Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Scaramouche, Feb 3, 2006.
I wish I was good at physics so I could look smart too.
Anytime the discussion goes beyond four functions with whole numbers, I get lost.
That's just the thing, the plasma is a byproduct of the immense amount of energy being used. it's partof why railguns are impractical, most of the energy is not imparted into the projectile, it's used up in the air. Wikipedia does say there's a positive and negative force at work on the opposing rails.
It's the only way electricity moves. If both rails were the same charge, nothing would happen. And I said electromagnetic, not electrostatic.
Well, if you use the words "charged positive and negative" that implies electrostatic. Though I don't know about the plasma issue; you could very well be correct on that, though I have some doubts; magnetisation in matter is an electron spin effect. To create a plasma, you usually ionize a gas by applying a high-frequency AC voltage that knocks a few electrons out of their orbits, ionizing the gas. Which is most definitely *not* an electron spin effect.
Bluff, they are just discussing physics because we don't understand. Gross you are just Ren-Lai-Feng you know? Well I know you won't understand, but I insist on posting this Chinese sentence, for you too are fucking my eyes with such hard English.
No, this is actually a discussion of railguns. No one would expect someone who didn't speak English as their primary language to know the English physics terms. I completely understand them, I'm just to lazy to read back to find out what they're really talking about.
And too lazy to put two O's on "too."
See why would I read when I won't even spel?
This is directly from that wikipedia page on railguns. Because I never directly said this before, I think you may have misunderstood me. "A railgun is even simpler than a motor. It consists of two parallel metal rails (hence the name) connected to an electrical power supply. When a conductive projectile is inserted between the rails (from the end connected to the power supply), it completes the circuit." That's how it works. The rails are charged positive and negative, and only when there is a projectile, the circuit is completed, creating a plasma arc resultant from the current running through the device. However, electromagnetism does take place. It's how the projectile is held in place. Any time there is a completed electrical circuit, you have an electromagnetic field.
And you're absolutely right, MADLAX, I don't understand any Chinese. And, I'm sorry.
No, you needn't know Chinese, and you needn't be sorry.
I said that just because I was in low spirit yesterday. And in fact, I can understand some, we Chinese all study physics hard.
There is a voltage drop between the two rails. This generates a current, delivering the Lorentz force. I googled a little more on the "plasma / railgun" thing, and found that some railgun designs do in fact turn the projectile into a plasma by heating it up, which makes it much easier to accelerate it since it now has some freely-movable charged particles, but this is in no way necessary.
Also, please realize that you will need to be more exact in the terms you use if you want to get me off your back. If you're gonna continue using the words "charged positive and negative", I'm going to continue giving you shit about it, because nothing I've read suggests there needs to be a nett charge density anywhere in the system (with the possible exception of creating a plasma on purpose as outlined here: http://www.matthewmassey.com/RailgunTheory.htm )
All I was trying to do was get a point across, with no animocity intended. Now you're getting all crazy and anal about it. As for the "plus and minus" I was talking about the MOST COMMON APPROACH to railguns by amateurs such as myself, i.e. the only way I know how. Looking at this from a new perspective, it looks like we're not even arguing the same point. Railguns use the lorentz force, yes, I never discounted that. I was saying how it's the principles of electromagnetic fields that carry the projectiles. That, and the projectile itself is not turned into a plasma, but the air surrounding it. However, I'm glad we agree that it's not really necessary. Sometimes, though, due to flaws in the design of said tool, plasma is an inevitable, if short lived, biproduct of activating a railgun.
Aside from that, a railgun is the simplest of electrical motors, meaning that it can in fact be created with opposing charges, If that's not the case, both the rails and the projectile would need to posess the same charge, frequency and amplitude to work properly. That being said, one could easily make a railgun with simple magnets, yes? Not really, because, as I'm sure you already know, that results in a gauss rifle. A very weak gauss rifle. Or, maybe a maglev. You've got to see that the only way to generate sufficient power is through an EM field. And, did you ever think, that the lorentz force is merely a term describing the motion of a mass through an EM field?
word of advice to you, n00b:
don't get all butt-hurt and pissy with the creator. he'll fry your ass.
If you think I was being pissy, you definitely misread what I typed. As for the "n00b" thing, yeah, I'll go wih that. Just because I haven't been around HERE for a while doesn't mean I'm not an otherwise reliable source of information and/or reason, though. To be honest, I think a couple people here are a bit too defensive when it comes to their point of view. I don't want any ill will to arise from some disagreement on a certain subject, but it seems that all certain people want when I say something is a fight. That kind of thing happens to me all the time when I'm literally talking to people.
With that being said, is anyone here able to build a working railgun? I mean, not like you have the resources, I'm talking the knowledge and the educational background to build one.
I've never seen a forum with so many people unable to consider or try to understand other's ideas, or maybe there are just so few here the ones who are posting happen to be for the most part the culprits. I'm not necissarily talking about you, rosenshyne, just very surprised and puzzled after reading many topics through search tool etc with people rejecting great ideas because they interfere with their own. Go destroy your ego somehow ... shit look up how on wikipedia. If you've ever done controversial research etc you will learn that wikipedia can be a very bullshit source, I've tried updating it a couple times with things learned from first hand experience and denied because it contrasted well known myths etc
Grossenschwaum, cool shit. Got any pics of the makeshift shooters?
I wish. I threw all of those away before I came in contact with a digital camera. I'm sure a lot of people are going to look at that and say "How convenient."
I'll try my hand at another one and then take take some pictures, if only to satisfy my own curiosities as to whether or not a person without a degree in mechanical engineering can build a working railgun.
Thanks for being interested.
Don't be ridiculous. All new ideas are submitted to the Idea Review Panel, and if they are found to have some merit, they go before the New Idea Induction Committee where they will be subjected to further scrutiny and critisism. If the NIIC finds them to be worth the read, they will be presented on the floor of the House Of Lords and ultimately ripped to shreds and rejected as n00bish drivel. The shreds will then be burned and the ashes scattered into the four winds.
No, I'm just kidding. We don't actually take the time to read them before we reject them. And don't bother whining about it because you are new and your thoughts don't count.
I'm sorry, that was just too well thought out. How long were you sitting on that one, Jungle Japes?
If it's more than seventeen seconds I'll be shocked, because most of us are intelligent enough to just think like that.
I'm not cynical enough to "just think like that." Congratulations on your ability to use sarcasm. Besides, equating sarcasm with intelligence just doesn't sit well with me. It's a bit of a pet peeve, though I'm sure it won't hold you back any to know that. But, it would really break my heart.*wink*
Separate names with a comma.