Quote from: WarpTech on 06/24/2015 06:31 amI think I just proved my hypothesis, with an open ended cone anyway....Excellent! Does this require the duty cycle like that seen in magnetrons? Would increasing the duty cycle increase thrust? Thanks!
I think I just proved my hypothesis, with an open ended cone anyway....
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
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1XizxEfB23tfjVmb1RiZXpaajd6WGpGQmpSWDkxRlV3cG10TEJmWVVEbTd2U0t4MC1aa1E&usp=sharingDr. Rodal, this is the same link as before so I hope it will give you access to the new x slices data set. The cavity sliced 276 times across the axis of rotation. Only thing I see is that the influence of the antenna diminishes markedly toward the upper half of the cavity. That and it seems very little energy actually reaches the small end. That may be simply an artefact of the time slice I chose.
(...)Everything vibrates, well maybe a bose condensate chilled just a bit above absolute 0c doesn't. So as a motor where does it get the EMF to push against being a closed box that nothing (Shawyer said so) escapes? The internal QV of the device? Honestly the generator and motor explanation goes against everything that makes sense even quantum theory make more sense to me. Shell
Just 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.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/24/2015 05:05 amJust 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.Ha! I've been trying to keep my nose out of this controversy, but I just figured out what's going on. It's like a spinning bicycle wheel. It will just sit there and do nothing until you try to tip it one way or the other, and then the torque acts to rotate it in one direction and oppose rotation it in the other direction. It doesn't exert any thrust due to the microwaves because Maxwell's equations say it can't. But it does store energy and that energy will have a back-reaction when you push it, which will be just as asymmetrical as the cavity attenuation.Todd
Quote from: SeeShells on 06/24/2015 06:04 am(...)Everything vibrates, well maybe a bose condensate chilled just a bit above absolute 0c doesn't. So as a motor where does it get the EMF to push against being a closed box that nothing (Shawyer said so) escapes? The internal QV of the device? Honestly the generator and motor explanation goes against everything that makes sense even quantum theory make more sense to me. ShellSo it seems to boil down to this: If it is moved, it moves. If it isn't moved, it doesn't move. What an insight! Others call it inertia. Even if we assumed that the QV somehow imparted microscopic vibrations.. since all QV vibrations time-average to Zero, the device would spend half the time in 'generator mode' and half the time in 'propulsion mode'. Nothing gained from it. Whatever Mr. Shawyer came up with to explain movement or acceleration, doesn't make any logical sense. I'm more than willing to look at experimental data that shows signals well above SNR. But I'm not willing to throw logic out of the window just for argument's sake.
Here's my understanding, if it helps to clarify anything:Consider a vertical tube with mirrors on each end, and light bouncing between them, under the influence of acceleration i.e. the Earth's gravitational field. The light will gain energy while moving down, hitting the bottom of the tube with more momentum, and will lose energy while moving up, hitting the top of the tube with less momentum. This can happen repeatedly, due to the mirrors. One might imagine therefore that there will be a net force pushing in the direction of acceleration force i.e. down. (I'd be interested to know what the flaw in this reasoning is, at it would appear to allow an EM drive like functionality fairly straightforwardly in the presence of a strong gravitational well.)If we now consider the tube not in a gravitational well, but rather experiencing acceleration from an external force, then the same thing will happen. The problem is that the net force will oppose the acceleration (i.e. it will add to the inertia).For the EM drive to be working as Shawyer suggests, the net force is in some way arranged to be asymetric, such that the drive opposes acceleration in one direction, and enhances it in the other (which in turn gives rise to more acceleration).
Quote from: pogsquog on 06/24/2015 07:42 amIf we now consider the tube not in a gravitational well, but rather experiencing acceleration from an external force, then the same thing will happen. The problem is that the net force will oppose the acceleration (i.e. it will add to the inertia).Emphasized statement : classically this added inertia term is exactly the mass equivalent of the bound energy content (em wave bouncing inside cavity). Taking 1kW at Q=10000 for 2.45GHz yields 4mJ (milli-Joule), (I recall other way to calculate push that up to 1J ??) equivalently about 4.5*10^-20 kg ... this is so minuscule as to make no possible measurable difference on anything.
If we now consider the tube not in a gravitational well, but rather experiencing acceleration from an external force, then the same thing will happen. The problem is that the net force will oppose the acceleration (i.e. it will add to the inertia).
I am not a Shawyer fan but the Traveller defense could be not so crazy, look at the following paper:Motion induced radiation from a vibrating cavityhttp://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9606029We study the radiation emitted by a cavity moving in vacuum. We give a quantitative estimate of the photon production inside the cavity as well as of the photon flux radiated from the cavity. A resonance enhancement occurs not only when the cavity length is modulated but also for a global oscillation of the cavity. For a high finesse cavity the emitted radiation surpasses radiation from a single mirror by orders of magnitude.
...In other words, does accelerating the frustum in one direction change the resonance mode, while accelerating in the other does not? And will the resonance mode significantly resist being changed?
Quote from: cej on 06/24/2015 10:22 am...In other words, does accelerating the frustum in one direction change the resonance mode, while accelerating in the other does not? And will the resonance mode significantly resist being changed?For that to happen, the mechanical acceleration would have to be huge, since the electromagnetic field frequency is in the GHz range. But, on the contrary, the reported EM Drive accelerations instead of being huge, it is extremely tiny: in the only EM Drive experiment that experienced significant rigid body motion: Shawyer's Demo on an air bearing, it takes several minutes for the EM Drive to complete a circumference, Extremely small acceleration.
Quote from: Rodal on 06/24/2015 12:22 pmQuote from: cej on 06/24/2015 10:22 am...In other words, does accelerating the frustum in one direction change the resonance mode, while accelerating in the other does not? And will the resonance mode significantly resist being changed?For that to happen, the mechanical acceleration would have to be huge, since the electromagnetic field frequency is in the GHz range. But, on the contrary, the reported EM Drive accelerations instead of being huge, it is extremely tiny: in the only EM Drive experiment that experienced significant rigid body motion: Shawyer's Demo on an air bearing, it takes several minutes for the EM Drive to complete a circumference, Extremely small acceleration.The interesting part is the multiplication factor of a high Q cavity.
we have demonstrated that periodical vibrations, in our case generatedby a spinning body, can significantly influence the readout of the scale, which probablyoperates based on an active feedback loop. The majority of electronic scales would fall intothis category, since they use an electromagnetic feedback loop in order to determine the forcenecessary to counter the weight of a test mass. This feedback loop has a defined frequency(which is mostly a trade secret of the production companies) for any specific state. Thus theinteraction of these two frequencies can lead to measurement errors. In case this situationcannot be avoided in a measurement, we advise that proper precautions should be taken inorder to decouple the vibration sources. Finally we conclude that the reason for the conflictingreports of the mass measurements of spinning gyroscopes was due to the error sourcespresented in this paper.
Quote from: Rodal on 06/24/2015 12:22 pmQuote from: cej on 06/24/2015 10:22 am...In other words, does accelerating the frustum in one direction change the resonance mode, while accelerating in the other does not? And will the resonance mode significantly resist being changed?For that to happen, the mechanical acceleration would have to be huge, since the electromagnetic field frequency is in the GHz range. But, on the contrary, the reported EM Drive accelerations instead of being huge, it is extremely tiny: in the only EM Drive experiment that experienced significant rigid body motion: Shawyer's Demo on an air bearing, it takes several minutes for the EM Drive to complete a circumference, Extremely small acceleration.The published video had a 8.2g resistance to rotation centre line of the EMDrive and the EMDrive generating 9.8g of force along the centre line.Have heard with no load, the Demonstrator EMDrive can do a rev in 3 sec on that rig.
A warnning on the detrimental effect of vibrations on scales, for people using scales to measure the EM Drive force, (as done for example by Shawyer), on Tajmar's paper:Quote we have demonstrated that periodical vibrations... http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1506/1506.02689.pdfThe discussion in the previous pages that "the EM Drive" needs some vibration to operate, makes one wonder about the EM Drive measurements that relied on scales.
we have demonstrated that periodical vibrations...
A warnning on the detrimental effect of vibrations on scales, for people using scales to measure the EM Drive force, (as done for example by Shawyer), on Tajmar's paper:Quote we have demonstrated that periodical vibrations, in our case generatedby a spinning body, can significantly influence the readout of the scale, which probablyoperates based on an active feedback loop. The majority of electronic scales would fall intothis category, since they use an electromagnetic feedback loop in order to determine the forcenecessary to counter the weight of a test mass. This feedback loop has a defined frequency(which is mostly a trade secret of the production companies) for any specific state. Thus theinteraction of these two frequencies can lead to measurement errors. In case this situationcannot be avoided in a measurement, we advise that proper precautions should be taken inorder to decouple the vibration sources. Finally we conclude that the reason for the conflictingreports of the mass measurements of spinning gyroscopes was due to the error sourcespresented in this paper. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1506/1506.02689.pdfThe discussion in the previous pages that "the EM Drive" needs some vibration to operate, makes one wonder about the EM Drive measurements that relied on scales.