Author Topic: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application  (Read 375204 times)

Online cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Liked: 52
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #720 on: 02/02/2010 08:42 PM »
Paul,

Do you think there is any chance of getting any serious official support now from the new 'game-changing seeking' NASA ? Seems to me you are being hindered by lack of materials science support, wouldn't it be nice and much quicker for your research if you just gave out a dielectric spec for a hybrid part and someone just went ahead and made it for you free of charge  ! ;)


Everything is possible. The Tiger teams want input and will consider everything that might be groundbreaking.

I'd wait to see the results in Dr.Woodward's SPESIF paper though. First let's establish that transient mass fluctuations can indeed be generated. Then let's special-order materials.

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1466
  • Liked: 9
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #721 on: 02/02/2010 10:19 PM »
The latest test runs from his shuttler rig are encouraging, although puzzling. I thought there may be an interaction between the thrust balance and the G/I "exhaust." However the "exhaust" does not seem to impinge much on the thrust balance beam.

>EDIT< - Sorry, the thrust appeared to be downwards even when the shuttler was flipped 180 degrees.
« Last Edit: 02/02/2010 10:21 PM by Lampyridae »
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18782
  • Liked: 1480
  • Minnesota
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #722 on: 02/02/2010 11:31 PM »
Paul,

Do you think there is any chance of getting any serious official support now from the new 'game-changing seeking' NASA ? Seems to me you are being hindered by lack of materials science support, wouldn't it be nice and much quicker for your research if you just gave out a dielectric spec for a hybrid part and someone just went ahead and made it for you free of charge  ! ;)


Everything is possible. The Tiger teams want input and will consider everything that might be groundbreaking.

I'd wait to see the results in Dr.Woodward's SPESIF paper though. First let's establish that transient mass fluctuations can indeed be generated. Then let's special-order materials.
Agreed. I have a hard time with things like this. While this would be so great if it was true, it doesn't pass the giggle test for me. We don't even know if this is strictly physically possible, let alone possible in the engineering or economic sense!
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
  • Liked: 9
  • TX/USA
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #723 on: 02/03/2010 11:45 AM »
Paul,

Do you think there is any chance of getting any serious official support now from the new 'game-changing seeking' NASA ? Seems to me you are being hindered by lack of materials science support, wouldn't it be nice and much quicker for your research if you just gave out a dielectric spec for a hybrid part and someone just went ahead and made it for you free of charge  ! ;)


Everything is possible. The Tiger teams want input and will consider everything that might be groundbreaking.

I'd wait to see the results in Dr.Woodward's SPESIF paper though. First let's establish that transient mass fluctuations can indeed be generated. Then let's special-order materials.
Agreed. I have a hard time with things like this. While this would be so great if it was true, it doesn't pass the giggle test for me. We don't even know if this is strictly physically possible, let alone possible in the engineering or economic sense!


The one thing I've always liked about Dr. Woodward's work was that it was based on NO new physics.  His mass fluctuation conjecture rest squarely on accepted and experimentally verified theories such as Newton’s three laws of motion, Einstein's special and general relativity, Lorentz invariance, and of course Einstein's famous mass = Energy / c^2.  And no, it's NOT E= m*c^2 for that version came later.  The only element in Woodward's theoretical foundations still in dispute is how to integrate Mach's principle and its effects on the origins of inertia into GRT. 

Now you want to know what Jim has produced of late in regards to his latest shuttler test program.  I don’t want to steal Dr. Woodward’s thunder, but I’ll append a typical, but still very preliminary data plot for your review with the understanding that Dr. Woodward is still wringing out this new shuttler test set up looking for false positives that might contaminate this test series using this particular type of “soft” PZT material as the energy storage capacitor material. And as usual, using high-k cap dielectric materials makes the result time dependent and a tad flakey, so bear with Jim’s teething pains in bringing this new test article up to its full potential, but M-E potential it has.

Edit: 1. The attached data plot's X-axis is run-time in seconds.
       2. Added ARC-Lite Torque Pendulum, Vacuum Chamber & Test article

Paul
« Last Edit: 02/03/2010 05:37 PM by Star-Drive »
Star-Drive

Offline clb22

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
  • Liked: 0
  • Europa
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #724 on: 02/03/2010 05:17 PM »
Paul,

Do you think there is any chance of getting any serious official support now from the new 'game-changing seeking' NASA ? Seems to me you are being hindered by lack of materials science support, wouldn't it be nice and much quicker for your research if you just gave out a dielectric spec for a hybrid part and someone just went ahead and made it for you free of charge  ! ;)


Everything is possible. The Tiger teams want input and will consider everything that might be groundbreaking.

I'd wait to see the results in Dr.Woodward's SPESIF paper though. First let's establish that transient mass fluctuations can indeed be generated. Then let's special-order materials.
Agreed. I have a hard time with things like this. While this would be so great if it was true, it doesn't pass the giggle test for me. We don't even know if this is strictly physically possible, let alone possible in the engineering or economic sense!

Surely, any project funded by NASA's new 5 billion technology groundbreaker program needs to be "serious" in nature. But hey, that new technology program has two main focuses, a few 5-year larger programs in the several hundred dollar to 1 billion dollar range and a multitude of small projects, ranging from a few hundred thousand dollars to a couple dozen of million dollars. If this one is only remotely possibly from a physical viewpoint, it should get some funding.

Hey, we got NASA style X-project funding now, let's start to use it on X-style projects!
Spirals not circles, Mr. President. Spirals!

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
  • Liked: 9
  • TX/USA
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #725 on: 02/03/2010 05:55 PM »
Folks:

When Dr. Woodward gets his current M-E proof-of-principle "Demonstrator" finished with accompanying M-E data for all to review, the normal scientific process would require other independent scientist to replicate his results at their leisure.  However that will take years to accomplish, so how can we jump start this process?  IMO, having NASA allocate approximately $1.0-to-2.0 million per year for a 3-to-5 years laboratory R&D effort to see if Woodward's M-E work can be verified and then expanded to increase its per thruster output level from micro-Newtons to Newtons and then thousands of Newtons would be well worth the effort.  Remember that if we can make this leap from M-E laboratory curiosity to working M-E thrusters, we will have equivalent specific impulse figures measured not in thousands or even tens or thousands of seconds, but trillions of seconds.  We will also have a path to building GRT's traversable wormholes or Alcubierre's warp-bubbles needed for interstellar flight that will be measured in weeks to months instead of thousands of years.  To me that would be tax dollars well spent no matter what the outcome of this R&D endeavor yields.
« Last Edit: 02/03/2010 05:57 PM by Star-Drive »
Star-Drive

Offline clb22

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
  • Liked: 0
  • Europa
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #726 on: 02/03/2010 06:27 PM »
To me that would be tax dollars well spent no matter what the outcome of this R&D endeavor yields.

I go even further, even if this doesn't yield any results, it would be money worth spend - just from a marketing perspective. Instead of NASA telling kids "we are building big rockets so we can do what folks back in the 1960s did already with prehistoric computers and slide rulers", NASA could say "kids, look, we might not be there yet, but we are currently funding technology that might us get even to other solar systems one day - it works like this..."
Spirals not circles, Mr. President. Spirals!

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1466
  • Liked: 9
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #727 on: 02/04/2010 05:59 AM »
To me that would be tax dollars well spent no matter what the outcome of this R&D endeavor yields.

I go even further, even if this doesn't yield any results, it would be money worth spend - just from a marketing perspective. Instead of NASA telling kids "we are building big rockets so we can do what folks back in the 1960s did already with prehistoric computers and slide rulers", NASA could say "kids, look, we might not be there yet, but we are currently funding technology that might us get even to other solar systems one day - it works like this..."

Yeah, it does look like NASA is looking for shiny "gee whiz" tech right about now. This might be the right time, especially if the experiments come up with better evidence.
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Online cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Liked: 52
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #728 on: 02/04/2010 12:50 PM »
To me that would be tax dollars well spent no matter what the outcome of this R&D endeavor yields.

I go even further, even if this doesn't yield any results, it would be money worth spend - just from a marketing perspective. Instead of NASA telling kids "we are building big rockets so we can do what folks back in the 1960s did already with prehistoric computers and slide rulers", NASA could say "kids, look, we might not be there yet, but we are currently funding technology that might us get even to other solar systems one day - it works like this..."

Yep, I concur. If NASA would spend part of their energy hiring sharp physicists with the explicit instructions to attempt to experimentally disprove a particular approach -- like this one-- the wheat could get separated from the chaff a lot faster.

If they were unsuccessful despite ample resources in disproving the approach, that would be a clear signal to the field "hey! something interesting is going on here!"

It also avoids the self-licking ice cream cone effect that the CRU/Mann/GSS Climategate has made evident exists in federally funded research.

Then those scientists would be working to establish the non/validity of revolutionary technologies. And that is exciting no matter what the outcome!

Online cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Liked: 52
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #729 on: 02/04/2010 12:57 PM »
Paul,

Do you think there is any chance of getting any serious official support now from the new 'game-changing seeking' NASA ? Seems to me you are being hindered by lack of materials science support, wouldn't it be nice and much quicker for your research if you just gave out a dielectric spec for a hybrid part and someone just went ahead and made it for you free of charge  ! ;)


Everything is possible. The Tiger teams want input and will consider everything that might be groundbreaking.

I'd wait to see the results in Dr.Woodward's SPESIF paper though. First let's establish that transient mass fluctuations can indeed be generated. Then let's special-order materials.
Agreed. I have a hard time with things like this. While this would be so great if it was true, it doesn't pass the giggle test for me. We don't even know if this is strictly physically possible, let alone possible in the engineering or economic sense!


The one thing I've always liked about Dr. Woodward's work was that it was based on NO new physics.  His mass fluctuation conjecture rest squarely on accepted and experimentally verified theories such as Newton’s three laws of motion, Einstein's special and general relativity, Lorentz invariance, and of course Einstein's famous mass = Energy / c^2.  And no, it's NOT E= m*c^2 for that version came later.  The only element in Woodward's theoretical foundations still in dispute is how to integrate Mach's principle and its effects on the origins of inertia into GRT. 

Now you want to know what Jim has produced of late in regards to his latest shuttler test program.  I don’t want to steal Dr. Woodward’s thunder, but I’ll append a typical, but still very preliminary data plot for your review with the understanding that Dr. Woodward is still wringing out this new shuttler test set up looking for false positives that might contaminate this test series using this particular type of “soft” PZT material as the energy storage capacitor material. And as usual, using high-k cap dielectric materials makes the result time dependent and a tad flakey, so bear with Jim’s teething pains in bringing this new test article up to its full potential, but M-E potential it has.

Edit: 1. The attached data plot's X-axis is run-time in seconds.
       2. Added ARC-Lite Torque Pendulum, Vacuum Chamber & Test article

Paul

Paul, this is great stuff. Far from being a problem, the thrust die-off over the course of 100 seconds is fascinating! Because I'm assuming this graph shows that the force die-off tracks with voltage die-off due to capacitor thermal issues! And taken with the conditions of vaccuum and faraday cage, that says that there is basically no possible explanation for the phenomenon observed except that it is a function of delta E changes, which are decreasing with capacitor thermal  issues.

The limits of capacitor die-off may hurt propulsion, but it's a clear signal that the theory has something physical behind it.

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
  • Liked: 9
  • TX/USA
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #730 on: 02/04/2010 09:51 PM »


The one thing I've always liked about Dr. Woodward's work was that it was based on NO new physics.  His mass fluctuation conjecture rest squarely on accepted and experimentally verified theories such as Newton’s three laws of motion, Einstein's special and general relativity, Lorentz invariance, and of course Einstein's famous mass = Energy / c^2.  And no, it's NOT E= m*c^2 for that version came later.  The only element in Woodward's theoretical foundations still in dispute is how to integrate Mach's principle and its effects on the origins of inertia into GRT. 

Now you want to know what Jim has produced of late in regards to his latest shuttler test program.  I don’t want to steal Dr. Woodward’s thunder, but I’ll append a typical, but still very preliminary data plot for your review with the understanding that Dr. Woodward is still wringing out this new shuttler test set up looking for false positives that might contaminate this test series using this particular type of “soft” PZT material as the energy storage capacitor material. And as usual, using high-k cap dielectric materials makes the result time dependent and a tad flakey, so bear with Jim’s teething pains in bringing this new test article up to its full potential, but M-E potential it has.

Edit: 1. The attached data plot's X-axis is run-time in seconds.
       2. Added ARC-Lite Torque Pendulum, Vacuum Chamber & Test article

Paul


Paul, this is great stuff.  Far from being a problem, the thrust die-off over the course of 100 seconds is fascinating!  Because I'm assuming this graph shows that the force die-off tracks with voltage die-off due to capacitor thermal issues!  And taken with the conditions of vaccuum and faraday cage, that says that there is basically no possible explanation for the phenomenon observed except that it is a function of delta E changes, which are decreasing with capacitor thermal  issues.

The limits of capacitor die-off may hurt propulsion, but it's a clear signal that the theory has something physical behind it.

[/quote]

Tom:

Then you'll love all the cap thrust die-off data that litters Jim's and my lab.  For instance, in my Mach-2MHz test article in a MINWAX Faraday shield using the same 500pF at 15kV, Y5U barium titanate caps that Jim was using at the time, but alas no vaccum system, it generated a first light thrust of ~5,000 micro-Newton  running at 3.8 MHz.   (See my STAIF-2006 paper and the attached related slides.  I'm also attaching my MLT-2004 test article's typical 8-second data run's thermal evolution as they heated up for your reference.)  I literally saw the Mah-2MHz's ~1,000 uN initial thrust level at 2.15 MHz die off into the noise over a ~1.0 minute run time with semi-constant, (I was looking at the thrust scope trace most of the time), cap voltage of ~125V-p and input power.   It looks like the cap’s barium titanate’s crystalline structure is rearranging itself while its under constant load, which in turn probably kills off the piezoelectric induced radial bulk acceleration in the caps that magnifies the vxB Lorentz force in these MLTs. 

BTW, these high-k cap based M-E test articles can be resurrected if one lets them rest for several days, or bakes them in an oven above their Curie temperature for an hour or two, then letting them cool down to room temperature.  However, they never seem to last as long as they did originally.  They typically demonstrate renewed run times to thrust die off on the order of 1/2 to 3/4 the time originally demonstrated when new.  That may be great for telling the physicists that something weirdly physical is going on in these M-E tests, but it really sucks when it comes to making a reliable thruster needed for aerospace uses…

Star-Drive

Offline Lampyridae

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1466
  • Liked: 9
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #731 on: 02/09/2010 01:38 AM »
The shuttler results seem discouraging. As you said in the newsletter, MHz or GHz freqs seem necessary for any reasonable level of thrust. Piezos just seem too "squishy" to get anything out of the noise.
SKYLON... The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen's preferred surface-to-orbit conveyance.

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
  • Liked: 9
  • TX/USA
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #732 on: 02/11/2010 02:21 AM »
The shuttler results seem discouraging. As you said in the newsletter, MHz or GHz freqs seem necessary for any reasonable level of thrust. Piezos just seem too "squishy" to get anything out of the noise.

Lampy:

The results are not discouraging to me.  They show that Woodward's scaling rules work for given the ~100 nanoNewtons Jim's device is generating at 47kHz and the fact that the M-E predicts cubic frequency scaling, it fits right in with my results operating at 2.2 and 3.8 MHz.  Jim just need to increasing his operating frequency by a couple of orders of magnitude to see some much more impressive resutls measured in milliNewtons.
« Last Edit: 02/11/2010 02:23 AM by Star-Drive »
Star-Drive

Offline jimgagnon

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 610
  • Liked: 0
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #733 on: 02/12/2010 05:42 PM »
We will also have a path to building GRT's traversable wormholes or Alcubierre's warp-bubbles needed for interstellar flight that will be measured in weeks to months instead of thousands of years.  To me that would be tax dollars well spent no matter what the outcome of this R&D endeavor yields.

Agreed, money should be found for Dr. Woodward's efforts. I'm confused by how this research into the Mach-Lorentz effect could lead to GRT traversable wormholes or an Alcubierre drive; I was under the impression that exotic stuff such as negative energy was a prerequisite for both.

Reviewing your literature, it seems all your experiments have been run at room temperature. Do you have any thoughts on how supercooling would affect your results?
« Last Edit: 02/12/2010 05:48 PM by jimgagnon »

Offline Star-Drive

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 580
  • Liked: 9
  • TX/USA
Re: Propellantless Field Propulsion and application
« Reply #734 on: 02/13/2010 04:33 AM »
We will also have a path to building GRT's traversable wormholes or Alcubierre's warp-bubbles needed for interstellar flight that will be measured in weeks to months instead of thousands of years.  To me that would be tax dollars well spent no matter what the outcome of this R&D endeavor yields.

Agreed, money should be found for Dr. Woodward's efforts. I'm confused by how this research into the Mach-Lorentz effect could lead to GRT traversable wormholes or an Alcubierre drive; I was under the impression that exotic stuff such as negative energy was a prerequisite for both.

Reviewing your literature, it seems all your experiments have been run at room temperature. Do you have any thoughts on how supercooling would affect your results?

"I'm confused by how this research into the Mach-Lorentz effect could lead to GRT traversable wormholes or an Alcubierre drive;"

Look at the always negative second order M-E Wormhole differential term and then think about what happens when it goes more negative than the rest mass of the accelerated dielectric in question.  That my friend is a negative energy concentration/density in the same geometric configuration as the accelerated cap that can be used to create a true starship.

"Do you have any thoughts on how supercooling would affect your results?"

Not a clue other than the usual low temp effects on metallic conductivity and changing the dielectric behaviour...
« Last Edit: 02/13/2010 04:34 AM by Star-Drive »
Star-Drive

Tags: