Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 02:36 amYou do understand that for a truly static EMDrive it will NOT move?Shawyer in his Force measurement document makes that very clear.The EMDrive operates in 1 of 3 mode:1) Do Nothing - no externally applied forces 2) Motor Mode - externally applied force moving the cavity big end toward small end.3) Generator Mode - externally applied force trying to move the cavity small end toward big end.The Energy for the Motor Mode generated Force to do Work over Distance comes from newly created microwave energy, powered by increased energy draw on the power supply.Hook an EMDrive to a rotary wheel and feed it to a generator is not a source of free energy as the energy necessary to turn the generator under load comes from the EMDrives primary electrical power supply.Pardon me if I am not understanding but I would like to clarify what seems to be a conceptual problem. Are you saying an em drive can be truly static? That doesn't make sense to me because take a car for instance moving down the street. The EM drive is not static to the car. In the case of the car the EM drive can do work and has force but for the lab frame observer no force is observed? In one case the Em drive could gain kinetic energy and the other frame would observe no gain in kinetic energy. That just doesn't seem right to me or am I misunderstanding things.
You do understand that for a truly static EMDrive it will NOT move?Shawyer in his Force measurement document makes that very clear.The EMDrive operates in 1 of 3 mode:1) Do Nothing - no externally applied forces 2) Motor Mode - externally applied force moving the cavity big end toward small end.3) Generator Mode - externally applied force trying to move the cavity small end toward big end.The Energy for the Motor Mode generated Force to do Work over Distance comes from newly created microwave energy, powered by increased energy draw on the power supply.Hook an EMDrive to a rotary wheel and feed it to a generator is not a source of free energy as the energy necessary to turn the generator under load comes from the EMDrives primary electrical power supply.
A number of methods have been used in the UK, the US and China to measure the forces produced by an EmDrive thruster. In each successful case, the EmDrive force data has been superimposed on an increasing or decreasing background force, generated by the test equipment itself. Indeed, in the UK when the background force changes were eliminated, in an effort to improve force measurement resolution, no EmDrive force was measured. This was clearly a result of attempting to measure the forces on a fully static thruster, where T and R cancel each other. UK flight thruster measurements employ this principle to calibrate the background noise on the force balance prior to carrying out force measurements.
You do understand that for a truly static EMDrive it will NOT move?Shawyer in his Force measurement document makes that very clear.The EMDrive operates in 1 of 3 mode:1) Do Nothing - no externally applied forces 2) Motor Mode - externally applied force moving the cavity big end toward small end.3) Generator Mode - externally applied force trying to move the cavity small end toward big end.
The only place where I know that Shawyer has specifically addressed spaceship transit times is last month's Daily Mail article: "Its inventor calculates that an interstellar probe would take ten years to reach two-thirds the speed of light, which he sees as pretty much the limit of how fast we could practically travel." I analyzed that claim here (over on the Feature Article thread) and showed that with T/P < 1/v specific thrust limitation his zero to 2/3 c in 10 years craft would require a power plant which generates at least 97.3 MW/kg. That is a massive power density and is five orders of magnitude greater than the astounding 1 kW/kg which VASIMR needs for its 39 day trips to Mars.It is also possible that Shawyer simply forgot to apply his T/P < 1/v when he calculated his interstellar probe acceleration.
He says 304 N/KW and 1m/s^2 and it looks like he means these to be constant.
Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 03:24 am He says 304 N/KW and 1m/s^2 and it looks like he means these to be constant. 340 mN/kw is the closest I could find there. If we got 340 N/kw, there wouldn't be any question as to whether the drive worked, we'd have put it on literally anything that moves by this point and solved the energy problems of the world.
Quote from: kdhilliard on 06/23/2015 05:35 pmThe only place where I know that Shawyer has specifically addressed spaceship transit times is last month's Daily Mail article: "Its inventor calculates that an interstellar probe would take ten years to reach two-thirds the speed of light, which he sees as pretty much the limit of how fast we could practically travel." I analyzed that claim here (over on the Feature Article thread) and showed that with T/P < 1/v specific thrust limitation his zero to 2/3 c in 10 years craft would require a power plant which generates at least 97.3 MW/kg. That is a massive power density and is five orders of magnitude greater than the astounding 1 kW/kg which VASIMR needs for its 39 day trips to Mars.It is also possible that Shawyer simply forgot to apply his T/P < 1/v when he calculated his interstellar probe acceleration.These figures for the interstellar probe can be seen in this presentation of Shawyer's: http://www.emdrive.com/iac2014presentation.pdf, specifically slides 9 and 10. He says 304 N/KW and 1m/s^2 and it looks like he means these to be constant. He also says that his power source is a 200KW nuclear generator. Even if you ignore the thrust-to-power ratio, it is obvious that the kinetic energy at the end is many many many times more than what this generator could possibly provide in the amount of time specified.Interestingly, on slide 11 he somehow claims to be calculating efficiency (based on energy input and final kinetic energy), to be less than 1 but this is clearly wrong given the figures in the previous two slides.
The power supply provides the Energy for the Force to do Work.
Slide 9 says "304N/KW". That's what I am referring to.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 03:53 amThe power supply provides the Energy for the Force to do Work.And that Force will do Work with the Energy from the power supply as long as we can keep it powered. I'm confused by your interjection. We have a thing that moves around when we turn on the power. Do you have some objection I'm missing here, or are you just in Delta's side of the fence? Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 04:04 amSlide 9 says "304N/KW". That's what I am referring to.Bowing out, then.
Strictly speaking the EMDrive will NOT move unless an outside force is applied, moving it big end to small end.Vibration caused that to initially occur.So just switching it on will not necessarily cause it to move.
Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 03:24 amQuote from: kdhilliard on 06/23/2015 05:35 pmThe only place where I know that Shawyer has specifically addressed spaceship transit times is last month's Daily Mail article: "Its inventor calculates that an interstellar probe would take ten years to reach two-thirds the speed of light, which he sees as pretty much the limit of how fast we could practically travel." I analyzed that claim here (over on the Feature Article thread) and showed that with T/P < 1/v specific thrust limitation his zero to 2/3 c in 10 years craft would require a power plant which generates at least 97.3 MW/kg. That is a massive power density and is five orders of magnitude greater than the astounding 1 kW/kg which VASIMR needs for its 39 day trips to Mars.It is also possible that Shawyer simply forgot to apply his T/P < 1/v when he calculated his interstellar probe acceleration.These figures for the interstellar probe can be seen in this presentation of Shawyer's: http://www.emdrive.com/iac2014presentation.pdf, specifically slides 9 and 10. He says 304 N/KW and 1m/s^2 and it looks like he means these to be constant. He also says that his power source is a 200KW nuclear generator. Even if you ignore the thrust-to-power ratio, it is obvious that the kinetic energy at the end is many many many times more than what this generator could possibly provide in the amount of time specified.Interestingly, on slide 11 he somehow claims to be calculating efficiency (based on energy input and final kinetic energy), to be less than 1 but this is clearly wrong given the figures in the previous two slides.The ship obeys A = F/M. It cares not about accumulated KE or velocity.The EMDrive generates a constant Force. The power supply generates constant energy to enable the Force to do Work on the ship's Mass and Accelerate it according to A = F/M.Violation of CofE by a constantly accelerating ship is just an unproven theory.
Quote from: Dortex on 06/24/2015 04:06 amQuote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 03:53 amThe power supply provides the Energy for the Force to do Work.And that Force will do Work with the Energy from the power supply as long as we can keep it powered. I'm confused by your interjection. We have a thing that moves around when we turn on the power. Do you have some objection I'm missing here, or are you just in Delta's side of the fence? Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 04:04 amSlide 9 says "304N/KW". That's what I am referring to.Bowing out, then.Strictly speaking the EMDrive will NOT move unless an outside force is applied, moving it big end to small end.Vibration caused that to initially occur.So just switching it on will not necessarily cause it to move.
The ship obeys A = F/M. It cares not about accumulated KE or velocity.The EMDrive generates a constant Force. ...
Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 04:14 amQuote from: Dortex on 06/24/2015 04:06 amQuote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 03:53 amThe power supply provides the Energy for the Force to do Work.And that Force will do Work with the Energy from the power supply as long as we can keep it powered. I'm confused by your interjection. We have a thing that moves around when we turn on the power. Do you have some objection I'm missing here, or are you just in Delta's side of the fence? Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 04:04 amSlide 9 says "304N/KW". That's what I am referring to.Bowing out, then.Strictly speaking the EMDrive will NOT move unless an outside force is applied, moving it big end to small end.Vibration caused that to initially occur.So just switching it on will not necessarily cause it to move.I hate to be the one saying this but you appear to be claiming that no force will be measured unless there is "interference" ie. other forces at play... When all other forces are removed it does nothing. I seriously hope this is not the case.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 04:14 amQuote from: Dortex on 06/24/2015 04:06 amQuote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 03:53 amThe power supply provides the Energy for the Force to do Work.And that Force will do Work with the Energy from the power supply as long as we can keep it powered. I'm confused by your interjection. We have a thing that moves around when we turn on the power. Do you have some objection I'm missing here, or are you just in Delta's side of the fence? Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 04:04 amSlide 9 says "304N/KW". That's what I am referring to.Bowing out, then.Strictly speaking the EMDrive will NOT move unless an outside force is applied, moving it big end to small end.Vibration caused that to initially occur.So just switching it on will not necessarily cause it to move.Honestly it could happen either way, move on its own or need to be pushed. The fulcrum I'm building will detect both ways as it can be free to move or push on scales. But, wait a minute, if I move just a few microns to deflect a scale, it's moving, right? Just doesn't make sense. Or do you really want to say its mass changes to show deflection on the scale?Shell
The EMDrive is trigger out of DoNothing mode and into Motor or Generator mode by externally applied forces (could be just vibration), upsetting the resonate EM waves in the cavity as per slide 7 attached.Interesting point is that when SPR did what EWs did, eliminated vibration, measured EMDrive generated Force went to zero.
Quote from: SeeShells on 06/24/2015 04:52 amQuote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 04:14 amQuote from: Dortex on 06/24/2015 04:06 amQuote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 03:53 amThe power supply provides the Energy for the Force to do Work.And that Force will do Work with the Energy from the power supply as long as we can keep it powered. I'm confused by your interjection. We have a thing that moves around when we turn on the power. Do you have some objection I'm missing here, or are you just in Delta's side of the fence? Quote from: zero123 on 06/24/2015 04:04 amSlide 9 says "304N/KW". That's what I am referring to.Bowing out, then.Strictly speaking the EMDrive will NOT move unless an outside force is applied, moving it big end to small end.Vibration caused that to initially occur.So just switching it on will not necessarily cause it to move.Honestly it could happen either way, move on its own or need to be pushed. The fulcrum I'm building will detect both ways as it can be free to move or push on scales. But, wait a minute, if I move just a few microns to deflect a scale, it's moving, right? Just doesn't make sense. Or do you really want to say its mass changes to show deflection on the scale?ShellJust needs some vibration.The EMDrive is an inertial ratchet. Push it on the small end and it will oppose that push, moving into Generator mode. Push it on the big end and it will support that push, moving into Motor mode.It may be that EW cooked its own goose then they worked so hard to eliminate vibration, without which the EMDrive will just sit there and get hot.
I think I just proved my hypothesis, with an open ended cone anyway. Very simply put, the cone shape has an inductance gradient that acts as a particle accelerator. A constant DC Current flowing around the cone perimeter at the big end will feel a force toward the small end. The current will "fall" in that direction, losing energy (and mass) in the process. At the same time, an equal and opposite force is acting on the magnetic flux contained in the current loop, pushing the flux out the back of the cone.Write up soon!Todd