How to push on the Vacuum, or create friction with the Vacuum using Radiation Reaction.I think the Woodward effect can be modeled this way, but please note that this is a work in progress. Not a paper for review. I'm hoping to give us something to discuss and make the conversation a little more productive.
Quote from: WarpTech on 11/22/2017 04:43 pmHow to push on the Vacuum, or create friction with the Vacuum using Radiation Reaction.I think the Woodward effect can be modeled this way, but please note that this is a work in progress. Not a paper for review. I'm hoping to give us something to discuss and make the conversation a little more productive. So a rocket needs propellant. What do you suspect might be being displaced? Is this something being displaced similar to what seems to be a change in the velocity of c around a rotating object via the frame dragging effect? Could it be related to length contraction such as what happens when accelerating inducing a change in ones acceleration to ensure they do not surpass c. That is under acceleration the contraction of space time being a flow of something?
Quote from: dustinthewind on 11/27/2017 12:02 amQuote from: WarpTech on 11/22/2017 04:43 pmHow to push on the Vacuum, or create friction with the Vacuum using Radiation Reaction.I think the Woodward effect can be modeled this way, but please note that this is a work in progress. Not a paper for review. I'm hoping to give us something to discuss and make the conversation a little more productive. So a rocket needs propellant. What do you suspect might be being displaced? Is this something being displaced similar to what seems to be a change in the velocity of c around a rotating object via the frame dragging effect? Could it be related to length contraction such as what happens when accelerating inducing a change in ones acceleration to ensure they do not surpass c. That is under acceleration the contraction of space time being a flow of something? The damping coefficient shows the vacuum photons act like "friction", working against an atom when its da/dt =/= 0. So unequal masses on a spring will have unequal friction.
Quote from: WarpTech on 11/27/2017 02:01 amQuote from: dustinthewind on 11/27/2017 12:02 amQuote from: WarpTech on 11/22/2017 04:43 pmHow to push on the Vacuum, or create friction with the Vacuum using Radiation Reaction.I think the Woodward effect can be modeled this way, but please note that this is a work in progress. Not a paper for review. I'm hoping to give us something to discuss and make the conversation a little more productive. So a rocket needs propellant. What do you suspect might be being displaced? Is this something being displaced similar to what seems to be a change in the velocity of c around a rotating object via the frame dragging effect? Could it be related to length contraction such as what happens when accelerating inducing a change in ones acceleration to ensure they do not surpass c. That is under acceleration the contraction of space time being a flow of something? The damping coefficient shows the vacuum photons act like "friction", working against an atom when its da/dt =/= 0. So unequal masses on a spring will have unequal friction.Doesn't there need to be some change in effective mass between the push and pull to get effective thrust? Your suggesting the heavier mass is pushed and the lighter mass is pulled? Effectively showing more friction when the mass is heavier? The result being a thrust effect via some coupling to something that effectively changes the mass? Or am I mistaken in how I am taking this.
Quote from: dustinthewind on 11/27/2017 03:24 amQuote from: WarpTech on 11/27/2017 02:01 amQuote from: dustinthewind on 11/27/2017 12:02 amQuote from: WarpTech on 11/22/2017 04:43 pmHow to push on the Vacuum, or create friction with the Vacuum using Radiation Reaction.I think the Woodward effect can be modeled this way, but please note that this is a work in progress. Not a paper for review. I'm hoping to give us something to discuss and make the conversation a little more productive. So a rocket needs propellant. What do you suspect might be being displaced? Is this something being displaced similar to what seems to be a change in the velocity of c around a rotating object via the frame dragging effect? Could it be related to length contraction such as what happens when accelerating inducing a change in ones acceleration to ensure they do not surpass c. That is under acceleration the contraction of space time being a flow of something? The damping coefficient shows the vacuum photons act like "friction", working against an atom when its da/dt =/= 0. So unequal masses on a spring will have unequal friction.Doesn't there need to be some change in effective mass between the push and pull to get effective thrust? Your suggesting the heavier mass is pushed and the lighter mass is pulled? Effectively showing more friction when the mass is heavier? The result being a thrust effect via some coupling to something that effectively changes the mass? Or am I mistaken in how I am taking this. Take this with a grain of salt, but the RR Force apparently depends on da/dt, not a mass fluctuation. So I would guess it depends on da/dt and the number of atoms that are oscillating. Therefore, a light metal like Aluminum will have more atoms/kg of mass, as per Appendix B in Milonni's book.The PZT stack does not have a symmetrical response. Piezoelectric effect and Electrostriction operate at frequencies w and 2w respectively. So the displacement of the stack when expanding from its "zero position" is different than the displacement when it's contracting from that position. Suggestions are welcome, but per Jose's 2016 presentation, the force we want to amplify is toward the small aluminum mass, not the big brass mass. That would seem to imply a frame dragging effect.
Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) representation of general relativityH. E. Puthoff m(K) = m_o*K^(3/2)
It appears that the displacement you obtain in the asymmetric case is in the opposite direction of the displacement claimed by Woodward.
The direction of the displacement is the same as claimed by Woodward
QuoteThe direction of the displacement is the same as claimed by WoodwardI'm completely open to be disproved, but I'm afraid this is incorrect.He claims that the "push when heavy / pull when light" action produces an actual force like the one drawn in the second diagram you posted. Such force creates a torque that rotates the balance arms accordingly. His explanation wouldn't make sense if the torque had the direction you show in your simulation.I know that Tajmar has built a slightly different set up, but he seems to expect an actual displacement like the one I'm describing. (Picture from "Revolutionary Propulsion Research at TU Dresden)
Something related to WarpTech's equations above Quote from: WarpTech on 11/22/2017 04:43 pmHow to push on the Vacuum, or create friction with the Vacuum using Radiation Reaction.I think the Woodward effect can be modeled this way, but please note that this is a work in progress. Not a paper for review. I'm hoping to give us something to discuss and make the conversation a little more productive. I realized this morning is that Puthoff's equations for the polarizable vacuum suggest a changing mass per change in acceleration also. That isQuote from: https://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/9909/9909037.pdf Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) representation of general relativityH. E. Puthoff m(K) = m_o*K^(3/2)so as an object falls into a gravity well undergoing a change in acceleration is mass changes also.
Other sources I have seen show the thrust towards the brass mass. Here is another from 2009 showing the thrust in the same direction.
Quote from: Povel on 12/02/2017 03:51 pmIt appears that the displacement you obtain in the asymmetric case is in the opposite direction of the displacement claimed by Woodward. The direction of the displacement is the same as claimed by Woodward. It is easier to understand if I label everything properly.
Check this image again. The displacement in the center is better indicated now. It is in the direction one would expect from thrust coming out the left side. Unless you have a better source, then I am inclined to go with what I have seen in the public domain.
QuoteCheck this image again. The displacement in the center is better indicated now. It is in the direction one would expect from thrust coming out the left side. Unless you have a better source, then I am inclined to go with what I have seen in the public domain. I'd argue it is actually opposite. Using the notation of the scheme device you posted, the displacement you highlighted is in the positive x verse, while the thrust expected is in the negative x verse.Imagine the thruster enclosed in a "black box" for simplicity, leaving the (supposedly real) thrust "coming out" the brass mass, in the same position on the balance of your first simulation. If you put this box on a balance like the one you simulated it will swing clockwise, not anticlockwise.