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
> >
> > It does not.
> If you break momentum conservation it doesn't.
Thanks for this, a first from any scientific platform.
> >> But
> >> it could be in invisible form. An EM pulse, or a pulse of
> >> neutrinos, or maybe it is in gravitational waves?! Did you
> >> test those things?
> >
> > I do not need to test anything invisible,
> OK, none of the great pioneers of physics really *needed* to
> do their investigations. (Some were even strongly opposed by
> their contemporaries, but they still did it!)
My pioneering works follow engineering goals, for my company HTN Research, like making a new class of electric motoe for superior travel.
From the science perspective all I wanted to show, and have so done, as will be very evident from video evidence, is that the electromagnetic force which accelerates an armature in a certain configuration does not automatically create a reaction upon the static force-producing circuitry. This new-found effect causes momentum conservation violation, leading to a new class of reactionless motors when further developed on the updated physics. Repeated violations on a cyclic basis will create unlimited speed in a vacuum, or space.
Now I want to raise money for such work by selling my apparatus to the highest bidder, and for that I wish for good luck, like any seller.
> > for this case. The invisibles I deal with - in my poetic works - relate to emotion, not modern physics. Someone else may try on the lines you suggest., but I would not advocate such waste. I would rather they support me.
> If the construction works better than the alternatives and is
> not too expensive, they surely will. (Would be my prediction..)
I most certainly hope so. Well we will see. I will post the videos soon.
Cheers,Arindam Banerjee
Director,
HTN Research Pvt. Ltd.
Melbourne
>
> --
> Jos