Author Topic: Woodward's effect  (Read 288172 times)

Offline cuddihy

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 800
  • Liked: 143
  • Likes Given: 148
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #400 on: 12/16/2013 04:28 AM »
so on the causality front, at least as it relates to how we look at space-time, there's been some interesting news.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/12/amplituhedron-jewel-quantum-physics/2/

money quote:
Quote
Beyondial making calculations easier or possibly leading the way to quantum gravity, the discovery of the amplituhedron could cause an even more profound shift, Arkani-Hamed said. That is, giving up space and time as fundamental constituents of nature and figuring out how the Big Bang and cosmological evolution of the universe arose out of pure geometry.


Basically the amplituhedron research suggests that there really is nothing untoward about the (apparent) time-traveling nature of Mach Effect interactions. The geometry works regardless.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9163
  • Delta-t is the salient metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 611
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #401 on: 12/16/2013 11:14 PM »
From:

https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/

Quote
Artist’s rendering of the amplituhedron, a newly discovered mathematical object resembling a multifaceted jewel in higher dimensions. Encoded in its volume are the most basic features of reality that can be calculated — the probabilities of outcomes of particle interactions.

The jewel is a mathematical object, not a thing.
« Last Edit: 12/16/2013 11:22 PM by JohnFornaro »
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline flux_capacitor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
  • France
  • Liked: 679
  • Likes Given: 929
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #402 on: 02/03/2014 02:53 PM »
Jim Woodward gave an interview about Mach effect warp drives and stargates, for the TV series "Ancient Aliens".
The show aired on History Channel January 24, 2014.
The interesting 7 mn edit can be watched at

Online Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #403 on: 02/05/2014 10:48 AM »
hey! the NIAC 2014 had a presentation on mach drives and mach related stuff :)
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Offline xanmarus

  • Member
  • Posts: 53
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 87
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #404 on: 02/05/2014 11:04 AM »
hey! the NIAC 2014 had a presentation on mach drives and mach related stuff :)
Hmm, i don't see it in the shedule on http://www.livestream.com/niac2014

Online Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
  • Liked: 231
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #405 on: 02/05/2014 11:10 AM »
it was there the speaker just before lunch.

probably this:  11:30
Invited Speaker
Gary Hudson, Space Studies Institute
“A Matter of Some Gravity"

i didn't catch the very beginning. and i see no way to download it. i do have a desktop screen video grabber though. i may get it later.
 
ACK! Dr Winglee was also there and he did not speak about the M2P2. :(
« Last Edit: 02/05/2014 11:14 AM by Stormbringer »
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • Liked: 488
  • Likes Given: 735
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #406 on: 02/05/2014 01:48 PM »
Gary is a forum member here too.

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1379
  • Liked: 866
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #407 on: 02/05/2014 05:04 PM »
it was there the speaker just before lunch.

probably this:  11:30
Invited Speaker
Gary Hudson, Space Studies Institute
“A Matter of Some Gravity"

i didn't catch the very beginning. and i see no way to download it. i do have a desktop screen video grabber though. i may get it later.
 
ACK! Dr Winglee was also there and he did not speak about the M2P2. :(

I've been told you can view my talk here:

http://www.livestream.com/niac2014/video?clipId=pla_bd9c1386-03c5-4c18-8349-1fb8ce972be7&utm_source=lslibrary&utm_medium=ui-thumb

...starting at the 1 hr 4 min point.  I have not checked this out, though so can't confirm.

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • Liked: 488
  • Likes Given: 735
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #408 on: 02/05/2014 05:49 PM »
I've been told you can view my talk here:
http://www.livestream.com/niac2014/video?clipId=pla_bd9c1386-03c5-4c18-8349-1fb8ce972be7&utm_source=lslibrary&utm_medium=ui-thumb
...starting at the 1 hr 4 min point.  I have not checked this out, though so can't confirm.
Yupp just checked, is there. :)

Offline D_Dom

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 459
  • Liked: 157
  • Likes Given: 106
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #409 on: 02/05/2014 06:33 PM »
Now I know why "Space is hard", Nivens law. The perversity of the universe tends towards maximum.
Space is not merely a matter of life or death, it is considerably more important than that!

Offline grondilu

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
  • France
  • Liked: 14
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #410 on: 02/05/2014 08:27 PM »
I think the John Cramer's talk mentioned in Hudson's presentation is this:



It's in the Q&A section, t=2403s
« Last Edit: 02/06/2014 06:10 PM by grondilu »
Space is pretty much literally an astronomically-high hanging fruit.

Offline flux_capacitor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 563
  • France
  • Liked: 679
  • Likes Given: 929
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #411 on: 02/06/2014 05:47 PM »
And the specific 15 mn edit from Gary Hudson's NIAC 2014 presentation about Mac Effect research (the Exotic Propulsion Initiative) is available on YouTube:


Offline SteveKelsey

Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #412 on: 02/07/2014 01:36 PM »
Thank you for posting out-takes from the talks, it's great so see what was shared.

I hope you don't mind me asking a question about a problem that has been bugging me for some time. :o

I get the Mach principle and how it is applied. I understand the argument regarding the conservation of energy and it makes sense to me. I understand Dr Woodward’s  experimental methods.

I have the book and can’t find the answer there.

What is bugging me is how the results are presented.

I have included  a screen grab from the presentation at about 10.44. and a second image where I have used Photoshop to strip out the power and heat trace for clarity.
 

I am going to use the term ‘positive’ to apply to a trace moving towards the top of the graph, and ‘negative’ to a trace moving towards the bottom of the graph.

Looking at the (brown) thrust trace, as the power is applied there is an initial negative going spike . It's a little tricky to see as the positive ( blue ) power spike is co-incident in time with the negative going spike.

As the power reduces to zero there then follows a positive thrust spike of approximately the same size but with a fractionally longer duration compared to the negative thrust spike.

This is followed by a third negative going thrust spike of lower amplitude but  longer duration.

This pattern is more or less repeated  with the second pulse which I take as an indication this is a typical response.

What is not clear to me is how the net thrust signal is derived. Initially the first two thrust spikes look to me as if they cancel out, which leaves the third negative going spike as the net thrust.
But looking closer I am not so sure. If you sum the areas under the curves, which can only estimate from the graph, I am not sure how the net thrust is derived.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not looking to knock the research; I really want this approach to work.

Can someone who knows throw me a bone on how to read this properly?
« Last Edit: 02/07/2014 03:35 PM by SteveKelsey »
2001 is running a little late, but we are getting there.

Offline burnout002

  • Member
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #413 on: 02/07/2014 06:21 PM »
in this video woodward says we can build prototypes of stargates in a decade or 2,         
if he have a enough funding and resources. Why do we not spent all our money on this. That would be great. We     
can go to the stars in our lifetime.

Why doesn't nasa fund this project to build stargates ?

Offline Elmar Moelzer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • Liked: 488
  • Likes Given: 735
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #414 on: 02/07/2014 06:40 PM »
in this video woodward says we can build prototypes of stargates in a decade or 2,         
if he have a enough funding and resources. Why do we not spent all our money on this. That would be great. We     
can go to the stars in our lifetime.

Why doesn't nasa fund this project to build stargates ?
Because a lot of people are skeptical of Woodward's claims. It is not quite mainstream physics. If Woodward can proof his theory, then getting funding for this should be a lot easier. It is a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Woodward has very little funding for proofing his idea, but he cant get more funding until he has proven his idea.
« Last Edit: 02/07/2014 06:42 PM by Elmar Moelzer »

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8224
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2993
  • Likes Given: 721
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #415 on: 02/07/2014 09:16 PM »
Why doesn't nasa fund this project to build stargates ?

Welcome to the forum.

We can't even get NASA to talk about space settlement. Vast swaths of NASA don't even see it as their goal.
Jeff Bezos has billions to spend on rockets and can go at whatever pace he likes! Wow! What pace is he going at? Well... have you heard of Zeno's paradox?

Offline 93143

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3039
  • Liked: 292
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #416 on: 02/07/2014 09:47 PM »
Can someone who knows throw me a bone on how to read this properly?

Woodward isn't using a load cell; he has to measure the deflection of a torsion balance.  It seems to me that the observed behaviour is probably a mechanical resonance.  That is, the thrust pushes the balance out of position, and when it's turned off the balance behaves like the damped oscillator it is.  The transient behaviour of the Mach effect itself is pretty much totally undetectable below the kHz range, so that can't be it.  And it's noted in his book that the balance has a settling time "on the order of 5 s".

There's also the fact that switching transients have been observed to create larger thrusts than ordinary AC operation (since it's actually the time derivative of the power that matters in the impulse term of the Mach-effect equation), which may explain the excessive-looking amplitude of the peak occurring immediately after the device is turned off.

Don't quote me on this...
« Last Edit: 02/07/2014 10:15 PM by 93143 »

Offline SteveKelsey

Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #417 on: 02/07/2014 10:11 PM »
Thanks for the reply!

I agree the waveform to the right of the major positive pulse  looks similar to a resonant decay. I had forgotten he was using a torsion balance.

I won't quote you though!
2001 is running a little late, but we are getting there.

Offline 93143

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3039
  • Liked: 292
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #418 on: 02/07/2014 10:15 PM »
Why doesn't nasa fund this project to build stargates ?

They are funding Sonny White's "Q-thruster" project, which is [*cough*] related.  His lab is/was also attempting to generate and detect a small warp field...

But in general, it's correct to say that there isn't the necessary confidence in Woodward's work for image-conscious bureaucrats to pour serious money in quite yet.  It's not really novel physics as such, but it is at least a non-mainstream interpretation of existing physics, and so people tread carefully around it.
« Last Edit: 02/07/2014 10:49 PM by 93143 »

Offline HMXHMX

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1379
  • Liked: 866
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: Woodward's effect
« Reply #419 on: 02/07/2014 11:21 PM »
Thank you for posting out-takes from the talks, it's great so see what was shared.

I hope you don't mind me asking a question about a problem that has been bugging me for some time. :o

I get the Mach principle and how it is applied. I understand the argument regarding the conservation of energy and it makes sense to me. I understand Dr Woodward’s  experimental methods.

I have the book and can’t find the answer there.

What is bugging me is how the results are presented.

I have included  a screen grab from the presentation at about 10.44. and a second image where I have used Photoshop to strip out the power and heat trace for clarity.
 

I am going to use the term ‘positive’ to apply to a trace moving towards the top of the graph, and ‘negative’ to a trace moving towards the bottom of the graph.

Looking at the (brown) thrust trace, as the power is applied there is an initial negative going spike . It's a little tricky to see as the positive ( blue ) power spike is co-incident in time with the negative going spike.

As the power reduces to zero there then follows a positive thrust spike of approximately the same size but with a fractionally longer duration compared to the negative thrust spike.

This is followed by a third negative going thrust spike of lower amplitude but  longer duration.

This pattern is more or less repeated  with the second pulse which I take as an indication this is a typical response.

What is not clear to me is how the net thrust signal is derived. Initially the first two thrust spikes look to me as if they cancel out, which leaves the third negative going spike as the net thrust.
But looking closer I am not so sure. If you sum the areas under the curves, which can only estimate from the graph, I am not sure how the net thrust is derived.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not looking to knock the research; I really want this approach to work.

Can someone who knows throw me a bone on how to read this properly?


I did ask Jim for his explanation, and he replied:

"The answer is fairly straight forward.  In addition to steady thrust once stable operating conditions are achieved, thrust switching transients are predicted as the mass fluctuation goes as dP/dt, not simply as the power.  These transients are often much larger than the steady thrust as dP/dt from switching can be much larger than the dP/dt of steady operation.  In fact, the data you chose to present shows nothing but switching transient thrusts.

When the power is switched on, there is a large negative going thrust spike that only persists for the one second powered interval, followed by a positive going spike which is a switching transient from turning off the power.  That is followed by nearly critically damped decay of the thrust transeints produced by switching the power.  The same pattern is repeated for the second powered interval.

Had the power been left on following either one second pulse, and conditions remained stable, the thrust would have swung to a positive value and remained steady for the duration of the application of power.  When the power is switched off, there would have been a positive going switching transient.  I note by the way that this only works for switched AC, as dP/dt integrated over a switched DC voltage is roughly zero.

I presented data at STAIF II last year, and Heidi at the IAC last fall, going into some detail on exactly this point.   Your questioner has good taste.  :-) "


One  of our ambitions is to build and power a larger device where the magnitude of the delivered thrust is unambiguously visible to the naked eye.  But that will likely require resources we don't currently enjoy.  See www.ssi.org to help.