Author Topic: Woodward's effect  (Read 285120 times)

Offline missinglink

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Liked: 15
  • Likes Given: 82
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1160 on: 11/21/2017 06:14 PM »
A glance at http://retractionwatch.com/ shows that publication in a peer-reviewed journal isn't necessarily a strong indicator of quality.

Number of citations is better, but there have been examples of "gaming the system" here, too.

Some retracted papers actually have more citations post retraction than before!

In any case, to an outsider peer review and citations are merely indirect indicators. Another indirect indicator is observing how people argue.

I must confess that I am irritated by how little support forum member meberbs is getting from the moderators. More than once, advocates of one hypothesis/theory or another violate the bounds of decorum by engaging in stalling, misdirection, pretend misunderstanding and other rhetorical tricks while meberbs stays scrupulously on topic.

Would be nice to see forum moderation drop "evenhandedness" in favor of evaluating actual conduct.

(None of the above should be taken as casting aspersions of any kind on Professor Woodward.)


Offline Povel

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1161 on: 11/21/2017 09:39 PM »
@ missinglink

Of course, I'm not claiming it to be a strong indicator or quality. Skepticism is always encouraged.
But again, if the peer-review process was conducted properly, one should reasonably conclude (at the very least) that a team of experts didn't find anything fundamentally and obviously wrong in Woodward hypothesis.
Considering what this hypothesis is about, that's a quite remarkable achievement already.


In general, I agree with you about the number of citations and looking on how people argue about, though in certain cases this could be unhelpful, even in the absence of people cheating the system.

In many fields there is just a handful of leading specialists around the world who both produce original work themselves and also peer review each otherís work.
Certain specific field of research get a quite low number of citations simply because they are "unfashionable" or controversial, and not many people are working on it, let alone arguing about it.
People might think a certain research is not important because it is not highly cited but it is not highly cited because people think it is unimportant (since otherwise it would be highly cited)
 
Works about Mach's principle and origin of inertia fall right into this category.
There was a recent nice article on American Scientist about it, and its conclusion is similar

https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-forgotten-mystery-of-inertia#



On a different note, I knew before (and your link sort of confirms it) that the most severe misconducts in peer review publication seem to happen in the biology/medicine field. Similar events seem to be much rarer in physical sciences.
« Last Edit: 11/22/2017 01:33 PM by Povel »

Offline WarpTech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Do it!
  • Vista, CA
  • Liked: 1350
  • Likes Given: 1814
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1162 on: 11/22/2017 04:43 PM »
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.  8)
« Last Edit: 11/23/2017 03:06 AM by WarpTech »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 267
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1163 on: 11/27/2017 12:02 AM »
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.  8)

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? 

Offline WarpTech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Do it!
  • Vista, CA
  • Liked: 1350
  • Likes Given: 1814
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1164 on: 11/27/2017 02:01 AM »
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.  8)

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.
« Last Edit: 11/27/2017 02:02 AM by WarpTech »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 267
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1165 on: 11/27/2017 03:24 AM »
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.  8)

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. 
« Last Edit: 11/27/2017 04:06 AM by dustinthewind »

Offline WarpTech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Do it!
  • Vista, CA
  • Liked: 1350
  • Likes Given: 1814
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1166 on: 11/27/2017 03:38 AM »
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.  8)

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.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 267
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1167 on: 11/27/2017 04:07 AM »
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.  8)

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.

I see so your suggesting the change in effective mass has something to do with change in rate of acceleration.  So a larger rate of change in acceleration for the mass moving away and then a slower rate of change in acceleration of the mass towards gives an un-equal effect.  This change in effect suggests da/dt as a coupling mechanism. 

Something else I have been pondering is David Waite's general relativistic derivation of some negative mass associated with a particular charge.  I was pondering accelerating one charge away swapping charges so the other charge is stationary, then accelerating the other charge back.  This would provide some effective change in mass but it seems to be a different concept than the da/dt effect.
« Last Edit: 11/27/2017 04:15 AM by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 267
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1168 on: 11/27/2017 07:09 PM »
Something related to WarpTech's equations above

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.  8)






I realized this morning is that Puthoff's equations for the polarizable vacuum suggest a changing mass per change in acceleration also. 
That is
Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) representation of general relativity
H. 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. 

Online Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1189
  • United States
    • /r/QThruster
  • Liked: 3210
  • Likes Given: 1063
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1169 on: 12/01/2017 10:20 PM »
I was able to upgrade the arduino setup to be able to send sine, square, sawtooth, chirps, plucks, and other wave signals to the asymmetric shaker. It was not easy!  I had to add a SD card to save the large number of WAV files used to store the signals being tested. Also seen below is the spare DATAQ ADC I added to monitor the voltage. Works great, but is only 240 Hz.  ???

I also created a physics-based simulation to better illustrate the effect.  I have greatly exaggerated the vibrating so the effect can be clearly seen.

« Last Edit: 12/01/2017 10:30 PM by Monomorphic »

Online Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1189
  • United States
    • /r/QThruster
  • Liked: 3210
  • Likes Given: 1063
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1170 on: 12/02/2017 03:06 PM »
I also simulated the "null test device" referenced in Experimental Null test of a Mach Effect Thruster. As expected, there was no displacement of the torsional pendulum due to the symmetric movement of the masses. If you continue watching, I show how varying the masses of different components affects the movement of the device.


Offline Povel

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1171 on: 12/02/2017 03:51 PM »
@ Monomorphic

Thank you for doing these simulations.

It appears that the displacement you obtain in the asymmetric case is in the opposite direction of the displacement claimed by Woodward. That is, in his case the thrust is directed toward the thick brass mass, and with the device positioned like in your simulation the balance arm rotates clockwise when seen from above, while in your case the rotation is anticlockwise.

Aside from that, I don't know if you also simulated some non-linear behaviour, but without it should be impossible to get spurious thrust signal ( in the form of non zero average balance arm displacement).

If possible it would be interesting to simulate it along with the omega+2omega signal Woodward uses for his devices.

Online Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1189
  • United States
    • /r/QThruster
  • Liked: 3210
  • Likes Given: 1063
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1172 on: 12/02/2017 05:07 PM »
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. It is easier to understand if I label everything properly.

Offline Povel

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1173 on: 12/02/2017 05:34 PM »
Quote
The direction of the displacement is the same as claimed by Woodward

I'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)

Online Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1189
  • United States
    • /r/QThruster
  • Liked: 3210
  • Likes Given: 1063
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1174 on: 12/02/2017 06:01 PM »
Quote
The direction of the displacement is the same as claimed by Woodward

I'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)

Other sources I have seen show the thrust towards the brass mass.   Here is another from 2009 showing the thrust in the same direction. 

Flipping the simulated device 180 degrees also reverses the direction of the displacement.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 247
  • Likes Given: 267
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1175 on: 12/02/2017 06:04 PM »
Something related to WarpTech's equations above

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.  8)






I realized this morning is that Puthoff's equations for the polarizable vacuum suggest a changing mass per change in acceleration also. 
That is
Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) representation of general relativity
H. 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.

Thanks WarpTech.

I suspect I may have connected the dots that describe how the EM drive is related to the Woodward effect.  The magnetic field at the tip of the frustum, being up, is of greater magnitude than the magnetic field at the lower portion of the frustum, down.  There is a dynamic effect that occurs when this happens.  The magnetic fields in the EM drive when created may initially be at equilibrium but as energy rapidly builds in the frustum the equilibrium may shift to compress the magnetic field below as in the crushing of a spring. 

This rapid build up in energy causes a rapid jerk or change in acceleration of the circulating current in the cavity toward the large end as the large end magnetic field is compressed. 

The trick to maximize the Woodward effect in the EM drive may be to maximize the amount of this current being displaced by this effect, maximize the change in energy in the input phase (bust pulse), allow gradual loss of energy in the dissipation phase to minimize jerk back (Quality effect). 

The greater change in acceleration of charge toward the large end (smaller da/dt toward the small end) suggest pushing the vacuum toward the large end (Thrust) and the resulting thrust force is toward the small end. 

I am still considering if this change in mass of the charges is akin to a change in mass of the light upon reflection and if it could lead to a 2nd order Doppler effect.  I.E. Absorption of energy by the vacuum. 

The trick now should be to get an estimate on the magnitude for such an effect.
« Last Edit: 12/03/2017 03:17 PM by dustinthewind »

Offline Povel

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1176 on: 12/02/2017 06:18 PM »
Quote
Other sources I have seen show the thrust towards the brass mass.   Here is another from 2009 showing the thrust in the same direction.

Yes, that's always how they draw it, because that's the direction they expect the thrust to be produced, and the balance arm displacement direction they get confirms that, it seems.
However in your simulation the displacement of the balance arm is in the opposite direction from the one you would expect from a genuine thrust signal (one directed toward the brass mass).

Offline tdperk

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 243
  • Liked: 73
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1177 on: 12/02/2017 06:25 PM »
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. It is easier to understand if I label everything properly.

Uhuh.

Now please try the checks against false signals Woodward has documented, and run it in a vacuum as he has.

Offline Povel

  • Member
  • Posts: 26
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1178 on: 12/02/2017 06:43 PM »
Quote
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.

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.
« Last Edit: 12/02/2017 06:44 PM by Povel »

Offline WarpTech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Do it!
  • Vista, CA
  • Liked: 1350
  • Likes Given: 1814
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #1179 on: 12/02/2017 06:48 PM »
Quote
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.

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.

Povel,

You and Monomorphic are not using the word "Thrust" in the same sense. You are arguing the thrust is in the direction of movement. Monomorphic's diagram is indicating the thrust is out the back and its movement is in the opposite direction.