Why is this apparent violation of the action and reaction law occurring?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ulysees
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reaction
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the apparent violation of the action and reaction law in the context of electromagnetic (EM) waves and their interaction with objects. Participants explore whether EM forces can exert influence without a simultaneous reaction, touching on concepts related to momentum, energy conservation, and the behavior of charged particles in fields.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that EM waves exert forces on objects, implying a potential violation of action and reaction laws, particularly noting that forces have a delay due to distance between interacting charges.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the validity of the claims, arguing that there is no convincing evidence against the idea that ion lifters simply accelerate ions in the air.
  • A different viewpoint is presented, stating that EM forces can occur without simultaneous reaction, using the example of forces acting on electrons in a radio receiver.
  • One participant proposes that the paradox can be resolved by introducing the concept of "hidden momentum" in the EM field, suggesting that momentum conservation can still hold true.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the circuit configuration of the discussed device, questioning how continuous current can flow if the circuit is not closed.
  • Another participant reiterates that while EM forces can act without simultaneous reaction, this does not negate the conservation of energy, referencing the principle behind solar sails.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of EM forces and their implications for action and reaction laws. There is no consensus on whether the claims presented are valid or if they represent a misunderstanding of fundamental principles.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the need for clarity regarding the definitions of forces and reactions in the context of EM interactions, as well as the assumptions underlying the claims about energy conservation and circuit behavior.

Ulysees
Messages
515
Reaction score
0
Here's an apparent violation of the action and reaction law:

[crackpot link deleted]

How can it be? Surely EM waves exert forces on objects all the time, nothing new to action without reaction (EM waves are not like sound waves where there is a medium and the medium experiences the reaction).

But then, all forces in the universe have a delay between action and reaction, because there is always a distance between the interacting charges or masses or whatever it is for the strong and weak nuclear force.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
There is no convincing evidence that ion lifters don't just accelerate ions in the air. I'll wait for discussion with the other mentors, but I consider this a crackpot idea.
 
Alright but wait a sec, I think this page was not intended to prove that his flying machine exhibits antigravity, just that EM forces can occur without a simultaneous reaction.

It happens all the time, EM waves arriving to a radio receiver exert forces to the electrons in the antenna. These electrons experience force without simultaneous reaction.
 
Last edited:
This paradox is resolved by assigning a "hidden momentum" to the EM field itself. This can be done in a consistent way such that momentum is always conserved (i.e., whatever momentum you put into the fields, you can get back out of them again).

Note that since the electrons experience forces, they must accelerate. And since they must accelerate, they must radiate. I think calculations of the photons thus radiated would show that they carry away momentum that balances whatever is gained by the CM of the electron-electron system. Thus, any thruster designed on this principle would work by means of shooting photons out the rear.
 
Apparently the lower foil is not connected to anything! :rolleyes:

Only the upper wire is connected to high voltage.

How can there be continuous current, charge flow, if the circuit is not closed?
 
Ulysees said:
Alright but wait a sec, I think this page was not intended to prove that his flying machine exhibits antigravity, just that EM forces can occur without a simultaneous reaction.
Whatever direction he wants to introduce it from, it doesn't matter. It's still a violation of conservation of energy.
It happens all the time, EM waves arriving to a radio receiver exert forces to the electrons in the antenna. These electrons experience force without simultaneous reaction.
Not true. EM radiation has to be emitted by something, so the reaction force is on the object emitting the radiation. This is the principle by which a solar sail works.

Thread locked, crackpot link deleted.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Newton's Third Law: Action & Reaction Along the Line Connecting Two Objects
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate Violation of action-reaction law?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
High School Is the Kink in the Electromagnetic Wave Responsible for Delayed Motion?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Graduate Reaction-at-a-distance: Might charged plates immediately repel?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Why doesn't Newtons third law also apply to the frame?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad Why is there no action-reaction pair for normal force?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
32K
Graduate Post-Selection: Pre-existing Correlations or Action At A Distance?
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
Newton's Third Law of Motion: Action & Reaction Impact on Creation
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
Graduate Bernoulli, lift and cause & effect
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
Undergrad Argument on centrifugal force
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K