Quote from: Mulletron on 10/12/2014 02:06 pmBy what logic are you assuming a photon would see unruh radiation when the speed of light is the same in all reference frames?Are you asking that to me ?I don't think a photon would see Unruh radiation, I think a moving "wall of electrons" (periodically) accelerating at great values could see Unruh radiation. I believe the speed of light is the same in all inertial reference frames. I don't believe in the claimed results so far, I think a number of more or less exotic effects could be used to get net forward thrust from power, but not at better than 1/c (as Newtons/Watts). But I'm not qualified to have any authority on the subject, just trying to follow.Maybe your question was addressed to dr Rodal ?
By what logic are you assuming a photon would see unruh radiation when the speed of light is the same in all reference frames?
Just read the oracle on the Pioneer Anomaly. It is thought to be caused by thermal effects, as of 2011-ish. Is this not the case?
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 10/12/2014 02:29 pmJust read the oracle on the Pioneer Anomaly. It is thought to be caused by thermal effects, as of 2011-ish. Is this not the case?What has that got to do with anything?
Quote from: IslandPlaya on 10/12/2014 02:31 pmQuote from: JohnFornaro on 10/12/2014 02:29 pmJust read the oracle on the Pioneer Anomaly. It is thought to be caused by thermal effects, as of 2011-ish. Is this not the case?What has that got to do with anything?http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0612599http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.3303Basically everything.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/12/2014 02:06 pmBy what logic are you assuming a photon would see unruh radiation when the speed of light is the same in all reference frames?This accelerating photon seeing unruh radiation stuff is nonsense. ...Non sequitur and unfounded.Please go to http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.htmland follow the discussion on the comments section.
By what logic are you assuming a photon would see unruh radiation when the speed of light is the same in all reference frames?This accelerating photon seeing unruh radiation stuff is nonsense. ...
Quote from: Rodal on 10/12/2014 02:14 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/12/2014 02:06 pmBy what logic are you assuming a photon would see unruh radiation when the speed of light is the same in all reference frames?This accelerating photon seeing unruh radiation stuff is nonsense. ...Non sequitur and unfounded.Please go to http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.htmland follow the discussion on the comments section.A photon starts off at C. They don't accelerate.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 10/12/2014 02:33 pmQuote from: IslandPlaya on 10/12/2014 02:31 pmQuote from: JohnFornaro on 10/12/2014 02:29 pmJust read the oracle on the Pioneer Anomaly. It is thought to be caused by thermal effects, as of 2011-ish. Is this not the case?What has that got to do with anything?http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0612599http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.3303Basically everything.The links you quote have nothing to do with thermal effects. I think you are confused.
Quote from: IslandPlaya on 10/12/2014 02:37 pmQuote from: JohnFornaro on 10/12/2014 02:33 pmQuote from: IslandPlaya on 10/12/2014 02:31 pmQuote from: JohnFornaro on 10/12/2014 02:29 pmJust read the oracle on the Pioneer Anomaly. It is thought to be caused by thermal effects, as of 2011-ish. Is this not the case?What has that got to do with anything?http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0612599http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.3303Basically everything.The links you quote have nothing to do with thermal effects. I think you are confused.The links have everything to do with the Pioneer anomaly, which pertain to McCulloch's theory of MiHsC. Loook harder.
Quote from: JFThe links have everything to do with the Pioneer anomaly, which pertain to McCulloch's theory of MiHsC. Loook harder.No. Try reading harder. You state it is due to thermal effects. Which it may be.However you then link to McCullochs papers. Not thermal, but MiHsC.Which is it?
The links have everything to do with the Pioneer anomaly, which pertain to McCulloch's theory of MiHsC. Loook harder.
This paper proposes an explanation for the Pioneer anomaly:
The Pioneer anomaly is similar to the galaxy rotation problem.
But the Pioneer anomaly, or the EMDrive explanation, and any other anomaly of a man-made object is not a fair test of the quantised inertia Unruh theory.A fair test would be the existence or non-existence of dark matter.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/12/2014 02:43 pmBut the Pioneer anomaly, or the EMDrive explanation, and any other anomaly of a man-made object is not a fair test of the quantised inertia Unruh theory.A fair test would be the existence or non-existence of dark matter.No lo comprendo, kemosabe. Explica para nosotros, party favor?Are you saying that DM is that which without which they ain't no swing?That is, why wouldn't a man-made experiment be, in principle, disallowed as a test of a theory? Me no unnerstand.
I don't know how this inters the discussion, but have we overlooked the part about the cavity being filled with air? To what degree would the air ionize producing ions/electrons in the mix? Ions would be massive but the electrons should be free to move about.
We must be sure to understand that emdrive doesn't need MiHsC to work if dielectric thrust holds true. MiHsC is an optimization factor. Here on earth in strong gravity MiHsC's effect is essentially zero. Once in microgravity is it helpful. The effect is pretty much nothing otherwise unless you have fancy meta materials.