Quote from: wallofwolfstreet on 06/28/2015 06:16 pmSorry to interrupt the great modeling work going on right now, but I condensed some of the recent findings on the intellectual property and financial aspects of SPR into a reddit post. To summarize, it looks like SPR has had alot more money move through the organization over the last 15 years than originally thought. It has received roughly 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity. This is about 950,000 USD at current exchange rates. If we adjust the time at which SPR received its' financing for inflation (grants received in 2000, over 250,000 pounds of equity in 2005), we get that SPR has had well over 1 million USD in total financing, in 2015 dollars.As I wrote in the attached reddit post, I consider this very suspect. A few patents, a few test articles and zero sales or licensing (at least licensing that SPR would actually get paid for) of any kind is very hard to justify given the resources at SPR had at its' disposal. Thanks for being "the one" that is bringing real facts and numbers on SPR. How were the 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity disbursed in time?Has it been receiving cash inflow steady through time? Particularly interesting regarding the last 7 years with the emphasis on superconductivity, which should be more expensive to realize. Has the money inflow increased with time or decreased with time?
Sorry to interrupt the great modeling work going on right now, but I condensed some of the recent findings on the intellectual property and financial aspects of SPR into a reddit post. To summarize, it looks like SPR has had alot more money move through the organization over the last 15 years than originally thought. It has received roughly 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity. This is about 950,000 USD at current exchange rates. If we adjust the time at which SPR received its' financing for inflation (grants received in 2000, over 250,000 pounds of equity in 2005), we get that SPR has had well over 1 million USD in total financing, in 2015 dollars.As I wrote in the attached reddit post, I consider this very suspect. A few patents, a few test articles and zero sales or licensing (at least licensing that SPR would actually get paid for) of any kind is very hard to justify given the resources at SPR had at its' disposal.
@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...
Quote from: deuteragenie on 06/28/2015 07:22 pmQuote from: Rodal on 06/28/2015 03:51 pmQuote from: deuteragenie on 06/28/2015 03:47 pm...Althouth it looks like the field strength is stronger at the small end, we have no data. What about averaging the field values for each frame we see in this video and produce the resulting "averaged" field strength ?We need NUMBERS to quantify this, there is no other way around it. Without numbers one cannot compare.At least now we have everything scaled to the same Max Min numbers, unfortunately we don't know the numbers.Can you tell aero how to output NUMBERS in Meep?I think this is achieved trough the definition of "flux", excerpt from the Meep tutorial:...Finally, we have to specify where we want Meep to compute the flux spectra, and at what frequencies. (This must be done after specifying the geometry, sources, resolution, etcetera, because all of the field parameters are initialized when flux planes are created.) ...We compute the fluxes through a line segment twice the width of the waveguide, located at the beginning or end of the waveguide. (Note that the flux lines are separated by 1 from the boundary of the cell, so that they do not lie within the absorbing PML regions.) Again, there are two cases: the transmitted flux is either computed at the right or the bottom of the computational cell, depending on whether the waveguide is straight or bent. => In 3D and for our case I suppose that the "flux region" in Meep is to be defined as a circle....Finally, we have to output the flux values:(display-fluxes trans refl)This prints a series of outputs like:flux1:, 0.1, 7.91772317108475e-7, -3.16449591437196e-7flux1:, 0.101010101010101, 1.18410865137737e-6, -4.85527604203706e-7flux1:, 0.102020202020202, 1.77218779386503e-6, -7.37944901819701e-7flux1:, 0.103030303030303, 2.63090852112034e-6, -1.11118350510327e-6flux1:, ...This is comma-delimited data, which can easily be imported into any spreadsheet or plotting program (e.g. Matlab): the first column is the frequency, the second is the transmitted power, and the third is the reflected power. So, from there, save the .CSV file and we are ready to go for quantitative analysis.That all looks fine. Now can you tell me how to make this .ctl file work. --the "flux-in-a-box" part.And while you're at it, please code (display-fluxes trans refl) into the file and send it back to me.
Quote from: Rodal on 06/28/2015 03:51 pmQuote from: deuteragenie on 06/28/2015 03:47 pm...Althouth it looks like the field strength is stronger at the small end, we have no data. What about averaging the field values for each frame we see in this video and produce the resulting "averaged" field strength ?We need NUMBERS to quantify this, there is no other way around it. Without numbers one cannot compare.At least now we have everything scaled to the same Max Min numbers, unfortunately we don't know the numbers.Can you tell aero how to output NUMBERS in Meep?I think this is achieved trough the definition of "flux", excerpt from the Meep tutorial:...Finally, we have to specify where we want Meep to compute the flux spectra, and at what frequencies. (This must be done after specifying the geometry, sources, resolution, etcetera, because all of the field parameters are initialized when flux planes are created.) ...We compute the fluxes through a line segment twice the width of the waveguide, located at the beginning or end of the waveguide. (Note that the flux lines are separated by 1 from the boundary of the cell, so that they do not lie within the absorbing PML regions.) Again, there are two cases: the transmitted flux is either computed at the right or the bottom of the computational cell, depending on whether the waveguide is straight or bent. => In 3D and for our case I suppose that the "flux region" in Meep is to be defined as a circle....Finally, we have to output the flux values:(display-fluxes trans refl)This prints a series of outputs like:flux1:, 0.1, 7.91772317108475e-7, -3.16449591437196e-7flux1:, 0.101010101010101, 1.18410865137737e-6, -4.85527604203706e-7flux1:, 0.102020202020202, 1.77218779386503e-6, -7.37944901819701e-7flux1:, 0.103030303030303, 2.63090852112034e-6, -1.11118350510327e-6flux1:, ...This is comma-delimited data, which can easily be imported into any spreadsheet or plotting program (e.g. Matlab): the first column is the frequency, the second is the transmitted power, and the third is the reflected power. So, from there, save the .CSV file and we are ready to go for quantitative analysis.
Quote from: deuteragenie on 06/28/2015 03:47 pm...Althouth it looks like the field strength is stronger at the small end, we have no data. What about averaging the field values for each frame we see in this video and produce the resulting "averaged" field strength ?We need NUMBERS to quantify this, there is no other way around it. Without numbers one cannot compare.At least now we have everything scaled to the same Max Min numbers, unfortunately we don't know the numbers.Can you tell aero how to output NUMBERS in Meep?
...Althouth it looks like the field strength is stronger at the small end, we have no data. What about averaging the field values for each frame we see in this video and produce the resulting "averaged" field strength ?
Quote from: rfmwguy on 06/28/2015 07:45 pm@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...It was 9 inches, but 10.2 should produce better forces from everything I've read. I had intended to run 10.2 inches but got side tracked, in part by your post that you had already selected 10.2. If so then I have time to run it before or while you are collecting data. It's unlikely the fields will show much different than the 9.0 inches, at least until we get some form of numerical output coded into the simulation. I'll go ahead and set up the model, but that will take only seconds to do. Then maybe I'll do some resonance runs while I take a break and read a book.
Quote from: aero on 06/28/2015 07:54 pmQuote from: rfmwguy on 06/28/2015 07:45 pm@rodal - been out shopping for nuisance hardware and trying catch up. The last meep animation...9.0L or 10.2? Considering the last simulation, which would u recommend I select...its10.2 now and easy to shorten...now, not in a couple of days...It was 9 inches, but 10.2 should produce better forces from everything I've read. I had intended to run 10.2 inches but got side tracked, in part by your post that you had already selected 10.2. If so then I have time to run it before or while you are collecting data. It's unlikely the fields will show much different than the 9.0 inches, at least until we get some form of numerical output coded into the simulation. I'll go ahead and set up the model, but that will take only seconds to do. Then maybe I'll do some resonance runs while I take a break and read a book.Thanks aero! Was thinking of a nickname/designation for the drive, for good luck...your name should be part of it. However theres so much support here, have decided on NSF-1701(giving away my age). Your efforts are appreciated my friend.
Quote from: RonM on 06/28/2015 07:08 pmQuote from: wallofwolfstreet on 06/28/2015 06:16 pmSorry to interrupt the great modeling work going on right now, but I condensed some of the recent findings on the intellectual property and financial aspects of SPR into a reddit post. To summarize, it looks like SPR has had alot more money move through the organization over the last 15 years than originally thought. It has received roughly 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity. This is about 950,000 USD at current exchange rates. If we adjust the time at which SPR received its' financing for inflation (grants received in 2000, over 250,000 pounds of equity in 2005), we get that SPR has had well over 1 million USD in total financing, in 2015 dollars.As I wrote in the attached reddit post, I consider this very suspect. A few patents, a few test articles and zero sales or licensing (at least licensing that SPR would actually get paid for) of any kind is very hard to justify given the resources at SPR had at its' disposal. So are you saying 1 million USD over 15 years? That's about $67K a year.That's not enough to pay one engineer. It would be total compensation pack, including salary, benefits, and any company required taxes. Don't forget other business expenses would cut into that amount.SPR is a shoestring operation. Shawyer isn't making any money off of this and I doubt there are any paid employees. Lack of funding is probably why he doesn't have definitive results, assuming his idea works.Yep, I am saying that over the full 15 years, if we bring all the financing figures into 2015 dollars, more than a million USD has gone into SPR.You're right that it is not enough to pay an engineer. SPR, to the best of my knowledge, has never had any employees on the payroll. Additionally, in at least the last two years,2013 and 2014,Shawyer has deferred any salary himself. Note that he is 68 years old, so he will be collecting pension. He is also married, so he will have personal financial support from his wife's pension as well. QuoteSPR is a shoestring operation. Shawyer isn't making any money off of this and I doubt there are any paid employees. Lack of funding is probably why he doesn't have definitive results, assuming his idea works.The reason I disagree with this, is that 1 million dollars isn't exactly small cheese, especially when we consider that there are what, almost a dozen individuals attempting their own replications on maybe a few hundred or thousand each?
Quote from: wallofwolfstreet on 06/28/2015 06:16 pmSorry to interrupt the great modeling work going on right now, but I condensed some of the recent findings on the intellectual property and financial aspects of SPR into a reddit post. To summarize, it looks like SPR has had alot more money move through the organization over the last 15 years than originally thought. It has received roughly 600,000 pounds in grants, loans and equity. This is about 950,000 USD at current exchange rates. If we adjust the time at which SPR received its' financing for inflation (grants received in 2000, over 250,000 pounds of equity in 2005), we get that SPR has had well over 1 million USD in total financing, in 2015 dollars.As I wrote in the attached reddit post, I consider this very suspect. A few patents, a few test articles and zero sales or licensing (at least licensing that SPR would actually get paid for) of any kind is very hard to justify given the resources at SPR had at its' disposal. So are you saying 1 million USD over 15 years? That's about $67K a year.That's not enough to pay one engineer. It would be total compensation pack, including salary, benefits, and any company required taxes. Don't forget other business expenses would cut into that amount.SPR is a shoestring operation. Shawyer isn't making any money off of this and I doubt there are any paid employees. Lack of funding is probably why he doesn't have definitive results, assuming his idea works.
SPR is a shoestring operation. Shawyer isn't making any money off of this and I doubt there are any paid employees. Lack of funding is probably why he doesn't have definitive results, assuming his idea works.
Syntax error:tut1.ctl:29:0: source expression failed to match any pattern in form (define ((display-flux-in-box dir box)) (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box dir box) "\n"))Yes, I got that. but what is the fix?
I can't contribute much to the technical discussion - hell, I can barely follow this at the concept level - BUT video editing and production I can do, including multiple layers, overlays, text, and motion tracking. I will try to contribute (with tech assistance on what makes sense!) in this way - hopefully it will help those whose EM understanding runs way deeper than mine! [/quoteMay need ur help vax...when I do the live video stream, it will contain a laser dot that (hopefully) will have vertical deflection. Translating that into a "chart" recorder type of display would could be very helpful to others. Here is a vid I made last week to test a concept...there is a small bit showing deflection.Next vid will be streamed live w/stationary camera on laser spot
Quote from: aero on 06/28/2015 07:57 pmSyntax error:tut1.ctl:29:0: source expression failed to match any pattern in form (define ((display-flux-in-box dir box)) (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box dir box) "\n"))Yes, I got that. but what is the fix?No clue. Looks like this tutorial file is broken no only for that reason.How about trying out something like this in the run-until clause ?(at-every 1.0 ( (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (meep-fields-flux-in-box fields Z (volume (center 5 0 0) (size 0 1 2))) ", \n" ) ))or (probably for more recent Meep versions):(at-every 1.0 ( (print "flux:, " (meep-time) ", " (flux-in-box Z (volume (center 5 0 0) (size 0 1 2))) ", \n" ) ))I read that Meep also has: electric-energy-in-box, magnetic-energy-in-box and field-energy-in-box, and can compute force spectra... when it does not core dump! Also, it looks like the recommended practice is to define a flux region first:(define wvg-pwr (add-flux f 0 1 (make flux-region (direction Z) (center 0 0) (size (* 1.2 (+ (* 2 sw) s)) (* 1.2 sw) 0))))and then display the fluxes (as a CSV):(display-fluxes wvg-pwr)See here: http://ab-initio.mit.edu/wiki/index.php/Meep_Tutorial/Optical_forces
Quote from: VAXHeadroom on 06/28/2015 07:54 pmI can't contribute much to the technical discussion - hell, I can barely follow this at the concept level - BUT video editing and production I can do, including multiple layers, overlays, text, and motion tracking. I will try to contribute (with tech assistance on what makes sense!) in this way - hopefully it will help those whose EM understanding runs way deeper than mine! [/quoteMay need ur help vax...when I do the live video stream, it will contain a laser dot that (hopefully) will have vertical deflection. Translating that into a "chart" recorder type of display would could be very helpful to others. Here is a vid I made last week to test a concept...there is a small bit showing deflection.Can do
I can't contribute much to the technical discussion - hell, I can barely follow this at the concept level - BUT video editing and production I can do, including multiple layers, overlays, text, and motion tracking. I will try to contribute (with tech assistance on what makes sense!) in this way - hopefully it will help those whose EM understanding runs way deeper than mine! [/quoteMay need ur help vax...when I do the live video stream, it will contain a laser dot that (hopefully) will have vertical deflection. Translating that into a "chart" recorder type of display would could be very helpful to others. Here is a vid I made last week to test a concept...there is a small bit showing deflection.
Quote from: SeeShells on 06/28/2015 05:52 amThanks so much for taking your valuable time to make this movie Could you be so nice to make movies from these four sets also, please ? (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1XizxEfB23tfmcxbUxsM0lVTGVkemVTX1RaMlZJb001NHVaUDRvYUtjS0lIbjdIcUNkX0k&usp=sharing June 27 runs) 1) rfmwguy- ez-xyz views › June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Hy views, Hy-y and2) rfmwguy- ez-xyz views › June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Hy views, Hy -zand3) rfmwguy- ez-xyz views › June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Ex views, Ex -yand4) rfmwguy- ez-xyz views › June 27 views, Magnetic antenna, Hz views, Hz -xThanks
...Example movie made from this data for EX(x,y,z) and HX(x,y,z) Frames 0-9 looped twice, 3 frames/sec. Is this kind of synchronized output useful?
Next vid will be streamed live w/stationary camera on laser spot