Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #621556

Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/03/2017 12:14 PM, benj wrote:
> On 3/4/2017 7:36 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 5/03/2017 9:32 AM, benj wrote:
>>> On 3/3/2017 8:07 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>> On 4/03/2017 11:34 AM, benj wrote:
>>>>> On 3/3/2017 7:06 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/03/2017 10:14 AM, benj wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/2/2017 7:31 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/03/2017 10:52 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 10:29:59 PM UTC+11, Sylvia Else
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/03/2017 7:18 PM, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:50:42 AM UTC+11,
>>>>>>>>>>> edpr...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 7:49:28 AM UTC-5, Arindam
>>>>>>>>>>>> Banerjee
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Back in 2000, I had posted a formula showing a new mass and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> energy
>>>>>>>>>>>>> relationship
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in this newsgroup.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite tremendous adversity, I have persisted with my
>>>>>>>>>>>>> research
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> following links show the results of my recent experiments,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> along
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with their
>>>>>>>>>>>>> analysis and theories.
>>>>>>>>>>>> []
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, but I don't usually follow links from here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you want to discuss your ideas here, please post them here.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Otherwise your post is just spam.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Respectfully,
>>>>>>>>>>>>     ed
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I have been posting my ideas for the past 17 years to
>>>>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>>>> newsgroups
>>>>>>>>>>> including this one.
>>>>>>>>>>> Since the interaction was not conclusive, I have spent a lot of
>>>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>> and effort
>>>>>>>>>>> to make the videos.
>>>>>>>>>>> The first four minutes of any video will give the information
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> require.
>>>>>>>>>>> They are expected to lead to more viewing.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In any case, the new physics shown by my experiments and their
>>>>>>>>>>> analysis as
>>>>>>>>>>> will be found by the videos is that the Lorenz force does not
>>>>>>>>>>> have a
>>>>>>>>>>> reaction.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This means that we can make spaceships which can accelerate
>>>>>>>>>>> indefinitely.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Since my effort was to make myself clear what I posted was not
>>>>>>>>>>> spam.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It is necessary to see the videos to come to an understanding
>>>>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>>>>> the workings
>>>>>>>>>>> of electrodynamics - it is clear that the Maxwellian approach is
>>>>>>>>>>> validated.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This will no doubt lead to an upheaval in physics in due course,
>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>> science is
>>>>>>>>>>> always provisional.
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> Arindam Banerjee
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I can't imagine why you think that experimental protocol is
>>>>>>>>>> remotely
>>>>>>>>>> convincing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is not a matter of imagination for any scientist. He or she
>>>>>>>>> has to
>>>>>>>>> do the
>>>>>>>>> experiments and find out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You clearly affect the position of the pendulum when you're
>>>>>>>>>> preparing to release the rod.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No. I take care that I do not. I release both my hands at once for
>>>>>>>>> both the
>>>>>>>>> current and non-current cases. There are videos showing this in
>>>>>>>>> IFE-3.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The videos clearly show you displacing the pendulum from its
>>>>>>>> neutral
>>>>>>>> position. If you cannot see that, then you're deluding yourself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have
>>>>>>>>> done the experiment many times and always got the null result so
>>>>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>>> as reaction
>>>>>>>>> to the force giving the extra force to the armature is
>>>>>>>>> concerned. In
>>>>>>>>> other words
>>>>>>>>> the law of conservation of momentum is violated when the
>>>>>>>>> armature is
>>>>>>>>> accelerated
>>>>>>>>> by the current. There is no reaction to the force accelerating the
>>>>>>>>> armature,
>>>>>>>>> and this is a new and most profound discovery.  However this is
>>>>>>>>> predicted by
>>>>>>>>> the Lorenz relation, where the force depends entirely upon the
>>>>>>>>> induced
>>>>>>>>> magnetic
>>>>>>>>> field and the current through the conductor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It certainly isn't predicted. The current through the rest of the
>>>>>>>> circuit creates a field which acts on the current through the rod.
>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>> the current through the rod also creates a field, and that field
>>>>>>>> acts on
>>>>>>>> the current flowing through the rest of the circuit. You can't pick
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> choose which bits of the circuit to analyse.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>   The experiment can be repeated by anyone. It is a
>>>>>>>>> most important experiment leading to a discovery as important as
>>>>>>>>> fire
>>>>>>>>> or the
>>>>>>>>> wheel. When it is repeated by someone else (honestly of course)
>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>> the same
>>>>>>>>> effect will be found.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would anyone bother, when you've failed to do the experiments
>>>>>>>> properly? It's not as if there was ever any a-priori reason to
>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>> there'd be an asymmetry between the rod and the rest of the wiring.
>>>>>>>> Why
>>>>>>>> would the universe have an interest in differentiating between
>>>>>>>> them?
>>>>>>>> Any
>>>>>>>> reasonable scientist would tell you to come back when you've
>>>>>>>> improved
>>>>>>>> your technique.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The use of a pendulum and inclined track just confuses the issue. A
>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>> more compelling demonstration (assuming the lack of actual fraud)
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> be one where the track was horizontal, and mounted on smooth
>>>>>>>> rollers on
>>>>>>>> top of a smooth base. Release the rod mechanically using a
>>>>>>>> mechanism
>>>>>>>> mounted on the track to obviate any risk of inadvertent movement,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> watch what happens. If you're right about the lack of reaction, the
>>>>>>>> rod
>>>>>>>> should head off in one direction, but the track should stay still.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But then, we know that's not what would happen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you sure? And if so why?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because that outcome is what is predicted by every well tested
>>>>>> theory we
>>>>>> have that's relevant, and no competently performed experiment has
>>>>>> shown
>>>>>> any different, especially at the level claimed for this system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there really were a force on the rod without a reaction on the
>>>>>> rest
>>>>>> of the circuit, then he could just fix the rod in place, and
>>>>>> demonstrate
>>>>>> a displacement of the pendulum when the current is on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As an aside, the "motor" would seem pretty useless, even if it
>>>>>> worked,
>>>>>> since the claimed force is on the rod, not on the part of the system
>>>>>> containing the power supply. It would be a reaction-less way of
>>>>>> throwing
>>>>>> otherwise inert metal rods into space, which is just a waste of rods.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sylvia.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't think that a violation of Newton's third law is an
>>>>> interesting
>>>>> effect? (Not that this occurs in this particular motor which is why I
>>>>> raised the point)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It would be, if it occurred, but we have no reason to think that's the
>>>> case. The nearest thing we have to an actual demonstration produces
>>>> effects that are so small that it's difficult to exclude sources of
>>>> experimental error.
>>>>
>>>> Sylvia.
>>>
>>> You need to be better informed. Go read Jefimenko's derivation and then
>>> come back and discuss it.
>>>
>>
>> Did Jefimenko derive an experiment that demonstrates significant
>> effects? If not, then it's irrelevant.
>
> Right. All theoretical physics unless incomprehensible is irrelevant.
> Got it. I presume you are saying you haven't read it, don't intend to
> read it, but do intend to dismiss it as nonsense based upon your total
> lack of knowledge.
>

It's not an experiment. Until we have an experiment that shows a 
reaction-less effect, there's not a lot of point in formulating theories.

Sylvia.

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-03-01 04:49 -0800
  Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-03-01 13:50 -0800
    Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 00:18 -0800
      Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-02 22:29 +1100
        Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 03:52 -0800
          Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-02 23:31 +1100
            Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-03-03 18:14 -0500
              Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-04 11:06 +1100
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-03-03 19:34 -0500
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-04 12:07 +1100
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-03-04 17:32 -0500
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 15:14 -0800
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-05 11:36 +1100
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-03-04 20:14 -0500
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-05 13:35 +1100
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-03-06 04:59 -0500
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-06 22:42 +1100
                Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-03-06 18:09 -0500
          Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest edprochak@gmail.com - 2017-03-02 22:03 -0800
        Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-03-03 18:13 -0500
          Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-03-04 09:41 -0800
            objectum noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-03-06 16:51 -0800
  Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-02 19:51 +1100
    Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 02:49 -0800
      Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-03-02 18:06 -0800
        Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-03-03 15:10 +1100
      Re: Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2017-03-03 19:12 -0500
  Re: Experiments on video showing a new physics effect along with its consequences for space conquest "Antonio Humidifier" <mahipals_ballsack@gmail.com> - 2017-03-03 18:35 -0800

csiph-web