Paul,If you have the time,Could you point me to link that explains what the shuttler-type experiment shows? for example, I understand the QVF on a torque pendulum, that is explained in the STAIF-2007 ppt, but what would one see as the output on Woodward's latest shuttler?r/
Ok, now I'm confused on terminology:"shuttler device" = rotary UFG or MLT on a torque pendulum?
First - I find it amusing and astonishing how a simple question can bootstrap a moribund topic like my last posting did. This is fun!Second - Given StarDrive's answer, one begins to consider whether or not the research into the Mach effect has reached the point of deminishing returns in regards to the scale of effort available to the 'garage tinkerer' despite his or her qualifications. At what point does the evidence become conclusive? (Lets not talk about riding into the NASA Admin's office on an MLT hover chair.) There has been some talk about the need for finding, creating, or even just specifying the working parameters of the materials needed for a practical MLT or its equivalent. This reminds me of Edison's search for the proper filament for a light bulb. He knew the theory was good - shoot some juice to a wire and it glows - but making it practical was the hard part. So - do we know that the Mach-Lorentz Effect is real? If so - how does one finance an Edison-like search for the proper materials?It can't be too hard to raise the money. The blacklight power guy has millons from investors and his theory is even weirder. P.S On my previous post I wrote "lasted" when I meant "latest" . I hope you didn't think I meant "blasted"!
Quote from: cuddihy on 01/04/2010 05:09 pmOk, now I'm confused on terminology:"shuttler device" = rotary UFG or MLT on a torque pendulum?A shuttler device is one made from two PZT stacks that linearly push/pulls on a capacitor array over a distance of microns, thus inducing a cyclic bulk acceleration to the energy storing capcitors. This new M-E based shuttler test article will be mounted in Woodward's exsitng torque pendulum that will be used to measure any net output forces generated.Edit: Clarified, Spell checked and added Shuttler device slide.
"So - do we know that the Mach-Lorentz Effect is real? If so - how does one finance an Edison-like search for the proper materials?"Whether the M-E is real or not is in the eye of the beholder at this stage of the game. There is enough data present to say soemthing curious is going on, but not enough high grade order of magnitude above the noise data that has been replicated in mutiple labs to say with certainty that it's for real as advertised. As to financing, Woodward prefers not to get entangled in such schemes since he likes to work at his own self-financed pace and as his health status permits. He is still fighting cancer...
Quote from: Star-Drive on 01/05/2010 04:12 am"So - do we know that the Mach-Lorentz Effect is real? If so - how does one finance an Edison-like search for the proper materials?"Whether the M-E is real or not is in the eye of the beholder at this stage of the game. There is enough data present to say soemthing curious is going on, but not enough high grade order of magnitude above the noise data that has been replicated in mutiple labs to say with certainty that it's for real as advertised. As to financing, Woodward prefers not to get entangled in such schemes since he likes to work at his own self-financed pace and as his health status permits. He is still fighting cancer...Sounds like Bussard, cept at least he got Navy funding. Gah, capital financing isn't a 'scheme'. When it comes to investors and their money, if anything is a scheme is a false claim of scientific fact. Theres still plenty of people who are willing to toss in money even on a very speculative research project.
Quote from: mlorrey on 01/06/2010 06:16 pmQuote from: Star-Drive on 01/05/2010 04:12 am"So - do we know that the Mach-Lorentz Effect is real? If so - how does one finance an Edison-like search for the proper materials?"Whether the M-E is real or not is in the eye of the beholder at this stage of the game. There is enough data present to say soemthing curious is going on, but not enough high grade order of magnitude above the noise data that has been replicated in mutiple labs to say with certainty that it's for real as advertised. As to financing, Woodward prefers not to get entangled in such schemes since he likes to work at his own self-financed pace and as his health status permits. He is still fighting cancer...Sounds like Bussard, cept at least he got Navy funding. Gah, capital financing isn't a 'scheme'. When it comes to investors and their money, if anything is a scheme is a false claim of scientific fact. Theres still plenty of people who are willing to toss in money even on a very speculative research project.Mike:The investors Woodward and I have talked to over the last ten years all wanted a sure-thing, 99% of the pie, and R&D control before they were willing to plunk down significant funding that could pay for our time. Woodward got very disgusted with the whole lot of them about the time he was diagnosed with lung cancer a few years back now, so he just stopped looking. It didn’t help either that we kept running over IEDs in the M-E R&D road like the just discovered dielectric E-field shielding effect either. My viewpoint on this fund raising business is that when the first G/I test article can float, or at the very least push itself across an air hockey table as a self contained propulsion unit, is the time when we start back up asking for investors, but not until then.
Quote from: Star-Drive on 01/06/2010 06:33 pmQuote from: mlorrey on 01/06/2010 06:16 pmQuote from: Star-Drive on 01/05/2010 04:12 am"So - do we know that the Mach-Lorentz Effect is real? If so - how does one finance an Edison-like search for the proper materials?"Whether the M-E is real or not is in the eye of the beholder at this stage of the game. There is enough data present to say soemthing curious is going on, but not enough high grade order of magnitude above the noise data that has been replicated in mutiple labs to say with certainty that it's for real as advertised. As to financing, Woodward prefers not to get entangled in such schemes since he likes to work at his own self-financed pace and as his health status permits. He is still fighting cancer...Sounds like Bussard, cept at least he got Navy funding. Gah, capital financing isn't a 'scheme'. When it comes to investors and their money, if anything is a scheme is a false claim of scientific fact. Theres still plenty of people who are willing to toss in money even on a very speculative research project.Mike:The investors Woodward and I have talked to over the last ten years all wanted a sure-thing, 99% of the pie, and R&D control before they were willing to plunk down significant funding that could pay for our time. Woodward got very disgusted with the whole lot of them about the time he was diagnosed with lung cancer a few years back now, so he just stopped looking. It didn’t help either that we kept running over IEDs in the M-E R&D road like the just discovered dielectric E-field shielding effect either. My viewpoint on this fund raising business is that when the first G/I test article can float, or at the very least push itself across an air hockey table as a self contained propulsion unit, is the time when we start back up asking for investors, but not until then. Well I have to say that whoever you guys talked to were scam artists, cause I've never seen that sort of a deal in any of the VC stuff I've done. Investors typically get 10-40% of the stock in the company depending on various factors. The only time I've seen a case of more than that was when Shultz needed 50 million to go from 5 Starbucks stores to 250, the guy who backed him (who was a friend of mine) basically took over the whole company and Shultz had to buy it back from him over 5 years with the success of the company.In the case of this, if Woodward can do enough to get a patent before getting investors, then the patent is sufficient tangible assets to justify him keeping majority control of the company.
In fact sometimes funding is staring you in the face, but you have to know how to read between the lines of a solicitation.
I think one of the issues you guys are missing is that Woodward’s device is not the only propellantless propulsion effort currently being investigated and some are even modestly funded.
Quote from: hec031 on 01/10/2010 04:29 amIn fact sometimes funding is staring you in the face, but you have to know how to read between the lines of a solicitation.do you have a link etc? this is curious.
Quote from: Nathan on 01/10/2010 05:49 amQuote from: hec031 on 01/10/2010 04:29 amIn fact sometimes funding is staring you in the face, but you have to know how to read between the lines of a solicitation.do you have a link etc? this is curious.I know this is going to sound strange, but there are unwritten rules and etiquette, so while I can hint in what direction to look, I would be crossing the line if I gave you the exact link. I will suggest that you read solicitations carefully and remember that the DoD has a pre-solicitation period of 30 days when you can talk to a project manager about their solicitation directly. The solicitation is always a very condensed version of what the project manager is looking for. It’s a minimum request and you need to ask them what they are looking for? Some solicitations are very broad, that’s how this kind of research gets funded. SBIR’s are the least scrutinized way these kinds of project can get significant funding. There are other mechanism, like subcontracting under related subject matter. This is how most fringe research is initially funded.
Quote from: hec031 on 01/10/2010 12:49 pmQuote from: Nathan on 01/10/2010 05:49 amQuote from: hec031 on 01/10/2010 04:29 amIn fact sometimes funding is staring you in the face, but you have to know how to read between the lines of a solicitation.do you have a link etc? this is curious.I know this is going to sound strange, but there are unwritten rules and etiquette, so while I can hint in what direction to look, I would be crossing the line if I gave you the exact link. I will suggest that you read solicitations carefully and remember that the DoD has a pre-solicitation period of 30 days when you can talk to a project manager about their solicitation directly. The solicitation is always a very condensed version of what the project manager is looking for. It’s a minimum request and you need to ask them what they are looking for? Some solicitations are very broad, that’s how this kind of research gets funded. SBIR’s are the least scrutinized way these kinds of project can get significant funding. There are other mechanism, like subcontracting under related subject matter. This is how most fringe research is initially funded.Hec031:Thanks for the funding hints! However we've been through that barn several times and we where shot down in the final evaluations for multiple USAF and DARPA applications. Perhaps we got discouraged a little too easily, but it sure gets old after awhile being told that your data means nothing...
Speaking of something else than Woodward drives, look what I stumbled upon. Link.