info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
New class of practical reactionless motor from my invention of the light low voltage rail gun
3 views
Skip to first unread message
banerjee...@gmail.com
Aug 12, 2022, 8:39:04 PM8/12/22
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYihBZmBbRI
Back in 2015, for my PhD work, which was to investigate whether or not electric rail guns had recoil equivalent to the force upon the bullet, I had constructed a model rail gun of new design. It operated with a heavy armature on the rails to reduce the contact resistance, making it of the order of milliohms. Thus thousands of amperes of current were created for the duration of the heavy armature upon the rails. Tests done at my residence (as there were no facilities for me in the university) indicated that there was no reaction, however the PhD panel at RMIT University, Melbourne, failed me on the ground that I had not actually made a model of a railgun, which forced me to leave the program.
Working on my own, in 2017 I published some youtube videos of my work to prove my point, but the response from the scientific world has been disappointing.
Nevertheless, I persevered and improved the design of the model, and increased the capacitor bank to get more power. This time, with more current providing more force, and a greater L factor for the motor, there is no doubt that indeed I have made a new invention, which works as a gun.
The next stage is to show whether or not the gun has recoil or not. If it does recoil as a result of the current pushing the bullet, then the centre of gravity of the whole system should not change. If however it does change, then we have a reactionless motor.
The new motor, where unlike the 2017 situation, pushes the heavy armature UPWARDS,has changed the centre of gravity of the whole armature-motor system after the firing; moving it forward by about 30cm and upward by about 3mm. This violates the inertia condition, and shows the reactionless quality of the device.
It will be seen that at the start the gun/motor does recoil. However it seems most likely that is because of the rolling friction of the rolling armature upon the rails, when accelerating. After it has accelerated, the push upon it retards the backwards movement caused earlier by the friction. Had there been an equal reaction to the rear (as per current theory) then the system would have kept on going backwards.
Evidently, if the friction is reduced, then there will be more sliding and the recoil from friction would be less. In the next experiment we will try to reduce the friction to see what happens.
This experiment shows the power stroke of the two stroke motor - the second stroke has not been shown here. It will be about returning the armature to the initial position, and prepare for the first stroke, like any conventional two stroke engine.
The claim here is that we have shown that the force causing the heavy armature to move does not have a corresponding opposite reaction, thereby directly violating Newton's third law of motion, which leads to the violation of the first law of motion. This is a new discovery, caused from the testing of this new invention
Had the recoil been blocked, then the armature would have moved much faster with respect to the ground. That experiment will be shown in a later video. As a gun, it can launch missiles, and can be used for tunneling with lateral impacts.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Director
HTN Research
Melbourne, 13 August 2022
Back in 2015, for my PhD work, which was to investigate whether or not electric rail guns had recoil equivalent to the force upon the bullet, I had constructed a model rail gun of new design. It operated with a heavy armature on the rails to reduce the contact resistance, making it of the order of milliohms. Thus thousands of amperes of current were created for the duration of the heavy armature upon the rails. Tests done at my residence (as there were no facilities for me in the university) indicated that there was no reaction, however the PhD panel at RMIT University, Melbourne, failed me on the ground that I had not actually made a model of a railgun, which forced me to leave the program.
Working on my own, in 2017 I published some youtube videos of my work to prove my point, but the response from the scientific world has been disappointing.
Nevertheless, I persevered and improved the design of the model, and increased the capacitor bank to get more power. This time, with more current providing more force, and a greater L factor for the motor, there is no doubt that indeed I have made a new invention, which works as a gun.
The next stage is to show whether or not the gun has recoil or not. If it does recoil as a result of the current pushing the bullet, then the centre of gravity of the whole system should not change. If however it does change, then we have a reactionless motor.
The new motor, where unlike the 2017 situation, pushes the heavy armature UPWARDS,has changed the centre of gravity of the whole armature-motor system after the firing; moving it forward by about 30cm and upward by about 3mm. This violates the inertia condition, and shows the reactionless quality of the device.
It will be seen that at the start the gun/motor does recoil. However it seems most likely that is because of the rolling friction of the rolling armature upon the rails, when accelerating. After it has accelerated, the push upon it retards the backwards movement caused earlier by the friction. Had there been an equal reaction to the rear (as per current theory) then the system would have kept on going backwards.
Evidently, if the friction is reduced, then there will be more sliding and the recoil from friction would be less. In the next experiment we will try to reduce the friction to see what happens.
This experiment shows the power stroke of the two stroke motor - the second stroke has not been shown here. It will be about returning the armature to the initial position, and prepare for the first stroke, like any conventional two stroke engine.
The claim here is that we have shown that the force causing the heavy armature to move does not have a corresponding opposite reaction, thereby directly violating Newton's third law of motion, which leads to the violation of the first law of motion. This is a new discovery, caused from the testing of this new invention
Had the recoil been blocked, then the armature would have moved much faster with respect to the ground. That experiment will be shown in a later video. As a gun, it can launch missiles, and can be used for tunneling with lateral impacts.
Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Director
HTN Research
Melbourne, 13 August 2022
0 new messages