I have the following design equation for a box resonator.L,M,N being the number of half wavelengths for the box dimensions d,b,a respectively.Is there a similar equation for truncated cone shaped resonators? I do not trust my ability to derive it.Thanks.
Quote from: WarpTech on 06/16/2015 06:59 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 06/16/2015 06:29 pmIf I understand correctly your intent to attribute cavity momentum to a field property, then the field will carry off equal and opposite momentum. So are you describing radiation reaction? If you are, then because the system is closed, there is net zero momentum expressed externally.You also need to account for forces that are 1000x greater than that expected of a photon rocket, and you seem intent on doing that using electromagnetism. Known physics says that this is impossible."Known" does not mean "understand", since I "know" that gravity can be mimicked by an EM effect, and this is not well understood by others. So this response does not surprise me. In a Newtonian gravitational field, an object falls to lower its potential energy. It loses energy and gains mass in the process. It does not eject mass to conserve momentum;E => E/sqrt(K)m => m*K^3/2In what I've proposed, the frustum "falls" forward to lower it's potential energy as it gains mass. The frustum is charged by a magnetron to raise it's potential energy and input more mass. It doesn't lose mass if it gains velocity.The "New Physics" you want is right in front of you! I'm showing you how to mimic gravity using magnetic flux as a gauge-gravity potential. This is about as NEW as it gets! Gauge potentials are simply the potential for a phase shift. The phase shift caused by magnetic flux is indistinguishable from the phase shift caused by a gravitational field, acting on the identical wave function. Most people do not understand this clearly.ToddThere is no problem in visualizing moving an object with an external electromagnetic field, external to the object.But in the EM Drive the electromagnetic field is inside the cavity, instead of the cavity being inside an external electromagnetic field. The example you give is of an object falling, with a gravity field that is all around, external to the object as well.
Quote from: deltaMass on 06/16/2015 06:29 pmIf I understand correctly your intent to attribute cavity momentum to a field property, then the field will carry off equal and opposite momentum. So are you describing radiation reaction? If you are, then because the system is closed, there is net zero momentum expressed externally.You also need to account for forces that are 1000x greater than that expected of a photon rocket, and you seem intent on doing that using electromagnetism. Known physics says that this is impossible."Known" does not mean "understand", since I "know" that gravity can be mimicked by an EM effect, and this is not well understood by others. So this response does not surprise me. In a Newtonian gravitational field, an object falls to lower its potential energy. It loses energy and gains mass in the process. It does not eject mass to conserve momentum;E => E/sqrt(K)m => m*K^3/2In what I've proposed, the frustum "falls" forward to lower it's potential energy as it gains mass. The frustum is charged by a magnetron to raise it's potential energy and input more mass. It doesn't lose mass if it gains velocity.The "New Physics" you want is right in front of you! I'm showing you how to mimic gravity using magnetic flux as a gauge-gravity potential. This is about as NEW as it gets! Gauge potentials are simply the potential for a phase shift. The phase shift caused by magnetic flux is indistinguishable from the phase shift caused by a gravitational field, acting on the identical wave function. Most people do not understand this clearly.Todd
If I understand correctly your intent to attribute cavity momentum to a field property, then the field will carry off equal and opposite momentum. So are you describing radiation reaction? If you are, then because the system is closed, there is net zero momentum expressed externally.You also need to account for forces that are 1000x greater than that expected of a photon rocket, and you seem intent on doing that using electromagnetism. Known physics says that this is impossible.
In my model, the gravitational field external to the particle plays no role. Only the field that intersects the particle plays a role by attenuating the natural frequency of the harmonic oscillators. That is what is going on inside the frustum. IMO, it's the same thing. Inside a proton, it's natural oscillations are attenuated more if it moves in one direction (increasing K) vs the other (decreasing K). Attenuation lowers its frequency and energy;f => f/sqrt(K)E => E/sqrt(K)The Energy of its internal oscillation in a gravitational field is equivalent to it's Potential energy. As it falls, it's frequency is shifted lower due to the increasing phase shift, i.e. gravitational red-shift of matter waves.I see no difference between this and how the EM Drive works. If there is nothing expelled, not even heat, then as the EM Drive falls forward it retains the added mass from the power source, which is converted into kinetic energy. The power source is losing mass of course in the process, unless it happens to be powered from solar panels. Todd
In a Newtonian gravitational field, an object falls to lower its potential energy. It loses energy and gains mass in the process. It does not eject mass to conserve momentum
According to the report, five deep space probes, propelled by electric thrusters, have explored the moon, asteroids and a comet. Japan-made "Hayabusa" was the first to bring samples from an asteroid back to earth, while US spacecraft "Dawn" was the first to probe on two asteroids in one mission
Experts believe that, given the significant weight reduction offered by electric propulsion, an array of 40 electric thrusters of 50 kilowatts would be able to send a 300-ton spacecraft to Mars in just 200 days.
China also plans to launch a hybrid propulsion communication satellite at the end of 2016. The electric propulsion system would be used in China's space station in the future, Wang says.
I didn't see this covered here yet, but I think this is worthy of front page news:China’s Interstellar Probe May Be Propelled by Electric Thrusterhttp://en.yibada.com/articles/37587/20150610/china-interstellar-probe-electric-thruster.htmQuoteAccording to the report, five deep space probes, propelled by electric thrusters, have explored the moon, asteroids and a comet. Japan-made "Hayabusa" was the first to bring samples from an asteroid back to earth, while US spacecraft "Dawn" was the first to probe on two asteroids in one missionChina aims to send craft to Mars in 200 days with electric thrustershttp://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1101&MainCatID=11&id=20150614000021QuoteExperts believe that, given the significant weight reduction offered by electric propulsion, an array of 40 electric thrusters of 50 kilowatts would be able to send a 300-ton spacecraft to Mars in just 200 days.Electric thruster propels China's interstellar ambitionshttp://www.china.org.cn/china/2015-06/08/content_35768904.htmQuoteChina also plans to launch a hybrid propulsion communication satellite at the end of 2016. The electric propulsion system would be used in China's space station in the future, Wang says.
FYIhttp://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3366.html"Here we consider low-energy quantum mechanics in the presence of gravitational time dilation and show that the latter leads to the decoherence of quantum superpositions. Time dilation induces a universal coupling between the internal degrees of freedom and the centre of mass of a composite particle. The resulting correlations lead to decoherence in the particle position, even without any external environment."
Quote from: WarpTech on 06/16/2015 07:41 pmIn my model, the gravitational field external to the particle plays no role. Only the field that intersects the particle plays a role by attenuating the natural frequency of the harmonic oscillators. That is what is going on inside the frustum. IMO, it's the same thing. Inside a proton, it's natural oscillations are attenuated more if it moves in one direction (increasing K) vs the other (decreasing K). Attenuation lowers its frequency and energy;f => f/sqrt(K)E => E/sqrt(K)The Energy of its internal oscillation in a gravitational field is equivalent to it's Potential energy. As it falls, it's frequency is shifted lower due to the increasing phase shift, i.e. gravitational red-shift of matter waves.I see no difference between this and how the EM Drive works. If there is nothing expelled, not even heat, then as the EM Drive falls forward it retains the added mass from the power source, which is converted into kinetic energy. The power source is losing mass of course in the process, unless it happens to be powered from solar panels. ToddThe point was that in your example (and all known examples), you can accelerate the center of mass of an object using external fields (fields that are external to the object being moved). There is no example in Physics that I know of, where one can accelerate the center of mass of an object by solely using an internal field, or an internal force.For example, an astronaut cannot accelerate a spacecraft's center of mass by moving, inside the spacecraft, a magnet.Can you provide an example where the center of mass of an object has been accelerated using a field or force internal to the object being accelerated?
...Were that crazy equation true, then a 1000 ton mass elevated 100 Km in 1 gee would gain 10 mg.I am forced to admit that this experiment would be very hard to do, so I can't rebut your theory on two fronts instead of just the one.
Quote from: deltaMass on 06/16/2015 07:44 pm...Were that crazy equation true, then a 1000 ton mass elevated 100 Km in 1 gee would gain 10 mg.I am forced to admit that this experiment would be very hard to do, so I can't rebut your theory on two fronts instead of just the one.You have it upside down and backwards. An object gains mass as it moves downward in a gravitational field. It loses mass as it moves upward. m => m*K^3/2K = 1/(1 - 2GM/rc^2)As r increases, K decreases and so does m.I wrote up my hypothesis in an earlier post.Todd
Quote from: rfmwguyThis has been my thought experiment...a point or points coupling to a natural entropic force. Surfing the wave so to speak or riding the wind. Sorry for the basic description...I cannot visualize particle or wave ejection/leakage thrusting forward nor thermal radiation of some sort. If emdrive works I'm convinced (without the math to prove it yet) that its being coupled to an elemental, natural force we have yet to measure directly. I'll leave it as an entropic force for the time being...the natural tendency for all energy and matter to disperse.So how do you explain life? Self organizing, becoming more and more complex, Fibonacci patterned from micro to macro scale. Apparently it is defying this mighty force.
This has been my thought experiment...a point or points coupling to a natural entropic force. Surfing the wave so to speak or riding the wind. Sorry for the basic description...I cannot visualize particle or wave ejection/leakage thrusting forward nor thermal radiation of some sort. If emdrive works I'm convinced (without the math to prove it yet) that its being coupled to an elemental, natural force we have yet to measure directly. I'll leave it as an entropic force for the time being...the natural tendency for all energy and matter to disperse.
http://phys.org/news/2015-06-theory-reality-nonlinear-optical-metamaterials.htmlSynopsis: metamaterials with negative index of refraction created in testable quantities for the first time.Question: Jack Sarfati claims such materials would of necessity be interchangeable with negative mass/energy which can then be used in space drives related to the topic at hand. Does that article make his claim testable now?
You might want to bookmark this link: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/em-drive-experimentThis is my ustream video channel where I will try and broadcast a live 1st test of my humble DIYDrive experiment in July. I may upload some videos in the meantime as I get further into the build.I have set chat up as well, but only plan to use it after a video upload or live event. I won't be routinely monitoring it. I'll hang here for most interactions.For now, you can log on to ustream for free, preferably creating the same username as you have on NSF, so I will know who I'm chatting with.Oh, forgot to mention. Click FOLLOW once your account is created, then you'll receive notices when uploads occur.
Quote from: WarpTech on 06/16/2015 10:51 pm...As r increases, K decreases and so does m.I wrote up my hypothesis in an earlier post.ToddPlease re-read what I wrote. dh < 0 (falling) and dm > 0 (when lower).The elevated mass, according to your crazy physics, should be smaller than what the mass was below.But yes, I should have said that the elevated mass is lighter according to you. Slip o' the kbd.
...As r increases, K decreases and so does m.I wrote up my hypothesis in an earlier post.Todd