Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 2  (Read 2099414 times)

Offline DIYFAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 48
  • Liked: 28
  • Likes Given: 149
Is copper the ideal material for the frustum? Or are there even better materials, theoretically?

I think maybe it was Mulletron that previously pointed out this paper:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01074608/document

The conjecture in that paper is that building the larger diameter plate (R1) out of metglas 2714A, a significant amplification of the effect would result. Perhaps there is a courageous person or group with some funds to put this to the test.  It would be interesting to see an experiment with the partial metglas construction to rule the theory in or out.

Given that metglas 2714A is a room-temperature material, it would be considerably easier to achieve an amplification that way than lining the interior of the test article with superconducting film and cooling to liquid nitrogen temperatures.

As far as building the cavity itself, copper is good enough. It is easy to get and work with and has great electrical properties. Anything better would be precious metals which isn't worth the money. And superconductors aren't exactly "home workshop" compatible for most.

As far as something in place of the polyethylene dielectric, I'd suggest something that exhibits a higher relative permittivity or even a material that exhibits magnetochiral dichroism. http://www.academia.edu/1084905/Probing_magnetochirality

Copper may very well be good enough for the cavity itself.  Or maybe not.  There is at least a theory that metglass would be better if used for one of the frustrum's plates (i.e., the larger plate).  Do you see a reason why someone shouldn't make an experiment along these lines?

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Liked: 774
  • Likes Given: 1007

Copper may very well be good enough for the cavity itself.  Or maybe not.  There is at least a theory that metglass would be better if used for one of the frustrum's plates (i.e., the larger plate).  Do you see a reason why someone shouldn't make an experiment along these lines?

There is no reason not to try Metglas 2714A, especially since it is supported by a paper written by a Professor Emeritus of Physics who makes sweeping claims like this:
Quote
If the microwave source radiates pulses with 10 megawatts power then the thrust can
reach up to 100kN.
.
He could be right for all we know.

Given that NO theory of operation has been proven correct, any reasonable suggestion is equally plausible. Experimentation might nail down the reason behind all this "anomalous thrust." Thrust which is way in excess of a photon rocket. That should be sending alarm bells throughout the scientific community. Instead the attitude we get from the likes of Sean Carroll and John Baez is dismissal and snarky one liners.* Obviously they have all the science all figured out already. Apparently there is no need to challenge our assumptions these days. The hardest inertia to overcome is our own. Scientists should be stumbling over each other trying to figure this Emdrive out because after all the replications, it seems likely there could be a Nobel awaiting someone if there is any new physics involved or at least a better understanding of current physics. At the very least, they could empirically put the smack down on some pseudoscience.

Quoting @GoatGuy over at NBF:
Quote
Any time the K/Ko exceeds 1.0 … is the point where almost all physicists will pause, turn their heads and say, what? Yep. The K/Ko in the lowest wattage, highest Q experiment was not just a little bit greater than 1.0, but was an almost implausible 6,388× larger.

If this were SETI, we'd call that the “Wow! signal”

* http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_vacuum_plasma_thruster
https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z13gzfm4xt2tuxehl04chvywcofjhhzhwbk
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/outthere/2014/08/06/nasa-validate-imposible-space-drive-word/#.VNoM1MO3M0N
« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 12:56 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
Is copper the ideal material for the frustum? Or are there even better materials, theoretically?

I think maybe it was Mulletron that previously pointed out this paper:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01074608/document

The conjecture in that paper is that building the larger diameter plate (R1) out of metglas 2714A, a significant amplification of the effect would result. Perhaps there is a courageous person or group with some funds to put this to the test.  It would be interesting to see an experiment with the partial metglas construction to rule the theory in or out.

Given that metglas 2714A is a room-temperature material, it would be considerably easier to achieve an amplification that way than lining the interior of the test article with superconducting film and cooling to liquid nitrogen temperatures.
Interesting conjecture.  Did the author of the paper advocating the use of Metglas 2714A take into account that its ultra-high magnetic permeability which he quotes in the paper (apparently for his calculations) as μ=1,000,000 occurs at very low frequencies and that its magnetic permeability decreases significantly at higher frequencies ? 

See the attached plot, unfortunately the available data ( http://www.metglas.com/assets/pdf/2714a.pdf ) goes up to only 10^5 Hz while the EM Drive operates at 20000 times higher frequency: 2*10^9 Hz.  At the much lower frequency of 10^5 Hz the magnetic permeability has decreased by a factor of 50 from the maximum DC permeability of μ =1,000,000 to μ =20,000. If it decreases by another factor of 50 (it will probably decrease more due to the steepening shape of the curve ?) the magnetic permeability at 2*10^9 Hz may be μ ~ 400 instead of 1,000,000.

(Optimistically ?) assuming that  μ ~ 400 for Metglas 2714A at 2*10^9 Hz, then the author's prediction of 1,000 times higher "thrust" (?) than Shawyer’s thruster would be reduced by Sqrt[(10^6)/400]=50 times, so that the increase in thrust would be 20 times over Shawyer's experiments (assuming that the author's conjecture and theory are correct, and assuming that the EM Drive can be (practically) tuned to stay in Q resonance at a suitable mode-shape with such a material).

Still, a factor of 20 times higher force is nothing to ignore, if the author's theory is correct, and if the magnetic permeability is at least μ ~ 400 for Metglas 2714A at 2*10^9 Hz, this material may enable to exceed the minimum requirements for testing the Eagleworks frustum at NASA's Glenn.
« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 03:55 PM by Rodal »

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
Is copper the ideal material for the frustum? Or are there even better materials, theoretically?

I think maybe it was Mulletron that previously pointed out this paper:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01074608/document

The conjecture in that paper is that building the larger diameter plate (R1) out of metglas 2714A, a significant amplification of the effect would result. Perhaps there is a courageous person or group with some funds to put this to the test.  It would be interesting to see an experiment with the partial metglas construction to rule the theory in or out.

Given that metglas 2714A is a room-temperature material, it would be considerably easier to achieve an amplification that way than lining the interior of the test article with superconducting film and cooling to liquid nitrogen temperatures.
Interesting conjecture.  Did the author of the paper advocating the use of Metglas 2714A take into account that its ultra-high magnetic permeability which he quotes in the paper (apparently for his calculations) as μ=1,000,000 occurs at very low frequencies and that its magnetic permeability decreases significantly at higher frequencies ? 

See the attached plot, unfortunately the available data ( http://www.metglas.com/assets/pdf/2714a.pdf ) goes up to only 10^5 Hz while the EM Drive operates at 20000 times higher frequency: 2*10^9 Hz.  At the much lower frequency of 10^5 Hz the magnetic permeability has decreased by a factor of 50 from the maximum DC permeability of μ =1,000,000 to μ =20,000. If it decreases by another factor of 50 (it will probably decrease more due to the steepening shape of the curve ?) the magnetic permeability at 2*10^9 Hz may be μ ~ 400 instead of 1,000,000.

(Optimistically ?) assuming that  μ ~ 400 for Metglas 2714A at 2*10^9 Hz, then the author's prediction of 1,000 times higher "thrust" (?) than Shawyer’s thruster would be reduced by Sqrt[(10^6)/400]=50 times, so that the increase in thrust would be 20 times over Shawyer's experiments (assuming that the author's conjecture and theory are correct, and assuming that the EM Drive can be (practically) tuned to stay in Q resonance at a suitable mode-shape with such a material).

Still, a factor of 20 times higher force is nothing to ignore, if the author's theory is correct, and if the magnetic permeability is at least μ ~ 400 for Metglas 2714A at 2*10^9 Hz, this material may enable to exceed the minimum requirements for testing the Eagleworks frustum at NASA's Glenn.

This paper (http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/55950/files/76.pdf ) has data up to 30 MHz (that is 67 times lower than the frequency of operation of the EM Drive, hence much closer to the EM Drive's frequency than the data from the manufacturer at 100KHz, considering that the drop of magnetic permeability depends on the Log of frequency, the EM Drive Log frequency is just 1.8 times higher) showing a magnetic relative permeability of  μ =6000 at 30 MHz, indicating about  μ =2400 at 2*10^9 Hz

If the author's conjecture and theory are correct, this extrapolated value ( μ =2400 at 2*10^9 Hz) would result in an improvement of 1000/Sqrt[(10^6)/2400] = 1000/20.4 = 49 times greater thrust force than Shawyer's experiments.

This information, coupled with the one in the previous post, indicates  that that (if Aquino's theory is correct) using amorphous metal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_metal) Metglas 2714A sheet ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metglas ) may result in 20 to 50 times greater thrust force than using copper sheet.

« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 05:16 PM by Rodal »

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
I still favor direct application of the Equivalence Principle ...night all
@Notsosureofit

Concerning <<I still favor direct application of the Equivalence Principle >> I would appreciate your comments/observations concerning Univ. of Massachusetts, John F. Donoghue, Barry R. Holstein, R. W. Robinett's 1985 (awarded ?) paper

"The principle of equivalence at finite temperature"   (http://www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/awarded/1984/donoghue_holstein_robinett.pdf)

citation history here:
http://inspirehep.net/record/14777/citations

where they claim to demonstrate that the equivalence principle is violated by radiative corrections to the gravitational and inertial masses at finite temperature. (How about Unruh radiation as per Dr. McCulloch's theory ?).

They argue that this result can be attributed to the Lorentz noninvariance of the finite temperature vacuum.

Max Jammer refers to Donoghue's paper in an authoritative manner with very interesting discussion in pages 138 to 140 of Jammer's classic book (in the Princeton University 2000 edition, not the Dover paperback reprint of the 1961 edition  !!) "Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Physics and Philosophy" (see: this link  http://bit.ly/1y8vaCO )

« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 07:25 PM by Rodal »

Offline DIYFAN

  • Member
  • Posts: 48
  • Liked: 28
  • Likes Given: 149
(Optimistically ?) assuming that  μ ~ 400 for Metglas 2714A at 2*10^9 Hz, then the author's prediction of 1,000 times higher "thrust" (?) than Shawyer’s thruster would be reduced by Sqrt[(10^6)/400]=50 times, so that the increase in thrust would be 20 times over Shawyer's experiments (assuming that the author's conjecture and theory are correct, and assuming that the EM Drive can be (practically) tuned to stay in Q resonance at a suitable mode-shape with such a material).

Still, a factor of 20 times higher force is nothing to ignore, if the author's theory is correct, and if the magnetic permeability is at least μ ~ 400 for Metglas 2714A at 2*10^9 Hz, this material may enable to exceed the minimum requirements for testing the Eagleworks frustum at NASA's Glenn.

This paper (http://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/55950/files/76.pdf ) has data up to 30 MHz (that is 67 times lower than the frequency of operation of the EM Drive, hence much closer to the EM Drive's frequency than the data from the manufacturer at 100KHz, considering that the drop of magnetic permeability depends on the Log of frequency, the EM Drive Log frequency is just 1.8 times higher) showing a magnetic relative permeability of  μ =6000 at 30 MHz, indicating about  μ =2400 at 2*10^9 Hz

If the author's conjecture and theory are correct, this extrapolated value ( μ =2400 at 2*10^9 Hz) would result in an improvement of 1000/Sqrt[(10^6)/2400] = 1000/20.4 = 49 times greater thrust force than Shawyer's experiments.

This information, coupled with the one in the previous post, indicates  that that (if Aquino's theory is correct) using amorphous metal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_metal) Metglas 2714A sheet ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metglas ) may result in 20 to 50 times greater thrust force than using copper sheet.



Thank you for distilling this information down and also for noticing and highlighting the frequency-dependent drop in magnetic permeability.  This aspect must have been overlooked by Aquino.  I agree that despite the precipitous drop, it may still very well be interesting and possibly superior to copper.  Since Dr. Aquino's suggestion is to use the Metglas 2714A sheet with only the larger diameter plate (i.e., the "R1" plate), it seems that those who have already constructed a copper cavity could simply cut a Metglas 2714A sheet to fit the inner dimensions of the R1 plate, and then form-fit it to the interior of the already constructed cavity.  This wouldn't require a significant rebuild of the apparatus.     
« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 05:30 PM by DIYFAN »

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
I still favor direct application of the Equivalence Principle ...night all
@Notsosureofit

Concerning <<I still favor direct application of the Equivalence Principle >> I would appreciate your comments/observations concerning Univ. of Massachusetts, John F. Donoghue, Barry R. Holstein, R. W. Robinett's 1985 (awarded ?) paper

"The principle of equivalence at finite temperature"   (http://www.gravityresearchfoundation.org/pdf/awarded/1984/donoghue_holstein_robinett.pdf)

citation history here:
http://inspirehep.net/record/14777/citations

where they claim to demonstrate that the equivalence principle is violated by radiative corrections to the gravitational and inertial masses at finite temperature. (How about Unruh radiation as per Dr. McCulloch's theory ?).

They argue that this result can be attributed to the Lorentz noninvariance of the finite temperature vacuum.

Max Jammer refers to Donoghue's paper in an authoritative manner with very interesting discussion in pages 138 to 140 of Jammer's classic book "Concepts of Mass in Contemporary Physics and Philosophy" (see: this link  http://bit.ly/1y8vaCO )

Quote from:  John F. Donoghue, Barry R. Holstein, R. W. Robinett
The fundamental ideas which led to the equivalence principle include the impossibility of defining absolute motion through the vacuum and the indistinguishability of acceleration and gravitational force. However, one can measure absolute velocity and acceleration relative to the heat bath (as has been done for the velocity of the Earth in the 3°K photon distribution left over from the early universe). Thus the conditions under which the equivalence principle was formulated are not met at finite temperature. The fact that we do live in a universe at a nonzero ternperature could in principle have led to unexpected results in the Eotvos experiments if it were not for the fact that the correction is too small to be detected at present temperatures.

« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 06:07 PM by Rodal »

Offline Notsosureofit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Liked: 704
  • Likes Given: 1361
@ RODAL

My understanding was that the Doppler shifted radiation of the cosmic background would constitute an increasing drag (and thus a limit) on the accelerated system, (as Unruh) not that it invalidated the equivalence principle.  But, I'll look and see what they say.

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
@ RODAL

My understanding was that the Doppler shifted radiation of the cosmic background would constitute an increasing drag (and thus a limit) on the accelerated system, (as Unruh) not that it invalidated the equivalence principle.  But, I'll look and see what they say.
Yes, you are entirely correct.  Sorry if my poor wording conveyed that impression.   I brought up Donoghue's paper because it may give yet another possibility: escaping the equivalence principle  (but the effect appears to be very small )
« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 09:53 PM by Rodal »

Offline Notsosureofit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Liked: 704
  • Likes Given: 1361
@ RODAL

My understanding was that the Doppler shifted radiation of the cosmic background would constitute an increasing drag (and thus a limit) on the accelerated system, (as Unruh) not that it invalidated the equivalence principle.  But, I'll look and see what they say.
Yes, you are entirely correct.  Sorry if my poor wording conveyed that impression.   I brought up Donoghoue's paper because it may give yet another possibility: escaping the equivalence principle  (but the effect appears to be very small )

A quick read but you can probably get their results by using the photon bath as a viscous fluid exchanging energy at a given temperature.   Nice quantum argument.  In any event, the cosmic background does not constitute a temperature "bath" under velocity (or acceleration) because of the vector form (directionality) of the velocity.  Have to look at the citations..

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
@ RODAL

My understanding was that the Doppler shifted radiation of the cosmic background would constitute an increasing drag (and thus a limit) on the accelerated system, (as Unruh) not that it invalidated the equivalence principle.  But, I'll look and see what they say.
Yes, you are entirely correct.  Sorry if my poor wording conveyed that impression.   I brought up Donoghoue's paper because it may give yet another possibility: escaping the equivalence principle  (but the effect appears to be very small )

A quick read but you can probably get their results by using the photon bath as a viscous fluid exchanging energy at a given temperature.   Nice quantum argument.  In any event, the cosmic background does not constitute a temperature "bath" under velocity (or acceleration) because of the vector form (directionality) of the velocity.  Have to look at the citations..

" the cosmic background does not constitute a temperature "bath" under velocity (or acceleration) because of the vector form (directionality) of the velocity"  Good point  :)

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Liked: 774
  • Likes Given: 1007
While trying to figure out the answer to my question here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1327384#msg1327384
Quote
It appears that TM modes are the top dogs now and at the same time performance has gone down significantly since vacuum testing began.
The answer to the bold part in particular. I don't think the answer is fully due to the elimination of air currents, as the thrust signature rise and fall times were instantaneous during the non vacuum tests reported last summer.

Also armed with the knowledge from @Star-Drive that the the copper frustum is vented.
Quote
BTW, the copper frustum is vented, so its internal pressure matches the chamber pressure after a short time period at vacuum.

I accidentally stumbled upon this report:
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00551421v1/document
Quote
We report the first observation of the anisotropy of the velocity of light, induced in a gas by electric
and magnetic fields.....Using a high finesse ring cavity, we have
measured the magneto-electric directional anisotropy of molecular Nitrogen at ambient temperature
and atmospheric pressure
This alone is an amazing result. Note that it is an observation.
They predict the following:
Quote
Moreover, the same effect is expected in quantum vacuum......Our long term goal is to search for
the magneto-electric directional anisotropy of quantum.
The QV prediction would be huge if confirmed.

I'm gathering facts still and I welcome your comments, but does this shed light on why the thrust signature is different between air filled and vacuum filled resonant cavities? This difference in measured thrust and the above experimental observations, may shed light on why Shawyer's devices appear to work without dielectric and also may lend support for the transfer of momentum from the QV approach which we discussed at length.

I'm still trying to find which reference it was where any of this implied non-reciprocity.
« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 11:21 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
..I don't think the answer is fully due to the elimination of air currents, as the thrust signature rise and fall times were instantaneous during the non vacuum tests reported last summer. ...
That "instantaneous" length of time was long enough, that it could be fully explained as a thermal instability, as I showed in my report.  Thermal instability that does not need thermal convection as a transport mechanism.  The IR experimental measurements were done without air inside or outside the EM Drive, and the COMSOL analysis showing heating of the big diameter surface was modeled without air inside or outside the EM Drive, is that right?

« Last Edit: 02/10/2015 11:52 PM by Rodal »

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
...

I accidentally stumbled upon this report:
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00551421v1/document
Quote
We report the first observation of the anisotropy of the velocity of light, induced in a gas by electric
and magnetic fields.....Using a high finesse ring cavity, we have
measured the magneto-electric directional anisotropy of molecular Nitrogen at ambient temperature
and atmospheric pressure
This alone is an amazing result. Note that it is an observation.
...

Very interesting.  What determines the anisotropy directions?  If the gas molecules are constantly bouncing around, I would have expected that their random motion would result in isotropy of the continuum of the gas molecules.  Are these experiments done at such a low temperature that the gas molecules are practically "frozen" ? Apparently not, since the paper states T = 300 K ?

Is it that a single Nitrogen gas molecule has no time to move during the experiment? and that the anisotropy being measured is the anisotropy of a single gas molecule (not the anisotropy of a large collection of gas molecules randomly oriented from each other)
« Last Edit: 02/11/2015 12:03 AM by Rodal »

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Liked: 774
  • Likes Given: 1007
As far as heat goes, Eagleworks repeatedly reported that heat was controlled for and wasn't an issue. So I'm forced to trust the experiment was legit. Vacuum eliminates hot air currents but not radiation or expansion.

A simple falsification of all this transferring momentum from the qv business is simply to evacuate all the air from the resonant cavity and remove the dielectric and see if the thrust goes away.
« Last Edit: 02/11/2015 12:01 AM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
As far as heat goes, Eagleworks repeatedly reported that heat was controlled for and wasn't an issue. So I'm forced to trust the experiment was legit. Vacuum eliminates hot air currents but not radiation.


Yes, "Vacuum eliminates hot air currents but not radiation," for example, a magnetic field can heat copper by induction heating. Thermal instability is still a possibility, is it not?

A simple falsification of all this transferring momentum from the qv business is simply to evacuate all the air from the resonant cavity and remove the dielectric and see if the thrust goes away.

As I showed in my paper on Thermal Instability, the dielectric HD PE is acting as an effective shield, that shields the small diameter surface from being heated by the electromagnetic field.

If you remove the  dielectric HD PE , the small diameter surface is also going to get heated, instead of just the big diameter.  Also you would be removing the thermal expansion effect (the thermal expansion of HD PE is much higher than the one of the metal).  Hence if the thrust force is decreased  or eliminated it may still be due to thermal effects.

An analysis of these effects is necessary...
« Last Edit: 02/11/2015 12:09 AM by Rodal »

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Liked: 774
  • Likes Given: 1007
Is 50 watts worth of ir radiation enough to mimic the thrust signal? You established that the measured thrust is in excess of a photon rocket. So all that is left is the thermal instability you mentioned. Hope Paul comments on that.
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5833
  • USA
  • Liked: 5900
  • Likes Given: 5248
Is 50 watts worth of ir radiation enough to mimic the thrust signal? You established that the measured thrust is in excess of a photon rocket. So all that is left is the thermal instability you mentioned. Hope Paul comments on that.

I wish that NASA Glenn would pay, now, to have several EM Drives tested in their unit, to be able (in principle) to generate enough thrust force to get a reading at Glenn with all the drives together being pointed in the same direction.  My reading of what Paul March wrote is that this would mean at least 3 EM Drives.  With three (or more) EM Drives one could also conduct several interesting tests with orientation of each drive: all of them oriented in parallel, oriented in series (is there any measurable wake ?), oriented opposite to each other, etc.

Edison conducted >10,000 experiments for the incandescent light bulb, thousands of tests for the alkaline battery, etc.
« Last Edit: 02/11/2015 01:08 AM by Rodal »

Offline RotoSequence

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 751
  • Liked: 554
  • Likes Given: 762
Could the thermal thrust theory be tested by insulating the device with some sort of thermal blanket, such as Mylar?

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 531
  • California
  • Liked: 468
  • Likes Given: 365
Is 50 watts worth of ir radiation enough to mimic the thrust signal? You established that the measured thrust is in excess of a photon rocket. So all that is left is the thermal instability you mentioned. Hope Paul comments on that.

I wish that NASA Glenn would pay, now, to have several EM Drives tested in their unit, to be able (in principle) to generate enough thrust force to get a reading at Glenn with all the drives together being pointed in the same direction.  My reading of what Paul March wrote is that this would mean at least 3 EM Drives.  With three (or more) EM Drives one could also conduct several interesting tests with orientation of each drive: all of them oriented in parallel, oriented in series (is there any measurable wake ?), oriented opposite to each other, etc.

Edison conducted >10,000 experiments for the incandescent light bulb, thousands of tests for the alkaline battery, etc.

From a space flight application perspective what is the TRL of the EM Drive?

Here is the list:

TRL 1.    Basic principles observed and reported
TRL 2.    Technology concept and/or application formulated
TRL 3.    Analytical & experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept
TRL 4.    Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment
TRL 5.    Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment
TRL 6.    System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment (ground or space)
TRL 7.    System prototype demonstration in a space environment
TRL 8.    Actual system completed and "Flight qualified" through test and demonstration (ground or space)
TRL 9.    Actual system "Flight proven" through successful mission operations

I haven't seen enough experimental data to be able to say what TRL level the EM-Drive would have.   The EM tether has been deployed in orbit so therefore it must have a TRL level of at least 7. 

Edison started with a theory of how an electric light could be built that many thought was impossible.   It was thought to be impossible not because the physics was believed to be wrong but because so many others had tried and failed.

Tags: