Author Topic: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application  (Read 664332 times)

Offline Cinder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 561
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 178
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #740 on: 03/03/2010 09:27 AM »
Am I wrong that MLTs would be compact enough that, if economics of scale are good enough (if e.g. durability is a biggie), they'd allow going out and grappling debris and either bringing it down to surface or accelerating it so that it entirely burns up in re-entry?

Depends on how much money you are willing to spend cleaning up the mess. All debris re-enters after a while, the smaller stuff sooner than the bigger. Certainly the big pieces such as rocket stages could be de-orbited easily.
I was thinking that the total cost (item, launch, operation etc) of a few (a few dozen) small MLT powered tugs ought to be less than that of so much debris up there.  Just a guess, I don't know how long e.g. 20-40 such little MLT snails would take to clean up a large chunk of all debris.
The pork must flow.

Offline Sith

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 181
  • Bulgaria, EU
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #741 on: 03/31/2010 05:16 AM »
Guys, what about the mentioned errors in the Lorentz transformation?
http://www.masstheory.org/lorentz.pdf
it may prevent any further advance in field propulsion

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
  • TX/USA
  • Liked: 856
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #742 on: 04/01/2010 04:23 AM »
Guys, what about the mentioned errors in the Lorentz transformation?
http://www.masstheory.org/lorentz.pdf
it may prevent any further advance in field propulsion


Whether the SR based Lorentz tranform discussed in this paper is valid or not, it has no bearing on the reality of the Lorentz force used in Woodward's MLT devices.  The Lorentz force, AKA the electrical engineering's Fleming right-hand-rule for cross product vectors (Force = q*(vxB)) is verified everytime you turn on an electric motor, fire a rail gun, or trace the trajectory of a plus or minus charged particle in a magnetic field. 
Star-Drive

Offline jimgagnon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #743 on: 04/01/2010 04:28 AM »
Guys, what about the mentioned errors in the Lorentz transformation?
http://www.masstheory.org/lorentz.pdf
it may prevent any further advance in field propulsion

I believe there are more rigorous ways to derive the Lorentz transformation:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation#Derivation

Wouldn't be the first derivation that was initially in error yet proved useful and later validly derived.

Offline Sith

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 181
  • Bulgaria, EU
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #744 on: 04/12/2010 05:41 AM »
Humor aside, the phrase "Flux Capacitor" makes very good sense when taken in its proper context.  A Mach-Effect (M-E), Mach-Lorentz Thruster (MLT) "Flux Capacitor" is an energy storing and processing capacitor structure that has a B-field flux vector running through it at right angles to the capacitor's internal E-field vector.  These time varying and crossed E- and B-fields in the capacitor dielectric create a longitudinal, (parallel to the thrust axis), Lorentz vxB force used to create the dE^2/dt^2 power flux in the capacitor and bulk accelerations of the capacitor needed to create the M-E inertial mass fluctuations, and also to force rectify these M-E derived inertial mass fluctuations into a unidirectional force.  Just as a reminder, these transient inertial mass fluctuations used in M-E devices are based on the Mach's Principle assumption that inertial mass is due to the gravitational interactions of all the mass/energy in the causally connected universe with a locally accelerated and energy verying dielectric mass.
Once you build up your field, would you be able to cut off the energy input from the battery and still keep your speed in the atmosphere?

Offline 93143

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3039
  • Liked: 292
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #745 on: 04/12/2010 05:51 AM »
Once you build up your field, would you be able to cut off the energy input from the battery and still keep your speed in the atmosphere?

Depends what you mean.

It's possible to stick some MLTs on a flywheel and generate enough power to run the drive (assuming the thrust efficiency is as good as the proponents hope).  You'd need a battery or a capacitor or something to start it, but after it got past its critical speed it could power itself.

If you mean "could you just start up the drive, get up to speed, and cut the power, without immediately starting to decelerate due to drag?", then no.  These devices require continuous energy input to maintain thrust.

Offline bpb3

  • Member
  • Posts: 8
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #746 on: 04/12/2010 04:16 PM »

"It's possible to stick some MLTs on a flywheel and generate enough power to run the drive (assuming the thrust efficiency is as good as the proponents hope).  You'd need a battery or a capacitor or something to start it, but after it got past its critical speed it could power itself."

The mind boggles...A personal star-ship with 'easy-spin' starting just like a lawn mower....

Oh well - back to the real world,  cranky old space shuttles....

Offline Sith

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 181
  • Bulgaria, EU
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #747 on: 04/16/2010 10:03 PM »
What is the most optimal shape for a MLT ship? Because from what I see it looks like a coil

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #748 on: 04/18/2010 03:05 AM »
What is the most optimal shape for a MLT ship? Because from what I see it looks like a coil

I seriously think a saucer would probably be best. That would give you the best combination of capsule-like simplicity and structural stability, along with aerodynamic shape because--let's face it, no matter how good your MLT driving is going to be, unless you want a slow-elevator like ascent and descent, at enormous energy expense, you're going to want to kick it in the atmosphere at respectable speeds, like Mach 3+.

The only reason airplanes are shaped the way they are (pointy with wings facing one direction) is because they have fixed external engines that need to be at the right relation to center of pressure and center of gravity.

MLT positions wouldn't affect or care about center of pressure, as long as it's relatively stable, although center of gravity still matters for that reason.

 Hence,round is best and gives the best combination of manueverability and stability. Maybe round with some small aerodynamic bias...sort of like the alien fighter ships from Independence Day, to enhance stability.

Oh, and it would scare the pants off of people... Maybe add some neon underlights for effect? ;-)

Offline Sith

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 181
  • Bulgaria, EU
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #749 on: 04/18/2010 03:50 PM »
What is the most optimal shape for a MLT ship? Because from what I see it looks like a coil

I seriously think a saucer would probably be best. That would give you the best combination of capsule-like simplicity and structural stability, along with aerodynamic shape because--let's face it, no matter how good your MLT driving is going to be, unless you want a slow-elevator like ascent and descent, at enormous energy expense, you're going to want to kick it in the atmosphere at respectable speeds, like Mach 3+.

The only reason airplanes are shaped the way they are (pointy with wings facing one direction) is because they have fixed external engines that need to be at the right relation to center of pressure and center of gravity.

MLT positions wouldn't affect or care about center of pressure, as long as it's relatively stable, although center of gravity still matters for that reason.

 Hence,round is best and gives the best combination of manueverability and stability. Maybe round with some small aerodynamic bias...sort of like the alien fighter ships from Independence Day, to enhance stability.

Oh, and it would scare the pants off of people... Maybe add some neon underlights for effect? ;-)

Sounds cool.
What kind of shielding will it use at speeds over Mach 3 in atmosphere? Or the best soultion will be to go up at LEO, accelerate and dive back again :)

Offline kkattula

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2506
  • Melbourne, Australia
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #750 on: 04/19/2010 04:11 AM »
Why bother with super-sonic flight in the atmosphere?  Straight up at low sub-sonic, you'll get to near vacuum in 10 to 15 minutes.

Aerodynamic shapes are unnecessary. I think a basic cube would be easiest to build. You know it makes sense. Resistance is futile. ;)

Offline Sith

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 181
  • Bulgaria, EU
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #751 on: 05/05/2010 06:45 PM »
If the MLT works on pulsed DC, will it be in the audio frequency spectrum or higher? Because if f goes up very high, then the pulsed DC will become more like normal DC and the coil will burn up since u = Ldi/dt, where i=constant, then u=0...

Offline kurt9

  • Member
  • Posts: 31
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #752 on: 05/05/2010 09:45 PM »
Paul March mentioned back in January that they determined that bulk dielectric material will not work for the MLT application and that thin film materials had to be used, an stack of alternating layers of low-k and high-k dielectric materials. He also mentioned that the optimal thickness of the thin-films was based on the acoustical wavelength of the drive frequency.

Is the drive frequency the frequency of the AC current applied to the capacitors in the experiments (for example, the 2.2MHz used in one of Woodward's experiments)?

How is the acoustical wavelength calculated from this? Is it the simple frequency times wavelength equals C equation? Or is it calculated differently?

I read through some of the papers on Woodward's site as well as the presentations. Where are the equations to calculate this stuff?

Also, the presentation has it where the thrust comes from the oscillation of the Titanium atom in the TiBaO3 crystal cell. Does this mean that the dielectric material need to be single-crystal in order to make an effective MLT? As a multi-layer stack, these would need to be deposited as epitaxial layers. Is this correct?

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 823
  • TX/USA
  • Liked: 856
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #753 on: 05/06/2010 04:05 AM »
Guys:

There appears to be a miss-understanding on the origins of the M-E in a dielectric being expressed in some of these posts.  Per Woodward's version of the M-E, (ther is another one based on near equvalent QM ideas about the nature of the QM vacuum and long range gravitational effects that traverse the universe), it takes a bulk acceleration relative to the distant stars of a concurrently energy storing dielectric before the M-E comes into play.  The greater the time rate of energy change in the capacitor dielectric per unit time and the greater the bulk accelertion of this dielectric, (the M-E is proportional to the product of these two variables), the greater the magnitude of the M-E mass fluctuations should be.  It turns out that any internal motion in the dielectric at the molecular level that cancels out over one ac cycle generates a null results in regards to the production of the M-E.  This was not abvious to Woodward and Crew until the middle of last year when Woodward finished his rotary cap experiments. 

Now to the issue of internal E-field cancellations in a dielectric by the back-EMF created by the charging molecules that make up the dielectric.  I think, but I have not yet experimetnally verify that the internal E-field in a dielectric is reduced by the a factor proportional to a factor equal 1/e-r for a give dielectric.  So one would think that in an MLT that uses the applied E-field to create a velocity vector of the internal ions used to generate the force rectification Lorenttz force, that a high-K dielectric would be at a distinct disadvanatage to a Low-k dielectric in regards to generating a force rectified M-E.  However, the M-E derivation indicates that the M-E is proportional to the square of the dielectric constant, but only varies lineraly with the applied Lorentz force, so its still better to use a higher-k dielectric than a low-k dielectric for expressing a M-E based rectified force.  In a perfect world combining both types of dielectrics in layers or stacks could be advantageous, but from the experimental data from my MLT-2004 and Mach-2MHz test articles that used monolythic e-r=2,500 and 5.000 dielectric caps respectively, it's not a hard and fast requirment.  In engineering every design is a long list of compromises... 
Star-Drive

Offline Sith

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 181
  • Bulgaria, EU
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #754 on: 05/07/2010 11:31 AM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_gravity
Is this theory better than the Heim theory?

Offline bocephus419

  • Member
  • Posts: 44
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #755 on: 05/07/2010 03:25 PM »
Star-Drive,

Just to clarify, does "bulk acceleration" mean that the whole cap has to move as opposed to just internal motion at the molecular level?  If so, are there any theories or papers on why that is?  Also, I was curious, can the M-E be induced through any type of energy change, magnetic for example, or is there something special about electric energy in this particular application?  Anyway, interesting stuff...

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #756 on: 05/07/2010 08:50 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_gravity
Is this theory better than the Heim theory?

Heim theory fails miserably to accurately calculate quite a number of constants.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #757 on: 05/08/2010 04:15 AM »
So Paul since you're back on this thread, wondering if you could explain why almost all your previous posts have been deleted? I went back trying to get an understanding of the substantive rebuttal to the Oak Ridge paper, and noticed all your previous posts are gone, although plenty of replies are left. What's up with that?


Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2133
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #758 on: 05/08/2010 05:30 AM »
So Paul since you're back on this thread, wondering if you could explain why almost all your previous posts have been deleted? I went back trying to get an understanding of the substantive rebuttal to the Oak Ridge paper, and noticed all your previous posts are gone, although plenty of replies are left. What's up with that?



So far as I know, Paul isn't back...
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #759 on: 05/08/2010 03:07 PM »
Isn't @stardrive Paul march?

Tags: