Now how does this work????

[Arindam Banerjee]

https://www.facebook.com/arindam.banerjee.31149359/videos/1028532314980688

From mini black holes filled with neutrinos tied by strings made up of quarks????

rotfl4pita.
Arindam Banerjee

[Arindam Banerjee]

Ploughing through a soup of bosons and leptons and hadrons and suchlike whatnots?
Mysterious interaction with instantaneously formed anti-matter?
Or is it dark matter coming to light by lightning impulses?
Is an invisible Harry Potter at work, waving a wand?
Is there incredible camera work making the slope of the table very steep, but not making it look that way? Or is some invisible string pulling that armature over the rails?

[Sylvia Else]

Standard physics of electromagnetism.

Sylvia.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Good.
Physics is classical Maxwellian electrodynamics, the invention is new, and also the discovery that the Lorenz force has no electrical reaction as must be the case with modern physics.
So, it throws out so-called modern physics.
It cannot work on both electromagnetism and also what-have-you, energy bundles clustered around the wires as Feynman would have it.
One or the other.
If one fixes on electromagnetism, it means the reality of electric and magnetic fields, and not photons, neutrinos, quarks, strings, bosons, whatever.
>
> Sylvia.

[Sylvia Else]

On 07-Aug-23 10:32 pm, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Monday, 7 August 2023 at 22:07:05 UTC+10, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 07-Aug-23 3:07 pm, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>> https://www.facebook.com/arindam.banerjee.31149359/videos/1028532314980688
>>>
>>> From mini black holes filled with neutrinos tied by strings made up of quarks????
>>>
>>> rotfl4pita.
>>> Arindam Banerjee
>> Standard physics of electromagnetism.
> Good.
> Physics is classical Maxwellian electrodynamics, the invention is new, and also the discovery that the Lorenz force has no electrical reaction as must be the case with modern physics.
>

"electrical reaction" is a term you've just invented.

However, you have not demonstrated the lack of a reaction to the Lorentz
force.

Sylvia.

[Arindam Banerjee]

I have, back in 2015 and presented in 2017.
For which I got nothing but lies from your side.
Which continues.
>
> Sylvia.

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Monday, 7 August 2023 at 15:07:17 UTC+10, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

"On 4th July 2023. The same demonstration of my new design rail gun from another camera. My smartphone actually what I am holding now. The force on the bullet accelerating it was 13.44 Newtons and the reaction caused by rolling on the rails, making the gun go backward was 11.62 Newtons. The momentum of the armature just as it left the rails after being there for 470 msec was 6.337 Kg m/s and the momentum of the gun was 5.463 Kg m/s. Very inefficient. As per my new rail gun theory the so-called Lorentz force on the armature is 34 Newtons. Welding has reduced it to the lesser value and pushback by rolling and sparking has created the recoil force. When the gun slides smoothly with no welds the whole force and momentum will go the armature. I will see what I can do about that.
Now it so happens that influential pro establishment physics entities have held that the slope of the floor of my shed is so inclined that the armature rolls down by gravity after being pushed by my hand. "

[Sylvia Else]

Why wouldn't there also be a Lorentz force on the gun, due to the
magnetic field created by the current through the armature, acting on
the current going through the gun?

Why wouldn't the force on the armature and the force on the gun be equal
and opposite?

Sylvia.

[Arindam Banerjee]

There is that, true. All rail guns work with very large currents that create a huge magnetic field - the same current going through that field experiences a linear force in the rail gun configuration where the same current goes through the moving conductor. In my experiment some 5000 Amps is going through the heavy cylindrical armature. That is enough to give it the amount of force required for such acceleration. See the figures. The momentum of muzzle was 6.337 Kg m/s seond which is giving a 6.337 gm bullet a speed of 1000m/s. Only the most powerful rifles give this kind of momentum and that too to a reasonably heavy bullet. But this gun could do much more if it was sliding, if all the 34 Newtons went forward.

Mind, my gun has a much higher design force capability than the rail guns on display by the US Navy. Besides, their formula is wrong.

> Why wouldn't the force on the armature and the force on the gun be equal
> and opposite?

Simply speaking, that is the way the universe works, as per Arindam's finding, and expressed with his physics aphorisms.

To get into a bit more detail:

Because Maxwellian electrodynamics reduces to the formula F = B i L and to that there is no reaction predicted, implying the violation of inertia and from there to "flying carpet" physics and technology, following my formula e=0.5mVVN(N-k) for interstellar spacecraft, and many explanations of natural phenomena.

The rail gun motor is an invention that is based upon the violation of inertia with a particular configuration - the electromagnetic force accelerating the armature does not push the gun back. The gun is pushed by the forward action, which because of the rolling friction from the treadmill action, pushes back the gun - giving the impression of recoil. If it was sliding - say on mercury rails - the whole force would be going forward and it would be far more efficient, practically no recoil.

The earlier Newtonian-Amperian electrodynamics formula was F = f(i1, i2) which predicted an opposite reaction. The net force in the closed loop was zero, for the force from the opposing current conductor (i2) would negate the force from conductor i1.

In relativistic quantum stuff, energy is bundled, up, and progresses through a circuit much like water in a closed pipe with a compressor. So, no change of inertial state possible.

Yes, there would be an equal and opposite reaction if either Newtonian-Amperian or Einsteinian-Feynmain electrodynamics was correct, but experiment with my apparatus (a working model of a new design rail gun) shows such is not the case.

Which means that Maxwellian electrodynamics is correct and Einstein-Feynman relativistic quantum electrodynamics must wrong if there is no equal or opposite reaction.
As there is no equal and opposite reaction, shown many times with my experiments, the latter is wrong and the former is right.
That means, aether is back in business.
Quantum theory must be discarded on correctness grounds, but may still have use for certain purposes. Like flat earth theory is okay for flat maps, for taxi cabs, not pilots.

***Now, Roachie, where are you, wu bist du? Did my falling armature crush you, poor roach! Alas. ***

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
>
> Sylvia.

[Sylvia Else]

On 09-Aug-23 8:41 pm, Arindam Banerjee wrote:

> Yes, there would be an equal and opposite reaction if either
> Newtonian-Amperian or Einsteinian-Feynmain electrodynamics was
> correct, but experiment with my apparatus (a working model of a new
> design rail gun) shows such is not the case.

Your video clearly shows that when an effort is made to reduce friction,
the two parts of the system move in opposite directions. Since that is
exactly what would be expected from both the theory of electromagnetism,
and from the law of conservation of momentum, you have offered nothing new.

Sylvia.

[Arindam Banerjee]

On Wednesday, 9 August 2023 at 22:49:56 UTC+10, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 09-Aug-23 8:41 pm, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>
> > Yes, there would be an equal and opposite reaction if either
> > Newtonian-Amperian or Einsteinian-Feynmain electrodynamics was
> > correct, but experiment with my apparatus (a working model of a new
> > design rail gun) shows such is not the case.
> Your video clearly shows that when an effort is made to reduce friction,
> the two parts of the system move in opposite directions.

Wrong. How incompetent of you, but I am far from surprised.
No effort can be made in this configuration to reduce friction between the armature and the rails as it is rolling. If it rolls, it must push back.
If it was sliding then it would not be rolling and thus would not push back the gun by simple friction from treadmill action.
With mercury rails, it would be sliding and so not pushing the gun back.
But even with pushing the gun back, with rolling action there is significant difference in momentum, shown by the data. There is more action force than reaction force.

Since that is
> exactly what would be expected from both the theory of electromagnetism,
> and from the law of conservation of momentum, you have offered nothing new.

All you show is your incompetence, based upon peculiar prejudices on one hand, and vested interests (that is to say, the e=mcc=hv nonsense must be protected as without that bullshit all modern physics will be busted) on the other, that must somehow show that right is wrong and wrong is right. Nomatter how ridiculously.
From my data (believe it or not, that is another issue) there is more forward momentum for the armature than there is for the gun.
Which is why, in earlier videos, the whole system moves forward, violating inertia, when the armature is arrested.
Thus violating the First Law.
The third law was violated in 2015, with my very first experiment showing similar violation of momentum, with the pendulum experiment. That is clearly shown in great detail in my 2017 videos.

I am once again posting the relevant links for the 2017 videos:

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
>
> Sylvia.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Of course, the way to make it slide is to make a rectangular armature on mercury rails.
With this design, the whole 34 Newtons force would come upon in and not push the gun back, causing huge inefficiencies.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Calculations show that the efficiency gains will be enormous with the sliding design.
The gun won't go back, thus effectively retaining the full barrel length.
No loss of monentum in blocking the backward momentum.
Really something!
Wide contact surfaces are necessary to stop welding and a mercury surface retained in honeycomb metal structure.should provide just that.

[Arindam Banerjee]

Now that ia shall we say a mini invention, the honeycombed mercury retaining rails.
Who knows when it will see the light of day.
The global conspiracy against revolutionary physics and engineering is too powerful.

[Arindam Banerjee]

The capitalist pig system is not working, as it is corrupted by racism and bigotry.
The challenging revolutionary insightful works of this brown unapologetic Hindu that is I must be ignored and suppressed at all costs. But they know they are worth trillions. Makes tgem salivate! Bew motors with new modes of travel, construction, etc.
As things are, it is difficult for these brilliant and unscrupulous thieves to steal them.
Their competitive systems will not allow this, unless they form a cabal that is global. One pack of thieves will be countered by another, if there is no global cabal. And courts are there!
Socialist systems are not around any more, tough luck for the world. Pigs rule, to pollute.