Err... I think you are mixing up your electical forces with the
basic laws of motion.
Aren't you forgetting the impulse of accelerating a person?
Everytime any load is placed on the escalator (or it has to
accelerate a load) still it experiences a recoil force that is the
reaction of moving the load. But due to the fact the escalator is
many times more massive then the load it moves (a person), as well
as to being secured, it does not seem to experience any recoil. But
as a matter of fact it does.
Imagine an escalator moving very quickly not secured to the ground and placed
on frictionless sliding rails. The moment a person steps onto it,
or even if the chain is started while the person is on it, the
escalator will indeed, recoil and move back along the rails.
The escalator will not recoil if there was no load placed on it and
all that was cycling was the mass of it's chain, because it is by
all means perfectly balanced like a wheel spinning. HOWEVER, this
moving mass still generates a recoil force which we know as torque.
Even if somehow the railgun works as you mentioned (which it does
not), significant torque forces will be generated.
Basically, for every action there is an equal and opposite
reaction.
The circilar "recoil" system you describe as "mass" cycling will
only work if there was an equal mass on the opposite side "cycling"
as well. That is the only way of countering the vector force
generated by the reaction of accelerating a projectile, it does not
magically cycle around in the electical "loop". That just does not
happen.
And I also dunno where you get your theory from... because the last
I checked, nobody said that being recoiless was a feature of
railguns at all... in fact they explictly mentioned that such a
thing was impossible.
In fact, it is mentioned that recoil is a significant problem for
railguns launching heavier projectiles at higher speeds, and there
are even patents on how to migitate it:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4840107.html
Also:
The need for strong conductive materials with which to build the
rails and projectiles; the rails need to survive the violence of an
accelerating projectile, and heating due to the large currents and
friction involved. The force exerted on the rails consists
of a recoil force - equal and
opposite to the force propelling the projectile, but along
the length of the rails (which is
their strongest axis) - and a sideways force caused by the
rails being pushed by the magnetic field, just as the projectile
is. The rails need to survive this without bending, and
must be very securely mounted.
So yes, railguns = recoil. The recoil forces cannot just remain
in the barrel without having to go somewhere... and in a handheld
weapon this means this impulse would transfer to the rest of weapon
and eventually to the shooter. How much recoil the shooter
experiences depends on how much is soaked up by the mass and recoil
buffering features of the weapon (like the recoil system in the
Barret).
In terms of the idea of a personal infantry railgun hurling rounds
much faster then conventional bullets, the recoil of such a weapon
would be a very big issue to overcome. Even if the projectiles were
very light, the impulse from accelerating them to extreme speeds is
quite high indeed.
