Mordred

Then you should have specified that long ago. Did you not see the reflection formula ? Of course the EM reacts to a non conductive material. The EM field exerts the radiation pressure look at the formulas. You don't treat them as seperate entities when calculating the force exerted. The Poynting vector formula shows that. It would be foolish to count the magnetic force then count the radiation pressure. When all you need is to account for the pressure term. Especially since pressure is force per unit area. Radiation passes through conductive material far easier than non conductors. If you don't believe me how do you think capacitors work it is two plates separated by an insulator. Even if the radiation is first absorbed then emitted to the exterior it still exerts a force. See the absorption formula above. How much passes through without interaction, gets reflected or gets absorbed will depend on the materials but you can lay good money you will most likely involve all three regardless of material. Lol when you get right down to it you can get better thrust pulsing against a good reflective surface. The surface area would be far greater than a wire . (That is how the EM drive was designed that was tested by both NASA and US Navy.) AFIAK to null results.

Seriously after how many pages on Newtons law ? Anytime any force pushes on something that object pushes back. If you prefer let's assume it pushes back the EM field if you want to keep that disconnected with everything else. Now you specified all the EM radiates out of the craft. However this wouldn't be true as wire B is a conductor...So now you have an imbalance in a different direction. A portion of that field will be absorbed just like an antenna. As your craft will most likely have conductive material Ie other electronics you had best provide shielding to those. Get the picture not all of the EM radiation will radiate evenly in a craft. Some will reflect off walls, some will penetrate but certainly only a small percentage. The penetration factor of the EM field will depend upon its frequency. However as we're dealing with a Pulse we can apply Beer-Lamnbert Law. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penetration_depth Like I said until the radiation leaves the ship it is still part of the ship as it will continue to act upon the craft in some manner either it penetrates or it reflects/refracts. LMAO your going to want shielding regardless of your pulse. You are flying in space outside the magnetosphere. "Cosmic rays have sufficient energy to alter the states of circuit components in electronic integrated circuits, causing transient errors to occur (such as corrupted data in electronic memory devices or incorrect performance of CPUs) often referred to as "soft errors." This has been a problem in electronicsat extremely high-altitude, such as in satellites, but with transistors becoming smaller and smaller, this is becoming an increasing concern in ground-level electronics as well" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray You might want to think again about designing your craft to radiate your EM pulse in every direction outside your craft... Do you actually believe there is a difference? Have you looked at the Maxwell radiation pressure formula ? [latex] S=\frac{1}{\mu_0}E*B [/latex] where E and B are the electric and magnetic fields respectively. [latex]F_{rp}=dp/dr[/latex] where p is the momentum. If the radiation is absorbed [latex]F_{rp}=\frac{\langle S \rangle A}{c} cos \vartheta[/latex] If it is reflected [latex]F_{rp}=\frac{2\langle S \rangle A}{c} cos^2 \vartheta[/latex]

Correct even though we cross posted on edit hehe had to add a bit

The EMP is still contained within the craft so counts as part of the craft. Just like the atmosphere within a shuttle. As Strange mentioned if you allow the EM field to leave the craft then it can act externally.

Editted was thinking of wrong formula

On essence acting upon radiation pressure not Lorentz force. Sounds like you will need to analyze the response of the siding of the craft as the radiation pressure will also respond to container walls.

Well hopefully you also agree on how Newton's third law applies.

Good luck ever getting the technology to meet your requirements...the gap atmosphere will always allow the EM field to be quicker than the flow of charge through your wire. Wires delay signals. You would need a much bigger gap and thus much more power.

Well considering flow of charge through your wire length vs the gap between your two wires. So that you can compete with c for a pulse width I would say your pulse idea is an impossibility. As I mentioned you can experiment the Lorentz force at home to see how two wires respond. Consider this wires has a signal propagation delay at roughly 1 NS per 15 inches on average.

Too quick to generate 10 amps that's also for sure. Are you familiar with pulse width modulation to generate current ? All variable speed drives use this principle. I can quantantee it takes a high frequency of pulses to generate 10 amps. Sounds like your proposal is an impossibility in its circuit requirements. Particularly since the flow of charge will take longer in the wires than the flow of EM field in an atmosphere.

Sure you can use an RC circuit. How do you think we generate DC pulses ? If I recall your gap was 0.1 with 10 amps. How did you plan on delivering a 10 amp current with a pulse ? That's a pretty impressive inductive kick

So you claim I for one know different. Do the experiment take a video and prove me wrong if you can. If you want a pulse generator use an RC circuit instead of a switch. Though quickly flicking the switch does the same. Though momentary switches are a dime a dozen.

If it's continuous or pulsed makes no difference. Why do you think I told you to add a switch to the circuit ? It is an easy at home experiment. I recommend a battery for DC voltage and safety reasons.

Yes A applies force to B B applies an equal but opposite force on A both through the EM field. That is the third law. I did see the link then look at the last formula on that link notice that the force acts upon the radius of seperation between the wires and that in the third formula they combined the force of both wires.

You have to complete all the Newton laws when you do the calculations. Skipping the third law isn't complete

Perform the experiment it will prove you wrong. I have done this experiment back in high school. You can apply the current however you choose. Both wires will attract to each other or repel from each other. Even if no current flows through the second wire. No need to take my word for it. Test it for yourself.

Take two magnets for Christ sake. Try and push them together in repulse alignment. Can you not feel magnet one resisting you as you push it against magnet two ? I'm positive you have two fridge magnets you can use. Your claim that the EM field no longer affects wire A is false just as it is in this experiment. Both magnets certainly radiate their field in all directions but you will still encounter resistance as you push against magnet two. Better yet take two wires hang them on a mount with enough slack to move. Connect a battery with a switch in circuit. Both wires will move toward each other or away from each other. Another household experiment you can perform see for yourself.

I don't have to create anything. I even provided a reference. Research it yourself try and prove me wrong. I also gave you the option on how to do so. Find one craft of any type where the force is not applied external to the craft to generate thrust. Good luck on that challenge It does not matter how you generate a force the third law applies. After how many pages of repeating the same thing I've grown tired of this. Your laser pulse pushes against the emitter and the target. Just like recoil from any gun. The EM field will push back on wire A as it pushes against wire B. Go ahead take two Newtonian scales and attach them to two electromagnet. As you pulse on one electromagnet they both will repel or attract depending on polarity. You can readily do that experiment at home.

This part in accordance with Newtons third law. Wire B must oppose wire A with the same force A makes on B. See link for reference if that isn't sufficient I can post thousands of other examples from textbooks etc. [latex]f_{12}=F_{21}[/latex] third law in vector form. The fact wire B has no net current means diddly squat Newtons third law still applies. " For EVERY force there is an equal but opposite force" EVERY MEANS EVERY FORCE. .... Wire B does not need to generate a field to oppose a force

Really how is it different when wire B cannot separate from wire A and this is where you are applying your force ? How can you possibly get thrust from that ? (You are pretty clear in not involving any other influence such as radiation pressure on walls or ionized gas) even though a closed box is a major factor in radiation pressure behavior. Do how do you gain thrust upon a technically immovable object ? And most important how do you prevent wire B from obeying the laws of nature in preventing an equal but opposite force on wire A. Please look at that link I posted it so you know I'm not pulling fluff out my a@@@#. I also specifically quoted the relevant section.

Pretend the wire A is a body. (Yourself ) wire B is a wall. When you push against an unmovable wall What happens to your body ? The equal but opposite force moves you from the wall. Do you think wire A pushing against wire B is any different ? (Your wires are fixed mounted cannot move past the mount constraints )

Absolutely finally a glimmer of hope on seeing the problem. What else can equal but opposite reaction of a force mean roflmao. The link shows this detail. I even quoted the specific line.

However here is the crux. When you examine a design you factor in ALL influences. You don't ignore ones that may prevent workability.

Yeesh the minute to pulse wire A to wire B wire B pulls back on wire A. See the Blooming link if you refuse to believe me. It clearly shows two not one Lorentz force lines in the two wire scenario. YOU MUST ACCOUNT FOR BOTH. Not just wire A simply examining WIRE A is not accounting for all force lines involved..... Lol this is quite similar to the EM drive impossibility that you see on Google. They may be using microwaves but microwaves are EM waves. (If you do Google make sure you find the link where they showed Earth's gravitational field interfering with the tests. Yes your idea is different than the drives so it has its own problem set.

No absolutely not. Try again it should be obvious once you identify the force lines in that link It is two wires applying Lorentz force and it's obvious which direction the two (not one) force lines point. The image in the link clearly shows them...