8 Feb 2022, great day for electromagnetics

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 11, 2022, 4:07:35 PM2/11/22

to

On 8 Feb 2022, at my residence in Melbourne, I successfully tested my model rail gun of new design, an invention that uses low voltage and a heavy slow armature, as opposed to the high voltage and light fast armatures of normal rail guns.

That was done to show conclusively whether a rail gun shows recoil, or not. Many years ago, in this newsgroup, I had come across posts that indicated that rail guns may not have recoil. That finding has influenced me greatly for the past 24 years. It led me to new theories about the nature of energy, and the theoretical consequences of internal energy creating unlimited acceleration.

What was theoretical, became fact on 8 Feb 2022. Unquestionably, the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature. In 2015, i had found this effect, but it was not pronounced
although it repeated reliably and

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 11, 2022, 4:09:01 PM2/11/22

to

> although it repeated reliably.

Arindam Banerjee
Melbourne

Jos Bergervoet

unread,

Feb 12, 2022, 11:09:14 AM2/12/22

to

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,

> ...
> ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature.

Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
theory that's obvious.

--
Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 4:49:18 AM2/13/22

to

Experiment shows otherwise.
>
> --
> Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 4:51:51 AM2/13/22

to

Jos Bergervoet

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 6:14:01 AM2/13/22

to

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,
>>> ...

>>> ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.

>>
>> Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
>> theory that's obvious.
>
> Experiment shows otherwise.

So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
because of experiments?

--
Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 7:04:38 AM2/13/22

to

I did not believe anything.
>
> --
> Jos

Jos Bergervoet

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 7:09:17 AM2/13/22

to

And now? Do you still not believe anything?

--
Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 4:30:36 PM2/13/22

to

Religion is about belief.

Science is not about belief. It is about acquiring knowledge in a reasonable manner.

For me, religion and science are mutually supportive. Belief and knowledge enhance each other.

So:

My belief is that with the grace of my Gurudev and the blessings of the Great Goddess I have been inspired to find scientific truths which can be verified by experiments done by honest and intelligent people who are beyond the grasp of petty biases and interests. All they have to do is to repeat my experiments, painstakingly done and explained in the youtube videos.

And I most warmly adore the fact that the Goddess Saraswati gives me the ability to express my works clearly to the honest and intelligent people beyond the grasp of petty biases and interests.

Whether or not the Goddess Lakshmi. so full with Grace and Wealth, will shower Her blessings upon me, for the good of the universe including flawed humanity, remains to be seen. I pray that may happen, soon.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 13, 2022, 4:45:18 PM2/13/22

to

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,
> > ...
> > ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon rhe armature.
>
> Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
> through the supply, not on the armature!

That is as per Newtonian-Amperian electrodynamics, supported by Einstein-Feynman quantum stuff which holds, roughly, that energy is as particles, so in a circuit energy flows as water flows in pipes.

> If you use standard EM
> theory that's obvious.

Standard EM is neither Newtonian nor Einsteinian. It is Maxwellian, based upon electromagnetic waves and their reality, described in terms of force by the formula F=BiL where implicitly there is no -F involved.
Maxwellian electrodynamics is the basis of all modern electrical engineering.

My experiments show that as there is no -F involved when the armature is moving by F (as opposed to the static situation for the normal circuit) there is a gain of momentum. That way, the Newtonian laws do not remain valid and need updating, on the lines I described back in 2000 in my book "To the stars!' published in my now-defunct adda website. It did gain some attention, at that time.

Thus Maxwellian electrodynamics is vindicated, from my experiments. My theories are no longer theories, they are facts. We can make motors that can take us at faster than light speed to the stars, create unlimited energy, travel very fast on Earth by going straight into near space very fast and very safely.... All the physics textbooks must be revised based upon the following links. Our entire concept of the universe changes. It is infinitely large, without beginning or end, and filled by infinitely fine aether which supports all matter and forces.

Jos Bergervoet

unread,

Feb 14, 2022, 1:48:22 PM2/14/22

to

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,
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
>>>>>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
>>>>>> theory that's obvious.
>>>>>
>>>>> Experiment shows otherwise.
>>
>>>> So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
>>>> because of experiments?
>>>
>>> I did not believe anything.
>> And now? Do you still not believe anything?
>
> Religion is about belief.
>
> Science is not about belief.

We must go back to the wording I started with: Why did you *expect*
recoil on the armature? That obviously would depend on the precise
geometry you have, only two parallel rails cannot feel recoil since
magnetic force is just perpendicular. But if you start including
more, and eventually the complete current loop is included, then
the recoil can be felt.

So is it just a word game about what you include in "armature"?
Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
on the material parts of the gun.)

--
Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 14, 2022, 4:36:46 PM2/14/22

to

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,
> >>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>> ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
> >>>>>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
> >>>>>> theory that's obvious.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Experiment shows otherwise.
> >>
> >>>> So you believed there would be recoil force upon the armature
> >>>> because of experiments?
> >>>
> >>> I did not believe anything.
> >> And now? Do you still not believe anything?
> >
> > Religion is about belief.
> >
> > Science is not about belief.
> We must go back to the wording I started with: Why did you *expect*
> recoil on the armature?

More like, it is "to be expected" rather than what I expect.
And that is:
Because of the third law of Newton accepted by the entire scientific community.
The force that accelerates the armature must have an equal and opposite reaction

That obviously would depend on the precise
> geometry you have, only two parallel rails cannot feel recoil since
> magnetic force is just perpendicular. But if you start including
> more, and eventually the complete current loop is included, then
> the recoil can be felt.

There is no recoil as my latest experiment done with the latest model of my new design invention rail gun most evidently shows.
The other end does not get an equal and opposite force. This is the breakthrough, as important as the discovery of the wheel, sled, wireless, radioactivity, electricity, etc.
Apart from the new practical invention, I have discovered the proper new theories for this behavious.

>
> So is it just a word game about what you include in "armature"?

See above.

> Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
> radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
> we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
> on the material parts of the gun.)
>

There is no balancing momentum as the first law is also violated. When the gun is in the motor mode.

Go through my video films and the supportive texts for my new physics which throws out the concepts if entropy, conservation laws, relativity and quantum, for our journey to the stars.

I do expect less studied indifference to the above, shortly.
What i want us to sell ny apparatus along with a series of lecture demonstrations to the highest bidder.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Director
HTN Research

> --
> Jos

Jos Bergervoet

unread,

Feb 14, 2022, 4:45:33 PM2/14/22

to

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,
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
>>>>>>>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
>>>>>>>> theory that's obvious.

...
...

>> Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
>> radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
>> we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
>> on the material parts of the gun.)
>
> There is no balancing momentum

Why do you believe there is no balancing momentum? Until now
nothing has ever been demonstrated without balance in momentum.
The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side. 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?

...

> What i want us to sell ny apparatus along with a series of lecture demonstrations to the highest bidder.

Then don't wait too long, but also don't sell too soon!

--
Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 14, 2022, 5:57:20 PM2/14/22

to

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,
> >>>>>>>>> ...
> >>>>>>>>> ... the new design showed no recoil for the electrical accelerating force upon the armature.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Why did you expect it would? The recoil is on the current path
> >>>>>>>> through the supply, not on the armature! If you use standard EM
> >>>>>>>> theory that's obvious.
> ...
> ...
> >> Or do you think the balancing momentum is in a pulse of "recoil
> >> radiation" flying off in the opposite direction?! (In that case
> >> we obviously would not expect any further recoil te be present
> >> on the material parts of the gun.)
> >
> > 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 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.

See my video links on the pendulum experiments. I show there is no more backward swing even when the armature with applied current exits the barrel with greater velocity. Also when arrested the system goes forward by some 30 mm. Not very convincing to lay people, I admit, but now another story.

I have now made a better rail gun with the same basic design of low voltage, and this invention works much better than the earlier version published in 2017 so the effect is clear to anyone.

> The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.

It does not.

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, 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.

I need to sell my apparatus to make a practical motor to smash all speed records. So far I have managed, entirely on my own, but now I need help for further developments.

Question is, who will buy and for how much. If old paintings of Leonardo da Vinci may sell for billions, then when realised as his incarnation my original work could fetch a small fraction if that, which will be enough for my purposes. I am sure that no matter how much I am paid, it will resell for more.

>
> ...
> > What i want us to sell ny apparatus along with a series of lecture demonstrations to the highest bidder.

> Then don't wait too long, but also don't sell too soon!

I will post the videos online with the necessary comments.
Thank you for your interest.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Director
HTN Research, Melbourne
>
> --
> Jos

Jos Bergervoet

unread,

Feb 15, 2022, 5:54:54 PM2/15/22

to

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.
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!)

>> The recoil momentum should be going to the opposite side.
>
> It does not.

If you break momentum conservation it doesn't.

>> 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!)

> 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..)

--
Jos

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 16, 2022, 4:01:32 PM2/16/22

to

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

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Feb 20, 2022, 4:06:17 AM2/20/22

to

The video with some notes and links posted in my facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/arindam.banerjee.31149359/
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

banerjee...@gmail.com

unread,

Mar 9, 2022, 3:36:48 AM3/9/22

to

9 mar 2022

Blocked the armature from escaping, making the whole system go forward some 70mm today as a single-shot motor.

I think with a bigger gun it will go even further.

The problem with this design is the friction upon the rails from the rolling armature.
That friction causes recoil, so the gun goes back.
If the friction is too much, the whole system will go backwards!

It is important to note that it does not appear that the electric force moving the gun forward has an equal reaction upon the capacitor pack causing the recoil.
If indeed there was, then with the friction involved the gun would have moved back much more.

The engineering issue is how to reduce the friction.
I would want to have mercury rails to conduct the current for a heavy sliding armature. Then the net force/momentum forward would be much greater, more efficient motor.
Alas, there is no scope for me to play with mercury!

I am making a bigger gun with expectation of making better progress.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee