Author Topic: EM Drive Developments Thread 1  (Read 763821 times)

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1740 on: 10/08/2014 08:09 PM »
Quote
"Superconductivity: a quantum mechanics effect for which people's intuition fails, because our intuition is built around our macro world and not the quantum world.   One would have to work out the quantum mechanics math to answer."

This is a hasty generalization.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 08:10 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline IslandPlaya

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Outer Hebrides
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1741 on: 10/08/2014 08:14 PM »
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/energy_p_reln.html

Helped me, sharing.
Didn't help me I'm afraid...
Useful reference to obvious things.
But...
Does a superconductor Ts degrade due to AC current?

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1742 on: 10/08/2014 08:15 PM »
What is the mechanism that destroys SC for AC currents?
Please enlighten me.

Destructive interference.


Yes.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 08:18 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline IslandPlaya

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Outer Hebrides
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1743 on: 10/08/2014 08:19 PM »
What is the mechanism that destroys SC for AC currents?
Please enlighten me.

Destructive interference.


Yes.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Lol,
At what frequency?

and topology?
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 08:20 PM by IslandPlaya »

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1744 on: 10/08/2014 08:20 PM »
What is the mechanism that destroys SC for AC currents?
Please enlighten me.

Destructive interference.


Yes.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Lol,
At what frequency?

and topology?

I don't think that computes. A general question begging a specific answer.
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • California
  • Liked: 468
  • Likes Given: 365
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1745 on: 10/08/2014 08:21 PM »
What is the mechanism that destroys SC for AC currents?
Please enlighten me.

I am not an expert in the theory of superconductors.   I experiment with high temperature superconductors and I have observed some of their interesting properties.  I can't disclose any of my research.   However there is a lot of literature available on this subject.   All are concerned with VLF AC.  If you know of a case where superconductors are used at microwave frequencies I would like to be informed-

https://cas.web.cern.ch/cas/Erice-2013/Lectures/May3_1_Gomory.ppt
http://www.utwente.nl/tnw/ems/Research/AC%20loss%20Twente%20Press/AC_loss_and_stability_of_superconducting_cables_for_fusion/
http://iopscience.iop.org/0953-2048/26/9/095001/
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 08:23 PM by zen-in »

Offline IslandPlaya

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Outer Hebrides
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1746 on: 10/08/2014 08:23 PM »
What is the mechanism that destroys SC for AC currents?
Please enlighten me.

I am not an expert in the theory of superconductors.   I experiment with high temperature superconductors and I have observed some of their interesting properties.  I can't disclose any of my research.   However there is a lot of literature available on this subject.   All are concerned with VLF AC.  If you know of a case were superconductors are used at microwave frequencies I would like to be informed-

https://cas.web.cern.ch/cas/Erice-2013/Lectures/May3_1_Gomory.ppt
http://www.utwente.nl/tnw/ems/Research/AC%20loss%20Twente%20Press/AC_loss_and_stability_of_superconducting_cables_for_fusion/
http://iopscience.iop.org/0953-2048/26/9/095001/
Maybe Dr Rodal would know about these things...

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8004
  • UK
  • Liked: 1278
  • Likes Given: 168
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1747 on: 10/08/2014 08:29 PM »

Dr. Rodal. I know your expertise on experimental setups.
Please could you cast your searching eyes over this please?
http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf
... and comment in the thread here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35805.0
Much obliged and thanks.
Hi IslandPlaya, still appreciating you being the first one to welcome me to this forum  :)

I wish I could, but unfortunately I can't at the moment embark into another topic.  I thank you for the gracious invitation :)
Thank you. However the topic has been nuked (maybe on my advice.)
I am currently trying to understand Hubble and Unrhu horizons as I intuit that is the theoretical key to the anomalous thrust.

It was only nuked because there was an already existing thread for it I imagine.

Offline IslandPlaya

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Outer Hebrides
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1748 on: 10/08/2014 08:31 PM »

Dr. Rodal. I know your expertise on experimental setups.
Please could you cast your searching eyes over this please?
http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf
... and comment in the thread here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35805.0
Much obliged and thanks.
Hi IslandPlaya, still appreciating you being the first one to welcome me to this forum  :)

I wish I could, but unfortunately I can't at the moment embark into another topic.  I thank you for the gracious invitation :)
Thank you. However the topic has been nuked (maybe on my advice.)
I am currently trying to understand Hubble and Unrhu horizons as I intuit that is the theoretical key to the anomalous thrust.

It was only nuked because there was an already existing thread for it I imagine.
No.
It was nuked because it didn't refer to space flight.

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1749 on: 10/08/2014 08:32 PM »
AC losses in superconductors.

http://www.bnl.gov/magnets/staff/gupta/Summer1968/0511.pdf

Hope this helps.

This is a very long answer above.

Does it make any sense, that since superconductors repel magnetic fields, they would repel their OWN magnetic field? That's why I said destructive interference. Is there a clearer term?
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 08:37 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline IslandPlaya

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Outer Hebrides
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1750 on: 10/08/2014 08:37 PM »
AC losses in superconductors.

http://www.bnl.gov/magnets/staff/gupta/Summer1968/0511.pdf

Hope this helps.
Not really.
A more modern version not out of the 60's would help.
Perhaps the 21st Century?
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 08:39 PM by IslandPlaya »

Offline IslandPlaya

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 582
  • Outer Hebrides
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 166
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1751 on: 10/08/2014 08:42 PM »
Mulletron.
I have decided you need to go back to physics school.
Sorry.
We will all welcome you when you get back.
Farewell and good luck!

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1752 on: 10/08/2014 08:49 PM »
Mulletron.
I have decided you need to go back to physics school.
Sorry.
We will all welcome you when you get back.
Farewell and good luck!

You're asking me questions here. Anyway, it is clear that superconductors break down in the presence of moving magnetic fields.

What kind of magnetic field do you have in the presence of AC?.......MOVING.

Edit:

Now let's play nice.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 09:03 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5835
  • USA
  • Liked: 5915
  • Likes Given: 5253
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1753 on: 10/08/2014 08:51 PM »
Quote
"Superconductivity: a quantum mechanics effect for which people's intuition fails, because our intuition is built around our macro world and not the quantum world.   One would have to work out the quantum mechanics math to answer."

This is a hasty generalization.


Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1754 on: 10/08/2014 08:59 PM »
Take another look at http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html, Prof. McCulloch has now incorporated the Chinese data, and all the data  [Shawyer, China and NASA] is pretty well calculated by McCulloch's formula except for one experiment (out of 3 in the list) by Brady et.al. that I had pointed out is extremely anomalous (they raised the Q by a factor of 2.5 and the force came down to 1/2).  The Unruth/McCulloch formula does a great job [compared to everything else that has been offered, and look at this thread we have considered all kinds of stuff].  What is most interesting again is that McCulloch does not use fudge factors or an excessive number of parameters.  Actually McCulloch's formula is bare bones:  PowerInput, Q, frequency and the geometry: that's all folks.  :)


Where does the dielectric requirement come in to his calculation? I don't see it.

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5835
  • USA
  • Liked: 5915
  • Likes Given: 5253
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1755 on: 10/08/2014 09:12 PM »
Take another look at http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html, Prof. McCulloch has now incorporated the Chinese data, and all the data  [Shawyer, China and NASA] is pretty well calculated by McCulloch's formula except for one experiment (out of 3 in the list) by Brady et.al. that I had pointed out is extremely anomalous (they raised the Q by a factor of 2.5 and the force came down to 1/2).  The Unruth/McCulloch formula does a great job [compared to everything else that has been offered, and look at this thread we have considered all kinds of stuff].  What is most interesting again is that McCulloch does not use fudge factors or an excessive number of parameters.  Actually McCulloch's formula is bare bones:  PowerInput, Q, frequency and the geometry: that's all folks.  :)
Where does the dielectric requirement come in to his calculation? I don't see it.
By his calculation do you mean the simple calculation in McCulloch's blog last page on the EM drives [yes, of course that simple calculation based on  PowerInput, Q, frequency and the flat surfaces, only applies to a truncated cone microwave cavity under restrictive assumptions as discussed in his blog] or do you mean McCulloch inertial theory as presented in McCulloch's papers?
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 09:26 PM by Rodal »

Offline Ron Stahl

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 210
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1756 on: 10/08/2014 09:16 PM »
What is the mechanism that destroys SC for AC currents?
Please enlighten me.
I don't think anyone really knows the mechanism behind the latest gen 2 HTSC stuff.  I think it does work for VHF however.  I have never seen any superconducting power equipment for UHF nor microwave.  DARPA had a portable HTSC ceramic supercap power storage unit some years ago that went to phase 2 that probably was UHF capable, though they were saying it was for communications.  (Yeah, I believe that!  They're looking for something to power their battlefield robots, powered exoskeletons, etc.)  If you search HTSC VHF at DARPA you'll find what little is left public on the program.  Was working with General Atomics I think.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 09:18 PM by Ron Stahl »

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • California
  • Liked: 468
  • Likes Given: 365
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1757 on: 10/08/2014 10:50 PM »
Mulletron.
I have decided you need to go back to physics school.
Sorry.
We will all welcome you when you get back.
Farewell and good luck!

You're asking me questions here. Anyway, it is clear that superconductors break down in the presence of moving magnetic fields.

What kind of magnetic field do you have in the presence of AC?.......MOVING.

Edit:

Now let's play nice.

I need to go back to physics school to and I'm a long way from understanding superconductivity.   You are right about moving magnetic fields degrading superconductor performance.   It doesn't need to be a strong field or fast moving field either.   With just a small amount of high temperature superconductor (hts) and low currents the resulting quench will cause a visible increase in liquid Nitrogen boil off.    For hts motors special configurations of the hts cable are used.  The upper limit for an AC field on hts, before quench occurs, is around 60 Hz, based on what I have read.   That would limit a motor speed to 3600 RPM.    My knowledge on this is very limited and others may have better information.  If someone can supply more information on higher frequency uses of hts I would find it very interesting.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 10:55 PM by zen-in »

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1111
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 1012
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1758 on: 10/08/2014 11:08 PM »
A follow up to JohnFornaro's questions:

Q: ""Do objects undergoing NO acceleration have inertial mass? NO"...Therefore, I take issue with the above statement.  We still don't know what the "true" orgigin of inertia is."

A: You are right, we don't know the true origin of inertia. Lots of people have ideas. I have one too. It is time.

Q: "Now, if one law of the universe can be broken, then all laws of the universe can be broken."

A: How do you figure? We're not breaking any laws here. But if we were, why the slippery slope?

Q: "If a "new universe" is being created inside a copper can, which, tho not shielded from gravity, is subject to all other universal laws, two questions occur.  How can it be called a "new universe" if subject to the inertial laws of this one?"

A: If you change any single property of a consistent universe, is it still the same universe? Or a different universe? I say a different one. Because it has different rules. A universe is defined by its rules.

Q: "Is the 45 degree angled copper can the only way this assymetrical acceleration can occur?"

A: NO, read McCulloch's paper on inertia.

Edited for grammar. Added the word we.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 11:17 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5835
  • USA
  • Liked: 5915
  • Likes Given: 5253
Re: EM Drive Developments
« Reply #1759 on: 10/08/2014 11:17 PM »
...
I will try to embiggen my knowledge further.
Embiggen ?

Now, that's a word we don't hear in our (American) neck of the woods  :).  I had to look it up.   

You have embiggened my vocabulary.

NASA has to EMbiggen their EMDrive to EMbiggen its force output
« Last Edit: 10/08/2014 11:39 PM by Rodal »

Tags: