On Jul 9, 3:30 pm, wrote:
On Jul 8, 5:27 am, Art Unwin wrote:



On Jul 7, 3:22 pm, Jim Kelley wrote:

Art Unwin wrote:
On Jul 3, 5:16 pm, Art Unwin wrote:
You know John, since America gives the 'right to bear arms' you would
think that the population would understand
that a projectile must have rotation to follow a straight line
trajectory.

Hi Art,

The American Constitution does not "give" rights. It simply attempts
to prevent government from eliminating them.

Under the influence of gravity, sub-orbital ballistic projectiles
generally follow a parabolic trajectory. Isssac Newton's laws of
motion apply without caveat.

ac6xg

It followsa straight line trajectory in two dimensions out of three

And it's completely motionless in one dimension out of the three. So
what?

The weak force othewise known as the magnetic field of the eddy
current
overcpmes or neutralises gravity while applying spin such gravitation
has little or no
effect on the trajectory as it is projected with spin.

The weak force is NOT otherwise known as a magnetic field. It relates
to radioactive decay and is only relevant at distances less than 10
e-8 nanometers and has nothing to do with electromagnetism.

ac6xg

Wrong again!
You are following the errors of the past again. Yes, the particle that
is
projected away from the radiator is radio active in terms of a
fraction of its life.
And yes the distance that the madnetic field resulting from the eddy
current is limited
as seen with the common elevation style experiments. The distanbce
required for the
velocity of the partical is NOT a determination of distance travelled
according to
Newtons laws of motion. I hope you are not teaching this stuff so
people can get a degree.!