Ok, this one is pretty interesting. (especially bottom row)Bell with conical big end.Bellconica is the name of the ship.
One has to balance the advantage of the greater unsymmetry vs. the useless metal mass adjacent to the big diameter. But in that sense the geometries with constant cross-section are even worse since the whole constant-cross-section is useless baggage (and also carrying the bad feature of the greater symmetry, hence having high electromagnetic fields in the wrong section
Maybe others tried it but here it is:Bell curve
Quote from: Rodal on 03/18/2017 01:31 amOne has to balance the advantage of the greater unsymmetry vs. the useless metal mass adjacent to the big diameter. But in that sense the geometries with constant cross-section are even worse since the whole constant-cross-section is useless baggage (and also carrying the bad feature of the greater symmetry, hence having high electromagnetic fields in the wrong section Sorry but high E & H fields at the small end are not what causes the force generation.The visible to FEKO "Stretching" of the guide wavelength at the small end is what causes the force generation as longer guide waves deliver less momentum transfer / radiation pressure to the small end plate vs the large end plate with it's much shorter guide waves.And for sure, on that point we do have a "failure to communicate".
Either you have no idea about what we are discussing or you are deliberately misleading this forum. Either way you will shortly come up short. See you on the other side.
Something I've tried to reconcile in my own mind, and is vitally important to get (at least for me), is truly understanding that warping space (ala Star Trek or the Alcubierre drive) which requires A LOT (the amounts of energy stored in matter) of energy, and inducing gravity, isn't the same thing. In my mind, I can induce a gravitational field (however weak) and it can coexist and superimpose with the gravitational field of the immediate environment to produce thrust, or cancel it out, or change the average rate of clocks in vicinity.
Quote from: Mulletron on 03/17/2017 05:15 pmSomething I've tried to reconcile in my own mind, and is vitally important to get (at least for me), is truly understanding that warping space (ala Star Trek or the Alcubierre drive) which requires A LOT (the amounts of energy stored in matter) of energy, and inducing gravity, isn't the same thing. In my mind, I can induce a gravitational field (however weak) and it can coexist and superimpose with the gravitational field of the immediate environment to produce thrust, or cancel it out, or change the average rate of clocks in vicinity.Thank you Mulletron,The notion of 'warp drive' is flawed because it assumes that empty space has properties. Surely acceleration of an object must be an interaction with other objects. Even if you want to define that interaction using fields, those fields are still dependent upon the presence (however remote) of objects.In my opinion relativity indicates that interactions occur across a separation at the speed of light. Time dilation due to acceleration, or, acceleration due to time dilation, amount to the same thing which is a balance of interactions in accordance with conservation. Isolated and independent generation of acceleration sounds to me like magical thinking.
Quote from: spupeng7 on 03/19/2017 12:18 amQuote from: Mulletron on 03/17/2017 05:15 pmSomething I've tried to reconcile in my own mind, and is vitally important to get (at least for me), is truly understanding that warping space (ala Star Trek or the Alcubierre drive) which requires A LOT (the amounts of energy stored in matter) of energy, and inducing gravity, isn't the same thing. In my mind, I can induce a gravitational field (however weak) and it can coexist and superimpose with the gravitational field of the immediate environment to produce thrust, or cancel it out, or change the average rate of clocks in vicinity.Thank you Mulletron,The notion of 'warp drive' is flawed because it assumes that empty space has properties. Surely acceleration of an object must be an interaction with other objects. Even if you want to define that interaction using fields, those fields are still dependent upon the presence (however remote) of objects.In my opinion relativity indicates that interactions occur across a separation at the speed of light. Time dilation due to acceleration, or, acceleration due to time dilation, amount to the same thing which is a balance of interactions in accordance with conservation. Isolated and independent generation of acceleration sounds to me like magical thinking.Well, empty space does have properties because everywhere in space exists a field for every particle we know of (and undiscovered ones), so to bring the argument full circle, there's no such thing as empty space. These fields all exist together everywhere (and are never exactly zero) and the aggregate effect of these fields are what we experience as the universe, including the (deceptively) empty parts. I'm talking about QFT here. So space isn't empty and it has properties. About 20 minutes in, this guy lays it out quite nicely. Bringing it back to the classical world, here's what I was talking about with the warp drive. It takes a lot of energy to warp/stretch/contract/bend spacetime, so why bother? Warping space and inducing gravity aren't the same thing. I'm going to try very hard over the coming days to translate what's going on in my intuitive mind to something other people can read and understand. There's a discussion here about this. You'll see comments saying that GR is a nonlinear theory and therefore it doesn't obey the superposition principle. That's true, and it's only applicable to extreme cases. http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/306305/do-all-waves-of-any-kind-satisfy-the-principle-of-superpositionSo, gravity, in the weak field limit (what we're experiencing right now on Earth and even in the solar system) is linear. It only goes nonlinear in the strong regime, like around a black hole. I'm entirely justified in ignoring the nonlinear parts of the theory and I can go with a linear approximation. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linearized_gravityhttp://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/152.mf1i.spring02/GravField.htmI firmly believe that in the weak field limit, I can get away with generating weak gravitational fields using gravitational induction (if it's really real, and not just a theory and equations that have no place in actual reality) and superimpose this paltry AC gravity with the static gravity (it's not really static either but that's another post) of the environment around me, and go places. Couple of quick things I dug up about the rigidity of spacetime. https://www.quora.com/Can-a-large-energy-field-other-than-gravity-warp-spacetime
Quote from: Rodal on 03/17/2017 05:12 pmOne has to balance the advantage of the greater unsymmetry vs. the useless metal mass adjacent to the big diameter. But in that sense the geometries with constant cross-section are even worse since the whole constant-cross-section is useless baggage (and also carrying the bad feature of the greater symmetry, hence having high electromagnetic fields in the wrong section Useless metal/baggage? I suggest not. Inconvient truth, yup.The big end was not adjustable, yet it had a 1/4 guide wavelength constant diameter setback to the big end plate. Tuning was done by adjusting the 1/4 guide wavelength constant diameter setback to the small end plate.Why was the small end 1/4 guide wavelength setback much longer than the 1/4 guide wavelength big end setback? Because the guide wavelength at the small end is LONGER than at the big end.The setbacks at each end are there for a reason. Would have thought a smart guy like you would be asking why the two 1/4 guide wavelength setbacks are there and what function they provide?
...Mulletron:One of the ideas behind Sonny White's mutable and degradable Quantum Vacuum (QV) conjecture is that it and GRT spacetime are one and the same thing. If this conjecture truly reflects the real world, then the GRT spacetime stiffness "constant" of 8*Pi*G / c^4 is also locally mutable under large (>100kV/m), time-varying (>10^9 Hz) E&M fields. In other words the stiffness of spacetime can be locally reduced under the appropriate dynamic excitation and in doing so create a local variation to the ambient gee field. Is there any proof that this could be real other than what is presented in the NASA/JSC Eagleworks Lab papers published to date? There might be in the guise of the attached 2009 paper by a Dr. Turtur in Germany that experimentally demonstrates that it IS possible to harvest energy from the QV zero point field with electrostatic and/or magnetostatic rotary converters. Now apply this QV energy harvesting lesson to the EMdrive and all other propellantless propulsion engines, but replace this experiment's rotor with large, time varying E&M fields in the frustum...Best, Paul M.
Dr. Martin Tajmar from AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH atSeibersdorf near Wien (Head of Space Propulsion & Advanced Concepts) didmany discussions with me, coming to the result that he tried together withHarald Chmela to further develop the electrostatic vacuumenergy-rotor into aversion with rigidly fixed axis. (Unfortunately up to now, the experiments didnot have success.)
Quote from: Star-Drive on 03/19/2017 09:54 am...Mulletron:One of the ideas behind Sonny White's mutable and degradable Quantum Vacuum (QV) conjecture is that it and GRT spacetime are one and the same thing. If this conjecture truly reflects the real world, then the GRT spacetime stiffness "constant" of 8*Pi*G / c^4 is also locally mutable under large (>100kV/m), time-varying (>10^9 Hz) E&M fields. In other words the stiffness of spacetime can be locally reduced under the appropriate dynamic excitation and in doing so create a local variation to the ambient gee field. Is there any proof that this could be real other than what is presented in the NASA/JSC Eagleworks Lab papers published to date? There might be in the guise of the attached 2009 paper by a Dr. Turtur in Germany that experimentally demonstrates that it IS possible to harvest energy from the QV zero point field with electrostatic and/or magnetostatic rotary converters. Now apply this QV energy harvesting lesson to the EMdrive and all other propellantless propulsion engines, but replace this experiment's rotor with large, time varying E&M fields in the frustum...Best, Paul M.It is healthy that the consequences of these theories are being honestly examined by Star-Drive as to their strange consequences, rather than being "swept under the rug". From the above discussion by Star-Drive it appears clear that Sonny White's theory about a degradable QV embraces the idea that energy can be harvested from the QV. This is a very controversial consequence of the theory. A lot has been written about the energy problem concerning that a force can be produced without expelling any propellants: http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation . My understanding is that Dr. McCulloch also embraces the idea that energy can be harvested from the Quantum Vacuum, according to McCulloch's theory.Notsosureofit has been trying to resolve this by examining the entropy in General Relativity, but my understanding is that the progress is slow and no final conclusion has been reached.Frobnicat early on showed that if the EM Drive can produce a constant force, this force could be utilized (in theory) to harvest energy. Actually, Frobnicat asked:1) if the EM Drive works as proposed, it looks like it would be more immediately exploitable for economic purposes (not necessarily by the scheme sketched by Frobnicat, but by any other means as discussed above by Star-Drive) as a means to produce practically "free energy" for mankind than for Interstellar Travel. 2) if the EM Drive works as proposed, it looks like extra EM Drives on-board could harvest energy from the QV and therefore avoid having to have (at least in part, or ideally at all) a means of providing electric energy to the EM Drive's providing propulsion, as that energy to produce the force could be harvested from the QV instead of being produced by onboard nuclear reaction or other means to provide electric energy.I am resurrecting these questions by Frobnicat, because at the time that Frobnicat posed them, Star-Drive was momentarily not active in the forum, and because Star-Drive's latest post discusses the idea that energy may be harvestable from the QV.On Turtur's experiments:https://www.psiram.com/en/index.php/Claus_Wilhelm_Turturhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Claus_Turturhttp://vixra.org/author/claus_wilhelm_turturquote from http://www.ostfalia.de/export/sites/default/de/pws/turtur/images/1_Schrift_03f_englisch.pdfQuoteDr. Martin Tajmar from AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH atSeibersdorf near Wien (Head of Space Propulsion & Advanced Concepts) didmany discussions with me, coming to the result that he tried together withHarald Chmela to further develop the electrostatic vacuumenergy-rotor into aversion with rigidly fixed axis. (Unfortunately up to now, the experiments didnot have success.)
Quote from: Star-Drive on 03/19/2017 09:54 am...Mulletron:One of the ideas behind Sonny White's mutable and degradable Quantum Vacuum (QV) conjecture is that it and GRT spacetime are one and the same thing. If this conjecture truly reflects the real world, then the GRT spacetime stiffness "constant" of 8*Pi*G / c^4 is also locally mutable under large (>100kV/m), time-varying (>10^9 Hz) E&M fields. In other words the stiffness of spacetime can be locally reduced under the appropriate dynamic excitation and in doing so create a local variation to the ambient gee field. Is there any proof that this could be real other than what is presented in the NASA/JSC Eagleworks Lab papers published to date? There might be in the guise of the attached 2009 paper by a Dr. Turtur in Germany that experimentally demonstrates that it IS possible to harvest energy from the QV zero point field with electrostatic and/or magnetostatic rotary converters. Now apply this QV energy harvesting lesson to the EMdrive and all other propellantless propulsion engines, but replace this experiment's rotor with large, time varying E&M fields in the frustum...Best, Paul M.It is healthy that the consequences of these theories are being honestly examined by Star-Drive as to their strange consequences, rather than being "swept under the rug". From the above discussion by Star-Drive it appears clear that Sonny White's theory about a degradable QV embraces the idea that energy can be harvested from the QV. This is a very controversial consequence of the theory. A lot has been written about the energy problem concerning that a force can be produced without expelling any propellants: http://emdrive.wiki/Energy_Conservation . My understanding is that Dr. McCulloch also embraces the idea that energy can be harvested from the Quantum Vacuum, according to McCulloch's theory.Notsosureofit has been trying to resolve this by examining the entropy in General Relativity, but my understanding is that the progress is slow and no final conclusion has been reached.Frobnicat early on showed that if the EM Drive can produce a constant force, this force could be utilized (in theory) to harvest energy. Actually, Frobnicat asked:1) if the EM Drive works as proposed, it looks like it would be more immediately exploitable for economic purposes (not necessarily by the scheme sketched by Frobnicat, but by any other means as discussed above by Star-Drive) as a means to produce practically "free energy" for mankind than for Interstellar Travel. 2) if the EM Drive works as proposed, it looks like extra EM Drives on-board could harvest energy from the QV and therefore avoid having to have (at least in part, or ideally at all) a means of providing electric energy to the EM Drive's providing propulsion, as that energy to produce the force could be harvested from the QV instead of being produced by onboard nuclear reaction or other means to provide electric energy.I am resurrecting these questions by Frobnicat, because at the time that Frobnicat posed them, Star-Drive was momentarily not active in the forum, and because Star-Drive's latest post discusses the idea that energy may be harvestable from the QV.On Turtur's experiments:https://www.psiram.com/en/index.php/Claus_Wilhelm_Turturhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Claus_Turturhttp://vixra.org/author/claus_wilhelm_turturquote from http://www.ostfalia.de/export/sites/default/de/pws/turtur/images/1_Schrift_03f_englisch.pdfQuoteDr. Martin Tajmar from AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH atSeibersdorf near Wien (Head of Space Propulsion & Advanced Concepts) didmany discussions with me, coming to the result that he tried together withHarald Chmela to further develop the electrostatic vacuum-energy-rotor into aversion with rigidly fixed axis. (Unfortunately up to now, the experiments didnot have success.)
Dr. Martin Tajmar from AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH atSeibersdorf near Wien (Head of Space Propulsion & Advanced Concepts) didmany discussions with me, coming to the result that he tried together withHarald Chmela to further develop the electrostatic vacuum-energy-rotor into aversion with rigidly fixed axis. (Unfortunately up to now, the experiments didnot have success.)
Does the momentum increase or decrease as the refractive index of the medium increases? The results here suggest that the answer depends on whether or not the light can put the fluid into motion: if it can, its momentum decreases and it exerts Abraham's pushing force; otherwise, its momentum increases and it exerts Minkowski's pulling force.Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-06-physicists-pressure.html#jCp
For the squeezed vacuum state the photon number distribution displays odd-even-oscillations. This can be explained by the mathematical form of the squeezing operator, that resembles the operator for two-photon generation and annihilation processes. Photons in a squeezed vacuum state are more likely to appear in pairs.
...Jose':As I already noted a mutable and degradable quantum vacuum (QV) AKA spacetime by definition permits setting up a thermodynamic cycle that should in theory be able to extract energy from the QV, i.e., degrade or lower the cosmological vacuum energy state of the causally connected universe. If Shawyer's EMdrives and/or Woodward's Mach-Effect drives work, then this has to be true. ...Best, Paul M.
...I just wanted to point out that any accelerated ion that makes light emits in a circle around it self or omnidirectionally. In that sense light always has a counter propagating partner. Would that imply it always has a center of mass?
... (Saying something rotates in all 3 axes at once doesn't make sense. Things only spin in one direction at once, you might just have to tilt your head to line up coordinate systems.) ...