General Discussion > New Physics for Space Technology

Propellantless Field Propulsion and application

<< < (275/370) > >>

mikegi:

--- Quote from: Star-Drive on 07/07/2011 03:38 AM ---Folks:

I forgot to append the following Woodward paper that was referenced in Part-1 of the latest M-E data dump.  It's a deeper explanation of action-at-a-distance and what it really means in the M-E context.  I.e., James C. Maxwell's E&M derivation's negative square root propagation solution that predicts possible acausal effects must be taken seriously not only for E&M, but also for gravitational effects as well.

Best,
Paul M.

--- End quote ---
The vector gravity theory used in that paper is Heaviside's Appendix B of his Electromagnetic Theory Vol. I, "A Gravitational and Electromagnetic Analogy", written in 1893. Here's McDonald's note on it:

http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/examples/vectorgravity.pdf

Of course, Heaviside would immediately reject any consideration of "advanced waves".

Note that Heaviside's vector gravity paper was just pushing an analogy as far as it could go. His actual gravity+electromagnetic theory is in Electromagnetic Theory Vol. III, "Matter, Electricity, Ether and the Pressure of Radiation", written in 1902. It's a far more interesting theory with all sorts of ramifications. Of course, it contains the dreaded "E" word, which instantly brands you a crackpot these days. I don't have any professional physics reputation to defend so it doesn't bother me. I'd just like to see someone with the proper mathematical chops look into it further. I can handle the plane wave solutions but not the general equations, which are where all the fun happens. In particular, the intersection of two or more intense em waves.

Anyway, I just thought I'd toss this out there.

Cinder:
Ya know, if for no other reason, it'd be great if ME panned out.  Just so it pulls the carpet under contemporary science's reluctance to going off the beaten path more than it does now.

GeeGee:

--- Quote from: Cinder on 07/07/2011 07:36 AM ---Ya know, if for no other reason, it'd be great if ME panned out.  Just so it pulls the carpet under contemporary science's reluctance to going off the beaten path more than it does now.

--- End quote ---

Strangely enough, Woodward isn't even really doing 'off-beat' physics when you realize what he's really doing is trying to answer a fundamental question of physics - what is the source of inertia? If Woodward's right, then the space drive is an added bonus.

I don't really understand why this isn't a 'hot topic' in physics anymore. Dark energy, String theory and the Higgs particle get all the attention these days.

Star-Drive:

--- Quote from: GeeGee on 07/07/2011 08:38 AM ---
--- Quote from: Cinder on 07/07/2011 07:36 AM ---Ya know, if for no other reason, it'd be great if ME panned out.  Just so it pulls the carpet under contemporary science's reluctance to going off the beaten path more than it does now.

--- End quote ---

Strangely enough, Woodward isn't even really doing 'off-beat' physics when you realize what he's really trying to do is trying to answer a fundamental question of physics - what is the source of inertia? If Woodward's right, then the space drive is an added bonus.

I don't really understand why this isn't a 'hot topic' in physics anymore. Dark energy, String theory and the Higgs particle get all the attention these days.

--- End quote ---

Mikegi:

Thanks for the Heaviside paper!

GeeGee:

Woodward just opened up his M-E distribution to the ZPE folks in the hopes of getting a constructive dialogue going between the M-E and ZPE camps.  A dialogue will hopefully push forward developments in advaced gravity physics and building Advanced Deep Space Transports (ADST).  An excerpt from Woodward's last night "A New Direction" e-mail follows:

"As you know, the events of the past several months have gotten me
thinking about the issues of advanced propulsion in a somewhat wider
setting than I've thought about them before.  As you've read in the
email appended below, the central problem facing the advanced
propulsion field in my opinion is getting the physics right -- and
that likely (if we are very lucky) there will be one path through the
physics to starships and stargates.  The way to get there, if it can be done, is through plausible physics.

There is a related problem in my opinion: the people who have been
engaged in trying to find the plausible physics that will enable
starships and stargates have formed into informal groups, each with
its take on how the physics is to be addressed.  While this, I
suppose, is quite natural, it is not the best way to tackle the
problems before us.  If you only talk to like-minded folks, you're not
likely to hear anything new often.  Is there a way to deal with this?

Yes.  Someone needs to try to get all of the interested parties who do
plausible physics into an arrangement where they can keep track of
what others are doing, and contribute constructive criticism to help forward the project.

If we sit around and wait for someone else to do this, hell will
probably freeze over before it gets done.  So I have decided to try to
get this done by changing the nature of this email circulation from
one where I update you on progress on the Mach effects project, and
occasional discusions of related maters take place, to one where those
on the circulation include people who do plausible physics from those
other informal groups (of which some of you may already be members).

To that end, I have invited Jack Sarfatti, Vince Teofilo, John
Brandenburg, Hal Puthoff, and Eric Davis to participate in this
circulation -- and I am pleased to say that they have all agreed to do
so.  I know them all to be very capable physicists who do plausible
physics.  That's not to say that I agree with all of their views on
the issues of advanced propulsion.  But that's not the point.  We do
not yet know with certainty what the path of plausible physics to
starships and stargates is.  They, or indeed others, may have
important pieces of the puzzle.  Whatever the pieces of the puzzle may
be, they will be easier to put together if we are all listening to each other -- and talking too of course."

(James F. Woodward)

mikegi:

--- Quote from: Star-Drive on 07/07/2011 12:41 PM ---Mikegi:

Thanks for the Heaviside paper!

--- End quote ---
You're welcome. I hope your theory and experiments succeed. I'm skeptical but the kind of effort and dedication you have is exactly what it will take to make breakthroughs. Even if Woodward's theory doesn't pan out, you never know what other things you'll discover in the post-mortem.


--- Quote ---Woodward just opened up his M-E distribution to the ZPE folks in the hopes of getting a constructive dialogue going between the M-E and ZPE camps.  A dialogue will hopefully push forward developments in advaced gravity physics and building Advanced Deep Space Transports (ADST).
--- End quote ---
I recommend using a private forum rather than email or other "distribution" list formats. There are websites that let you create a private forum for free (advertisements). You/Woodward would have control over who is allowed to read/signup/post/etc. I could setup a phpBB forum on one of my servers for y'all (which would be totally free -- i.e. no annoying advertising).

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version