What physics reveals about the JFK event

[Jerry Organ]

Firstly off it is interesting that no one is offering any clarification on Newton's laws and the absolute opposite interpretations that are being offered. Good old Aristotle and the law of the excluded middle is often a worthy ride at times such as these. Yes the good old jet effect. Never demonstrated other than with liquid or near liquid materials as far as I have seen.

Ballistic-wise, the brain is a liquid.

Also the jet is visible in the examples JM has offered The only jet we see from JFK's skull is heading upward so the jet effect should be driving him down into the seat. Just for the sake of ridiculous argument any such 'jet' would have come from JFK's right and therefore would have been driven back to his right

Post-Z313, the head is driven downward, backward AND to the left. In other words, the opposite direction of the matter being forcibly expelled from the top right of the skull.

I guess this is better than the twitch theory, but that is not saying much

What else would cause a one-frame forward motion and skull eruption, followed by a slightly-less severe backward-downward-leftward motion? Simultaneous bullet strikes from the rear and front?

[John Mytton]

The only jet we see from JFK's skull is heading upward so the jet effect should be driving him down into the seat.

Worth considering is JFK's upper body movement was restricted because of his back brace.



JohnM

[Matt Grantham]

Ballistic-wise, the brain is a liquid.

 Regardless you need to see the consummate amount of material. Not that I agree with giving you some authority to create alchemy through linguistics

Post-Z313, the head is driven downward, backward AND to the left. In other words, the opposite direction of the matter being forcibly expelled from the top right of the skull.

You seem to be ignoring the direction of the projectile Are you suggesting it turned in his skull?

What else would cause a one-frame forward motion and skull eruption, followed by a slightly-less severe backward-downward-leftward motion? Simultaneous bullet strikes from the rear and front?




 

That is easy Either two shots, or deceleration of the limo. There is also the ever lurking concern of alteration in the Z film though I find extremely unlikely that the forward motion at 312 could have been faked. It is possible that there may have been additional frames of forward motion after 312 and before 313.

Also I added some edits to my previous message that you might want to check out

[Jerry Organ]

That is easy Either two shots, or deceleration of the limo.

• Two simultaneous shots that either were coordinated to occur that way or fantastically manifested through happenstance? And the science of terminal ballistics (temporary cavity formation and duplicable "jet effect") is a bridge too far.
• Kennedy's head nods forwards several inches and goes downward during Z312/Z313, and near the end of that span takes a bullet? Maybe he sneezed a millisecond before the bullet arrived. Nalli claims the forward movement is only seen on Kennedy's head, not his torso or the heads of the others.

There is also the ever lurking concern of alteration in the Z film though I find extremely unlikely that the forward motion at 312 could have been faked. It is possible that there may have been additional frames of forward motion after 312 and before 313.
Also I added some edits to my previous message that you might want to check out

You would have need the right front of JFK's skull to have blown out completely to have created a jet effect that would have moved his head back and to the left. That didn't happen. You would have also needed to see a volume of jet material comparable to the examples given by JM. You would need to see a massive amount of material being blown out in the direction previously described Did not happen not even close.

You must be working for Lockheed Martin on the next generation of jet engines. Your theory is that the less restricted the nozzle opening of a jet engine, the greater the acceleration.

[Andrew Mason]

Perhaps you can distinguish for me when to apply the law of conservation of momentum as opposed to Newtons third law?

Conservation of momentum follows directly from Newton's third law if you assume that the time of interaction is the same for both interacting bodies (which it is unless the interacting bodies travel at speeds approaching the speed of light relative to each other).  An action is a force for a certain duration. The "opposite reaction" is an opposite force for the same duration.  Force x time = impulse = change in momentum so if the two impulses are equal and opposite, they impart equal and opposite momentum so there is no change in total momentum: momentum is conserved.

The bullet has momentum.  It strikes the head.  The bullet loses momentum.  The head gains the same amount of momentum that the bullet lost - momentum has to be conserved (ignoring for the moment that the head is also connected to the body and, through friction, to the car). So the head starts to move forward as the bullet strikes the back of the head and plows through the brain. But then the head explodes sending brain matter in all forward directions.   So now the head and expelled contents must, together, have the same momentum that the head had before the explosive exit wound. This means that the head must recoil in the opposite direction to the ejected matter.  The forward momentum of the exploding brain matter (and the equal and opposite rearward momentum imparted to the head) is much greater than the forward momentum of the incoming bullet.  So in order to conserve momentum, the head has to recoil rearward with more momentum than the incoming bullet.  So the recoil from the explosive exit wound completely overcomes the forward momentum imparted by the bullet impact and sends the head backward.  This is seen in Chad Zimmerman's turkey shoot video in which he used jacketed bullets fired through pork ribs attached to the back of the turkey:
http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/Photos/turkeyribshot1a.mpg

[Andrew Mason]

You would have need the right front of JFK's skull to have blown out completely to have created a jet effect that would have moved his head back and to the left. That didn't happen.

The right side of JFK's skull opened.  His head was also turned to the left and he was leaning to the left. 

You would have also needed to see a volume of jet material comparable to the examples given by JM. You would need to see a massive amount of material being blown out in the direction previously described Did not happen not even close.

How do you know this if you have not worked it out?  See my earlier post using 100 grams of matter being ejected with 10% of the bullet energy. That is enough to send the head recoiling at 1 m/sec.

[Andrew Mason]

Jet Effect.

Hi John.   The coconut shot is very good.  It certainly shows the jet effect.  Do you know what ammunition was used?   It is rather easy to duplicate with hunting bullets (no jacket) but much more difficult with jacketed ammunition.  The coconut might be hard enough to deform a jacketed bullet. 

[Matt Grantham]

The right side of JFK's skull opened.  His head was also turned to the left and he was leaning to the left. 
How do you know this if you have not worked it out?  See my earlier post using 100 grams of matter being ejected with 10% of the bullet energy. That is enough to send the head recoiling at 1 m/sec.

 You are willing to admit there are two forces at play right. any jet effect and the conservation of momentum? In other words any amount of force actually absorbed by the skull that is not blown out works to move the head forward. Is that in your calculation


 Did Alvarez allow for any consideration for the conservation of momentum in  his equations for JFK's head shot?