Nebulous. Also, atomic matter is electrical neutral, it will have a dipole moment, quadrapole moment, so any scheme to couple with the EM field is miniscule, compared to bulk charged matter. Furthermore, it would have to couple in the right way and follow a cyclical "protocol" to dump angular momentum to the field (ExB at certain radius, ExB smaller radius and then with cancelling fields)
Classical mechanics works very well describing bulk matter and the CM of a gyroscope won't move unless there is an external force. The stuff spinning round will precess and do a fancy dance but that's it. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 02 January 2019 21:54 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Vo]:New EM propulsion paper In reply to Remi Cornwall's message of Wed, 2 Jan 2019 16:19:58 -0000: Hi Remi, [snip] >You need something to react against to dump the momentum to and for that >reason gyroscopes dont work as a propulsion device. > >All this L = r x p stuff and the strange way they behave confuses people, >even Laithwaite. > >All the best. Take into consideration that, at the atomic level, a gyro is a collection of charged particles, all moving in an electromagnetic sea. I suspect that if you examine Laithwaite more closely, you may find that, as Jones suggests, it has commonalities with your work. > >>>Jones Beene Wed, 02 Jan 2019 06:49:08 -0800 > Brian, > >Here is a download which does not demand access to you contacts list >http://vixra.org/abs/1812.0484 >This basic concept - "static electromagnetic momentum", as expounded in the >Feynman Disk is interesting especially to vortex and should be fertile >ground for comment. >Here is a discussion of one part of the paradox - and it reminds me of the >several Laithwaite videos which are on YouTube Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
