Quote from: Bob012345 on 08/15/2017 05:45 pmBut if one accepts that a fixed electrical input power can actually create a fixed static thrust at all,The only valid conclusion after this point is an over unity device (as long as Force/power is grater than 1/c).It makes no sense to call the final kinetic energy the "input" because where did this energy come from?For a simple analogy of the energy balance, you start with 2 buckets, one has 1 liter of water in it, and the other is empty. The one that starts with water in it represent electric potential energy and the other represents kinetic energy. Now pour the one water from the first bucket to the second. If the second bucket now has 2 liters of water in it you broke conservation, because an extra liter of water appeared out of nowhere.Some theories like the Mach effect are supposed to resolve this by saying that the energy somehow gets pulled in from the rest of the universe, meaning that there is a third bucket that the extra liter of water comes from. I think this brings up other problems, but those aren't important right now. At least they don't ignore the issue, and therefore accept the quite useful application of there device (if it works as advertised) as an energy generator.
But if one accepts that a fixed electrical input power can actually create a fixed static thrust at all,
Specifically, a Rotating Wave (RW) is formed by a photon brought into rotation by somekind of binding energy, creating an electron and positron.
Quote from: Bob012345 on 08/18/2017 05:11 pmQuote from: RotoSequence on 08/18/2017 05:02 pmThese charts aren't doing any favors to anyone without proof of the cited thrust figures. As of this posting, there's still no proof of a device that produces an anomalous force in the double digit millinewtons per kilowatt. Why shouldn't we dismiss the enormous figures as rambling claptrap?While you are free to dismiss such numbers or that they've been adequately proven, it's not that such numbers haven't been amply reported as they have been. So, we should be able to discuss them here.In all honesty Bob, even I as layman can tell that graph is worthless :1/ Not enough sampling2/comparing different configurations and setups really is "comparing apples and oranges"What has been done there in that graph , is basically comparing diesel engines, with petrol engines, jet engines and rocket boosters while researching the best fuel..The first rule to make a comparative listing is that only vary 1 parameter in design:fe if you want to compare different fuels, you try the same rocket engine setup up with ethanol+O2, methanol+O2, kerosene+O2, etc and then see what produces the most thrust...So, if any meaningful graph needs to be produced for the EMdrive, you have to use the SAME design and gradually ramp up the power and measure the reaction forces (if any).The listing Shawyer has provided us is purely for marketing purposes in an attempt to get an opinion or believe across to the audience but can not be considered "proof".It is in a way, dishonest to pretend it is a factual data sheet, where in fact it is nothing more pile of random info...Hardly anything can be learned from that, because it is obscured by a zillion changing parameters...
Quote from: RotoSequence on 08/18/2017 05:02 pmThese charts aren't doing any favors to anyone without proof of the cited thrust figures. As of this posting, there's still no proof of a device that produces an anomalous force in the double digit millinewtons per kilowatt. Why shouldn't we dismiss the enormous figures as rambling claptrap?While you are free to dismiss such numbers or that they've been adequately proven, it's not that such numbers haven't been amply reported as they have been. So, we should be able to discuss them here.
These charts aren't doing any favors to anyone without proof of the cited thrust figures. As of this posting, there's still no proof of a device that produces an anomalous force in the double digit millinewtons per kilowatt. Why shouldn't we dismiss the enormous figures as rambling claptrap?
Quote from: Bob012345 on 08/18/2017 06:58 pmOk, I'm going to assume your position is that it's a red herring and that the apparent OU doesn't really need a explanation as long as input Rf is greater than the rate of kinetic energy gain in the immediate, local instantaneous rest frame of the device. I can accept that position well enough but I just wish it would be clearly acknowledged by those that hold it. Thanks.That position doesn't really make sense, because it is a known fact that accelerating reference frames can't have conservation of energy directly applied to them. (There are way to do it, but aren't worth the effort.)It does not matter anyway, because no matter what happens in the device frame, it does not change the fact that it is trivial to turn such a device into a power generator by having it accelerate and then extracting the kinetic energy.There are ways to explain this from the device taking energy from somewhere or something else, or even that energy conservation simply does not hold. Before considering the implications of any of these, the fact of using the device to generated energy must be accepted. Talking about energy conservation in the instantaneous rest frame is simply a way to ignore the issue.I will not bother responding to TT directly, since TT has not addressed the simple fact that his last spreadsheet he shared did not even have the proper units in the energy calculation. The Pluto spreadsheet he has since shared a screenshoot of seems to have been further changed presumably to remove any remaining resemblance to the laws of physics.
Ok, I'm going to assume your position is that it's a red herring and that the apparent OU doesn't really need a explanation as long as input Rf is greater than the rate of kinetic energy gain in the immediate, local instantaneous rest frame of the device. I can accept that position well enough but I just wish it would be clearly acknowledged by those that hold it. Thanks.
snip..Perhaps a forced gradient in the virtual particle density by -dB/dt where there is mutual repulsion between particles. A larger change in the magnetic field (energy density) may exist in the narrow part of the cone pushing pairs more into the larger end. This would give a lower pair density at the narrow end and larger density at the large end (possibly similar to squeezed light or vacuum). Maybe this change in density forces energy to be distributed to the available pairs. More energy per pair may increase the effective mass and decrease the number of available photons. Photon quanta being the interaction of vacuum pairs with an electron in material with possible backwards time traveling waves that cancel out a quanta of energy going else where when absorbed.
Quote from: dustinthewind on 08/19/2017 07:37 amsnip..Perhaps a forced gradient in the virtual particle density by -dB/dt where there is mutual repulsion between particles. A larger change in the magnetic field (energy density) may exist in the narrow part of the cone pushing pairs more into the larger end. This would give a lower pair density at the narrow end and larger density at the large end (possibly similar to squeezed light or vacuum). Maybe this change in density forces energy to be distributed to the available pairs. More energy per pair may increase the effective mass and decrease the number of available photons. Photon quanta being the interaction of vacuum pairs with an electron in material with possible backwards time traveling waves that cancel out a quanta of energy going else where when absorbed. Sounds similar to the ideas of Dr. White et al.
Based on the presence of a mean field[edit]Squeezed states of light can be divided into squeezed vacuum and bright squeezed light, depending on the absence or presence of a non-zero mean field (also called a carrier), respectively. Interestingly, an Optical Parametric Oscillator operated below threshold produces squeezed vacuum, whereas the same OPO operated above threshold produces bright squeezed light. Bright squeezed light can be advantageous for certain quantum information processing applications as it obviates the need of sending local oscillator to provide a phase reference, whereas squeezed vacuum is considered more suitable for quantum enhanced sensing applications. The AdLIGO and GEO600 gravitational wave detectors use squeezed vacuum to achieve enhanced sensitivity beyond the standard quantum limit
Casimir effect[edit]Main article: Casimir effectIn the Casimir effect, two flat plates placed very close together restrict the wavelengths of quanta which can exist between them. This in turn restricts the types and hence number and density of virtual particle pairs which can form in the intervening vacuum and can result in a negative energy density.
But would the concept of getting energy out of the Mach effect for example be really that shocking? Pretty much all the energy we use now ultimately comes from something just laying around or falling down or blowing by. We invest energy and money to extract and use it. That wouldn't change.
Quote from: Bob012345 on 08/19/2017 05:36 pmBut would the concept of getting energy out of the Mach effect for example be really that shocking? Pretty much all the energy we use now ultimately comes from something just laying around or falling down or blowing by. We invest energy and money to extract and use it. That wouldn't change.But if, as Woodward claims, energy and momentum can be extracted from the rest of the universe via the Mach effect, why isn't Woodward pitching his device to power utilities instead of space agencies?
First S11 VNA scan with the new 3D printed frustum with spherical end-plates. TE013 was located at 2.402738GHz vs 2.404GHz predicted by simulations. This difference could be because the end-plates are not yet bolted down and so are a little further apart. Still this is very close agreement with simulation. With the linear actuator, I can easily tune the cavity to -45dB return loss or better.
(...) I will gladly take the time to collect papers proving this point if the library project (remember some of us promised to collect and share all relevant literature in some sort of public database?) others talked about does not finally happen.
First S11 VNA scan with the new 3D printed frustum with spherical end-plates. TE013 was located at 2.402738GHz vs 2.404GHz predicted by simulations. This difference could be because the end-plates are not yet bolted down and so are a little further apart. Still this is very close agreement with simulation. With the linear actuator, I can easily tune the cavity to -45dB return loss or better. I need to purchase a male SMA shorting cap as I had to rig a SMA short during calibration. Very interesting Smith chart results. Unlike anything I've seen with the flat end frustums.
Monomorphic -45db loss is unbelievable for DIY!! Wow!Dustinthewind, your theory implies every charge imbalance within a resonant medium should self-accelerate due to limited pair numbers to communicate with for the wavelets which propagate within it. What makes the EM drive special? It cannot just be the microwaves themselves which cause this. It is the QV determined ratio of excitons/wavelet energy densities within the walls which accelerate the cavity by modifying the alignment of existing permanent dipole moments. Polarizing the QV forces the medium into a set number of alignments rather than chaotic alignment which does not repel linearly. In other words we charge the cavity sections by decreasing entropy in the surrounding QV and increasing the state mixing of the surface waves in the wall or phonons in the cavity. QV works then as an electric gain increasing the E field and providing an increase in magnitude of the state correlation. Only reason this does not become a postive feedback loop is that the electron emission spectra increases accordingly.Unclear how this would produce any thrust though... perhaps repulsion between sections or the degree of decoherency/existing misalignment which the QV related gain cannot help 'correct'?
Quote from: X_RaY on 08/19/2017 05:39 pmQuote from: dustinthewind on 08/19/2017 07:37 amsnip..Perhaps a forced gradient in the virtual particle density by -dB/dt where there is mutual repulsion between particles. A larger change in the magnetic field (energy density) may exist in the narrow part of the cone pushing pairs more into the larger end. This would give a lower pair density at the narrow end and larger density at the large end (possibly similar to squeezed light or vacuum). Maybe this change in density forces energy to be distributed to the available pairs. More energy per pair may increase the effective mass and decrease the number of available photons. Photon quanta being the interaction of vacuum pairs with an electron in material with possible backwards time traveling waves that cancel out a quanta of energy going else where when absorbed. Sounds similar to the ideas of Dr. White et al.yes it mixes the vacuum plasma with vacuum pairs, virtual particles known to surround charges, electrons in the skin of the cavity, the woodward effect (changing in mass) force/power>=1/c [slowing light] - increasing impulse, the Polarizable vacuum, General relativity, with standard electrodynamics, with squeezed light/vacuum which creates alternating regions of positive and negative energy. Possibly sensing and generating gravity waves.Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezed_coherent_stateBased on the presence of a mean field[edit]Squeezed states of light can be divided into squeezed vacuum and bright squeezed light, depending on the absence or presence of a non-zero mean field (also called a carrier), respectively. Interestingly, an Optical Parametric Oscillator operated below threshold produces squeezed vacuum, whereas the same OPO operated above threshold produces bright squeezed light. Bright squeezed light can be advantageous for certain quantum information processing applications as it obviates the need of sending local oscillator to provide a phase reference, whereas squeezed vacuum is considered more suitable for quantum enhanced sensing applications. The AdLIGO and GEO600 gravitational wave detectors use squeezed vacuum to achieve enhanced sensitivity beyond the standard quantum limitQuote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_energyCasimir effect[edit]Main article: Casimir effectIn the Casimir effect, two flat plates placed very close together restrict the wavelengths of quanta which can exist between them. This in turn restricts the types and hence number and density of virtual particle pairs which can form in the intervening vacuum and can result in a negative energy density.If there is any truth to it many things may tie in.
Quote from: dustinthewind on 08/19/2017 09:25 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/19/2017 05:39 pmQuote from: dustinthewind on 08/19/2017 07:37 amsnip..Perhaps a forced gradient in the virtual particle density by -dB/dt where there is mutual repulsion between particles. A larger change in the magnetic field (energy density) may exist in the narrow part of the cone pushing pairs more into the larger end. This would give a lower pair density at the narrow end and larger density at the large end (possibly similar to squeezed light or vacuum). Maybe this change in density forces energy to be distributed to the available pairs. More energy per pair may increase the effective mass and decrease the number of available photons. Photon quanta being the interaction of vacuum pairs with an electron in material with possible backwards time traveling waves that cancel out a quanta of energy going else where when absorbed. Sounds similar to the ideas of Dr. White et al.yes it mixes the vacuum plasma with vacuum pairs, virtual particles known to surround charges, electrons in the skin of the cavity, the woodward effect (changing in mass) force/power>=1/c [slowing light] - increasing impulse, the Polarizable vacuum, General relativity, with standard electrodynamics, with squeezed light/vacuum which creates alternating regions of positive and negative energy. Possibly sensing and generating gravity waves.Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezed_coherent_stateBased on the presence of a mean field[edit]Squeezed states of light can be divided into squeezed vacuum and bright squeezed light, depending on the absence or presence of a non-zero mean field (also called a carrier), respectively. Interestingly, an Optical Parametric Oscillator operated below threshold produces squeezed vacuum, whereas the same OPO operated above threshold produces bright squeezed light. Bright squeezed light can be advantageous for certain quantum information processing applications as it obviates the need of sending local oscillator to provide a phase reference, whereas squeezed vacuum is considered more suitable for quantum enhanced sensing applications. The AdLIGO and GEO600 gravitational wave detectors use squeezed vacuum to achieve enhanced sensitivity beyond the standard quantum limitQuote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_energyCasimir effect[edit]Main article: Casimir effectIn the Casimir effect, two flat plates placed very close together restrict the wavelengths of quanta which can exist between them. This in turn restricts the types and hence number and density of virtual particle pairs which can form in the intervening vacuum and can result in a negative energy density.If there is any truth to it many things may tie in. Dustinthewind:If you liked those Quantum Vacuum plasma runs try out this mp4 movie of same. I've also attached a related Eagleworks (EW) Lab paper with the start of our idea on this QV topic if you've not read it already.Best, Paul M.
It looks like you are over-coupled into the frustum. The Smith chart circle OD should be no larger than from the 50 ohm center point to the perimeter of the chart. A couple of examples of what I was seeing with the Agilent Field fox VNA at the Eagleworks Lab are attached.
It was a bad calibration. After a new calibration, i'm now getting good results. -52dB return loss! QL of ~7,200 (-3dB method ~3,600 x 2 as RL is better than -40dB). Next step is to rotate the end-plates to see if that can be improved - then bolting the plates in place.
Quote from: Star-Drive on 08/20/2017 05:00 amQuote from: dustinthewind on 08/19/2017 09:25 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/19/2017 05:39 pmQuote from: dustinthewind on 08/19/2017 07:37 amsnip..Perhaps a forced gradient in the virtual particle density by -dB/dt where there is mutual repulsion between particles. A larger change in the magnetic field (energy density) may exist in the narrow part of the cone pushing pairs more into the larger end. This would give a lower pair density at the narrow end and larger density at the large end (possibly similar to squeezed light or vacuum). Maybe this change in density forces energy to be distributed to the available pairs. More energy per pair may increase the effective mass and decrease the number of available photons. Photon quanta being the interaction of vacuum pairs with an electron in material with possible backwards time traveling waves that cancel out a quanta of energy going else where when absorbed. Sounds similar to the ideas of Dr. White et al.yes it mixes the vacuum plasma with vacuum pairs, virtual particles known to surround charges, electrons in the skin of the cavity, the woodward effect (changing in mass) force/power>=1/c [slowing light] - increasing impulse, the Polarizable vacuum, General relativity, with standard electrodynamics, with squeezed light/vacuum which creates alternating regions of positive and negative energy. Possibly sensing and generating gravity waves.Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squeezed_coherent_stateBased on the presence of a mean field[edit]Squeezed states of light can be divided into squeezed vacuum and bright squeezed light, depending on the absence or presence of a non-zero mean field (also called a carrier), respectively. Interestingly, an Optical Parametric Oscillator operated below threshold produces squeezed vacuum, whereas the same OPO operated above threshold produces bright squeezed light. Bright squeezed light can be advantageous for certain quantum information processing applications as it obviates the need of sending local oscillator to provide a phase reference, whereas squeezed vacuum is considered more suitable for quantum enhanced sensing applications. The AdLIGO and GEO600 gravitational wave detectors use squeezed vacuum to achieve enhanced sensitivity beyond the standard quantum limitQuote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_energyCasimir effect[edit]Main article: Casimir effectIn the Casimir effect, two flat plates placed very close together restrict the wavelengths of quanta which can exist between them. This in turn restricts the types and hence number and density of virtual particle pairs which can form in the intervening vacuum and can result in a negative energy density.If there is any truth to it many things may tie in. Dustinthewind:If you liked those Quantum Vacuum plasma runs try out this mp4 movie of same. I've also attached a related Eagleworks (EW) Lab paper with the start of our idea on this QV topic if you've not read it already.Best, Paul M.Thanks for mentioning this paper as its fascinating. I have been thinking for a while now about the electron cloud around an atom so it really hit home. The way the electron can jump energy states or form a cloud seemed like a positron hole. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_holePossibly giving a reason why an electron cloud orbit doesn't lose energy via acceleration to radiation falling into the nucleus.