What physics reveals about the JFK event

[Michael O'Brian]

Let's say for the sake of argument that we all agree that there was no shooter on the north knoll.

Does that demonstrate that Oswald killed the president?

No it does not, and also the fact that both target hitting shots came from behind still does not make him guilty either, in fact the latter makes it more obvious of his innocence and that it was a planned and well thought out set up, and according to Milteers premonition correct on a few counts.

[Thomas Halle]

As they say in the "World of Science," "on the contrary." The final move of President Kennedy's body is observed to be to the left-rear of the limo, which suggests (according to "Conservation of Momentum") the final shot (or shots) was from the front of the motorcade hurling JFK in that direction (L-rear). This is analogous to a baseball player "at bat" connecting with the ball. Generally, the ball will travel in a direction AWAY from the batter, not TOWARD him. 

[Bill Chapman]

Let's say for the sake of argument that we all agree that there was no shooter on the north knoll.

Does that demonstrate that Oswald killed the president?

 

Stop wetting yourself: It only demonstrates that there was no shooter on the north knoll.

[Michael O'Brian]

Yes, that's what the physics experts are saying.

JohnM

They are not saying that the TSBD 6th floor alleged SN window is the correct area for the 2 target hitting shots, they only mention the vacinity.

“The President’s reactions just after the projectile impact were physically consistent with a gunshot wound caused by a high-energy Carcano military rifle bullet fired from the vicinity of the Texas School Book Depository,” Nalli writes.

[Michael O'Brian]

As they say in the "World of Science," "on the contrary." The final move of President Kennedy's body is observed to be to the left-rear of the limo, which suggests (according to "Conservation of Momentum") the final shot (or shots) was from the front of the motorcade hurling JFK in that direction (L-rear). This is analogous to a baseball player "at bat" connecting with the ball. Generally, the ball will travel in a direction AWAY from the batter, not TOWARD him. 

U.S. President John F. Kennedy was assassinated while riding in an open motorcade
by a sniper in Dallas, Texas on 22 November 1963. A civilian bystander, Mr. Abraham
Zapruder, filmed the motorcade with a 8-mm home movie camera as it drove through
Dealey Plaza, inadvertently recording an ≈8 second sequence of events that included
a fatal gunshot wound to the President in the head. The accompanying backward
motion of the President’s head after impact appeared to support later “conspiracy
theories” because it was claimed that this was proof of a shot from the front (in
addition to one from behind). In this paper, simple one-dimensional dynamical
models are uniquely applied to study in detail the fatal shot and the motion of the
President’s head observed in the film. Using known parameters from the crime
scene, explicit force calculations are carried out for determining the projectile’s
retardation during tissue passage along with the resulting transfer of momentum
and kinetic energy (KE). The computed instantaneous KE transfer within the soft
tissue is found to be consistent with the formation of a temporary cavity associated
with the observed explosion of the head, and subsequent quantitative examination
of this phenomenon reveals two delayed forces at play in the backward motion of
the President following impact. It is therefore found that the observed motions of
President Kennedy in the film are physically consistent with a high-speed projectile
impact from the rear of the motorcade, these resulting from an instantaneous forward
impulse force, followed by delayed rearward recoil and neuromuscular forces
Keywords: Physics, Mechanics

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325023601_Gunshot-wound_dynamics_model_for_John_F_Kennedy_assassination

[Andrew Mason]

As they say in the "World of Science," "on the contrary." The final move of President Kennedy's body is observed to be to the left-rear of the limo, which suggests (according to "Conservation of Momentum") the final shot (or shots) was from the front of the motorcade hurling JFK in that direction (L-rear). This is analogous to a baseball player "at bat" connecting with the ball. Generally, the ball will travel in a direction AWAY from the batter, not TOWARD him. 

The jet effect IS all about conservation of momentum.  There was a spray of matter going forward out of the front right side of JFK's head.  The momentum of that matter could easily amount to several times the momentum of the incoming bullet, sending the head and body backward and to the left, overcoming and overwhelming the forward momentum imparted by the incoming bullet.  See: Alvarez's paper at 434:

• I concluded that the retrograde motion of the President's head, in response to the rifle bullet shot, is consistent with the law of conservation of momentum, if one pays attention to the law of conservation of energy as well, and includes the momentum of all the material in the problem.  The simplest way to see where I differ from most of the critics is to note that they treat the problem as though it involved only two interacting masses: the bullet and the head.  My analysis involves three interacting masses, the bullet, the jet of brain tissue observable in frame 313, and the remaining part of the head. It will turn out that the jet can carry forward more momentum than was brought in by the bullet, and the head recoils backward, as a rocket recoils when its jet fuel is ejected.

[Michael O'Brian]

The jet effect IS all about conservation of momentum.  There was a spray of matter going forward out of the front right side of JFK's head.  The momentum of that matter could easily amount to several times the momentum of the incoming bullet, sending the head and body backward and to the left, overcoming and overwhelming the forward momentum imparted by the incoming bullet.  See: Alvarez's paper at 434:

• I concluded that the retrograde motion of the President's head, in response to the rifle bullet shot, is consistent with the law of conservation of momentum, if one pays attention to the law of conservation of energy as well, and includes the momentum of all the material in the problem.  The simplest way to see where I differ from most of the critics is to note that they treat the problem as though it involved only two interacting masses: the bullet and the head.  My analysis involves three interacting masses, the bullet, the jet of brain tissue observable in frame 313, and the remaining part of the head. It will turn out that the jet can carry forward more momentum than was brought in by the bullet, and the head recoils backward, as a rocket recoils when its jet fuel is ejected.

On a more lay mans terms  when a car speeds up the people on board are pushed  backwards

[Bill Chapman]

The jet effect IS all about conservation of momentum.  There was a spray of matter going forward out of the front right side of JFK's head.  The momentum of that matter could easily amount to several times the momentum of the incoming bullet, sending the head and body backward and to the left, overcoming and overwhelming the forward momentum imparted by the incoming bullet.  See: Alvarez's paper at 434:

• I concluded that the retrograde motion of the President's head, in response to the rifle bullet shot, is consistent with the law of conservation of momentum, if one pays attention to the law of conservation of energy as well, and includes the momentum of all the material in the problem.  The simplest way to see where I differ from most of the critics is to note that they treat the problem as though it involved only two interacting masses: the bullet and the head.  My analysis involves three interacting masses, the bullet, the jet of brain tissue observable in frame 313, and the remaining part of the head. It will turn out that the jet can carry forward more momentum than was brought in by the bullet, and the head recoils backward, as a rocket recoils when its jet fuel is ejected.

The exita fired upward at a steep vertical angle according to the film and subsequent tests
From what I've read and recall, without revisiting that information at this moment, Kennedy's feet where jammed tightly under the jump seat in front of him to the extent that it was very difficult to get him out of the car. This indicates a powerful neurological reaction according to the article.

'For every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction' goes Newton's third law of momentum. Kennedy's head moves about 2.5" forward at the moment of impact, which roughly equals the recoil of a Carcano I've seen online.