Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 2  (Read 2165821 times)

Offline PaulF

  • Member
  • Posts: 52
  • Netherlands
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 9
If a drive needs an impulse to get thrust production, how small would that impulse need to be to get things going? is there a threshold value beyond which a push will make a difference, or not? Maybe that could explain why it needs an impulse to start up, and that current theories pertaining random particle movement imply impulses that fall below the threshold value? Maybe someone can answer that question.

Furthermore, If it needs a push to put things in motion, wouldn't that action create the needed reference frame to explain this the classical way? And that before the push(with the EM drive activated) a new explanation is needed? (saying it this way because i cannot describe it).

Physical interaction may be a better term if that threshold value turns out to be 0.

I am truly sorry if this has all been discussed/dismissed before. delete this post if necessary.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:00 PM by PaulF »

Offline saucyjack

  • Member
  • Posts: 20
  • San Francisco
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 1
Speaking of KM, is there anyone out there that has what it takes and is willing to volunteer and set up a wiki or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I've set up a MediaWiki server before and it wasn't too bad. That is a good platform. I'm simply stretched too thin right now to try it again. My previous attempt at KM (just a simple Google Doc, which was pretty bad didn't catch on so I deleted it:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4PCfHCM1KYoTXhSUTd5ZDN2WnM&usp=sharing

@Mulletron et al., I am happy to assist in this.  I agree, this forum is excellent for reviewing the latest contributions by all the excellent minds here, but newer folks are finding it difficult to get a handle on how we got here over the past hundred pages.  As a result some of the same questions are being re-asked repeatedly.  Ideally it might become the FAQ section that was discussed previously (which @Rodal noted some valid concerns regarding).  Worth a try, at least.

To this end, I have set up a MediaWiki server at http://emdrive.echothis.com and will start by the adding the relevant links in today.  However, I'm just a (non-practicing) mechanical engineer, not a physicist so my role in this would be limited to setting up the organization and linking to the relevant content already posted by people far more knowledgeable than I.  Anyone who has been tracking the forum and would like to join in this endeavor, welcome!

Offline D_Dom

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 458
  • Liked: 157
  • Likes Given: 106

A resonant cavity can ONLY support certain frequencies. If those frequencies change, say due to red or blue shift, they won't/can't resonate, and are lost. That resonant cavity that was once saturated, now has a "hole" which can be filled by more incoming radiation, said another way energy flowing back in. The transient Poynting vector. In layman's terms.

The missing Poynting vector is due to us never considering an accelerating cavity. Shawyer says it has to move first before you observe a force. He isn't just saying that. He probably observed that.
...
See that bottom pic. Those "dips" are the only frequencies that will exist within that range of my cavity. If they get shifted up or down (like by if I pick up the cavity and shake the crap out of it), they're history.


Trying to understand the implication here. If your frustum were mounted on a shaker table can you speculate the most interesting excitation frequencies? Keeping in mind your test setup would a sub-woofer be adequate?
Space is not merely a matter of life or death, it is considerably more important than that!

Offline TheTraveller

If a cavity needs an impulse, how small would that impulse need to be to get things going? is there a threshold value beyond which a push will make a difference, or not? Maybe that could explain why it needs an impulse to start up, and that current theories pertaining random particle movement imply impulses that fall below the threshold value? Maybe someone can answer that question.

Furthermore, If it needs a push to put things in motion, wouldn't that action create the needed reference frame to explain this the classical way? And that before the push(with the EM drive activated) a new explanation is needed? (saying it this way because i cannot describe it).

I am truly sorry if this has all been discussed/dismissed before. delete this post if necessary.
My understanding, based on Shawyer data, is the EM Drive has 2 modes that will cause a external force, in opposite directions, to be generated. One he calls Motor mode and the other Generator mode.

If you push against the EM Drive such that Generator mode is activated, it will resist your push and not move. If you push it in the other direction, Motor mode is activated and it will move away from your push.

I then see any random event causing Generator to be activated resulting in no backward movement, while random events which activate Motor mode will move the EM Drive forward with no applied external force. This may be a small effect and use of an long term external force may cause higher acceleration rates.

In Generator mode, the backward push kinetic energy is converted into higher cavity energy and finally heat and in Motor mode the forward push drains cavity energy and converts it into forward kinetic energy, while drawing replacement from the microwave generator, which draws energy from the primary energy supply. Thus vehicle gained kinetic energy is that drawn from the primary energy supply minus losses. COE conserved.

Shawyer proposed Generator could be used to decelerate the vehicle at no energy cost to the primary energy source. Could be used to stop additional acceleration as the vehicle enters a gravity well.

This is my opinion based on what I read from what Shawyer has stated. Time will tell if both, one or the other or neither are correct.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:16 PM by TheTraveller »
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5895
  • USA
  • Liked: 6045
  • Likes Given: 5325
If a drive needs an impulse to get thrust production, how small would that impulse need to be to get things going? is there a threshold value beyond which a push will make a difference, or not? Maybe that could explain why it needs an impulse to start up, and that current theories pertaining random particle movement imply impulses that fall below the threshold value? Maybe someone can answer that question.

Furthermore, If it needs a push to put things in motion, wouldn't that action create the needed reference frame to explain this the classical way? And that before the push(with the EM drive activated) a new explanation is needed? (saying it this way because i cannot describe it).

Physical interaction may be a better term if that threshold value turns out to be 0.

I am truly sorry if this has all been discussed/dismissed before. delete this post if necessary.

I fully agree with you.  Neither the threshold impulse is defined, nor is it supported by anything.   :)

Offline TheTraveller

If a drive needs an impulse to get thrust production, how small would that impulse need to be to get things going? is there a threshold value beyond which a push will make a difference, or not? Maybe that could explain why it needs an impulse to start up, and that current theories pertaining random particle movement imply impulses that fall below the threshold value? Maybe someone can answer that question.

Furthermore, If it needs a push to put things in motion, wouldn't that action create the needed reference frame to explain this the classical way? And that before the push(with the EM drive activated) a new explanation is needed? (saying it this way because i cannot describe it).

Physical interaction may be a better term if that threshold value turns out to be 0.

I am truly sorry if this has all been discussed/dismissed before. delete this post if necessary.

I fully agree with you.  Neither the threshold impulse is defined, nor is it supported by anything.   :)
How small a movement will it take for the resonate cavity energy waves to become unbalanced? 1um? Larger? Smaller? Function of wavelength versus phase distortion?

At 3.86 GHz, as used in the Flight Thruster, the full wave length is 77.9 mm.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:22 PM by TheTraveller »
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5895
  • USA
  • Liked: 6045
  • Likes Given: 5325
I had high hopes for this thread to keep on an analytical basis, away from opinions about "methodology driven R&D managers", and comparison with the misfortune of disassociated persons.

Wait, this happened before.

Perhaps this too shall pass?
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 05:00 PM by Rodal »

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 1030
If a cavity needs an impulse, how small would that impulse need to be to get things going? is there a threshold value beyond which a push will make a difference, or not? Maybe that could explain why it needs an impulse to start up, and that current theories pertaining random particle movement imply impulses that fall below the threshold value? Maybe someone can answer that question.

Furthermore, If it needs a push to put things in motion, wouldn't that action create the needed reference frame to explain this the classical way? And that before the push(with the EM drive activated) a new explanation is needed? (saying it this way because i cannot describe it).

I am truly sorry if this has all been discussed/dismissed before. delete this post if necessary.
My understanding, based on Shawyer data, is the EM Drive has 2 modes that will cause a external force, in opposite directions, to be generated. One he calls Motor mode and the other Generator mode.

If you push against the EM Drive such that Generator mode is activated, it will resist your push and not move. If you push it in the other direction, Motor mode is activated and it will move away from your push.

I then see any random event causing Generator to be activated resulting in no backward movement, while random events which activate Motor mode will move the EM Drive forward with no applied external force. This may be a small effect and use of an long term external force may cause higher acceleration rates.

In Generator mode, the backward push kinetic energy is converted into higher cavity energy and finally heat and in Motor mode the forward push drains cavity energy and converts it into forward kinetic energy, while drawing replacement from the microwave generator, which draws energy from the primary energy supply. Thus vehicle gained kinetic energy is that drawn from the primary energy supply minus losses. COE conserved.

Shawyer proposed Generator could be used to decelerate the vehicle at no energy cost to the primary energy source. Could be used to stop additional acceleration as the vehicle enters a gravity well.

This is my opinion based on what I read from what Shawyer has stated. Time will tell if both, one or the other or neither are correct.

That makes sense. I see we differ on a minor point too. If we can get confirmation from Mr. Shawyer on this point, it would do wonders for everybody.

Would @Chris Bergin be willing to set up a private thread just for talking with Mr. Shawyer, undisturbed by outside agitators?

http://emdrive.com/
Contact sprltd@emdrive.com
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:39 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 1030
Speaking of KM, is there anyone out there that has what it takes and is willing to volunteer and set up a wiki or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I've set up a MediaWiki server before and it wasn't too bad. That is a good platform. I'm simply stretched too thin right now to try it again. My previous attempt at KM (just a simple Google Doc, which was pretty bad didn't catch on so I deleted it:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4PCfHCM1KYoTXhSUTd5ZDN2WnM&usp=sharing

@Mulletron et al., I am happy to assist in this.  I agree, this forum is excellent for reviewing the latest contributions by all the excellent minds here, but newer folks are finding it difficult to get a handle on how we got here over the past hundred pages.  As a result some of the same questions are being re-asked repeatedly.  Ideally it might become the FAQ section that was discussed previously (which @Rodal noted some valid concerns regarding).  Worth a try, at least.

To this end, I have set up a MediaWiki server at http://emdrive.echothis.com and will start by the adding the relevant links in today.  However, I'm just a (non-practicing) mechanical engineer, not a physicist so my role in this would be limited to setting up the organization and linking to the relevant content already posted by people far more knowledgeable than I.  Anyone who has been tracking the forum and would like to join in this endeavor, welcome!

Seriously thank you bro. That is some serious gettin' stuff done.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:42 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 1030

A resonant cavity can ONLY support certain frequencies. If those frequencies change, say due to red or blue shift, they won't/can't resonate, and are lost. That resonant cavity that was once saturated, now has a "hole" which can be filled by more incoming radiation, said another way energy flowing back in. The transient Poynting vector. In layman's terms.

The missing Poynting vector is due to us never considering an accelerating cavity. Shawyer says it has to move first before you observe a force. He isn't just saying that. He probably observed that.
...
See that bottom pic. Those "dips" are the only frequencies that will exist within that range of my cavity. If they get shifted up or down (like by if I pick up the cavity and shake the crap out of it), they're history.


Trying to understand the implication here. If your frustum were mounted on a shaker table can you speculate the most interesting excitation frequencies? Keeping in mind your test setup would a sub-woofer be adequate?

If it were on a shaker table, I wouldn't know what to expect. Guess that depends on how narrow the bandwidth of the cavity is. That is @Rodal quality math.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:45 PM by Mulletron »
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Speaking of KM, is there anyone out there that has what it takes and is willing to volunteer and set up a wiki or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I've set up a MediaWiki server before and it wasn't too bad. That is a good platform. I'm simply stretched too thin right now to try it again. My previous attempt at KM (just a simple Google Doc, which was pretty bad didn't catch on so I deleted it:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4PCfHCM1KYoTXhSUTd5ZDN2WnM&usp=sharing

@Mulletron et al., I am happy to assist in this.  I agree, this forum is excellent for reviewing the latest contributions by all the excellent minds here, but newer folks are finding it difficult to get a handle on how we got here over the past hundred pages.  As a result some of the same questions are being re-asked repeatedly.  Ideally it might become the FAQ section that was discussed previously (which @Rodal noted some valid concerns regarding).  Worth a try, at least.

To this end, I have set up a MediaWiki server at http://emdrive.echothis.com and will start by the adding the relevant links in today.  However, I'm just a (non-practicing) mechanical engineer, not a physicist so my role in this would be limited to setting up the organization and linking to the relevant content already posted by people far more knowledgeable than I.  Anyone who has been tracking the forum and would like to join in this endeavor, welcome!

Seriously thank you bro. That is some serious gettin' stuff done.
A FAQ page would be super helpful and is sorely needed.  But it won't make much difference if it isn't easily accessible.  Ideally there'd be a link to it at the top of every page on this forum- or better yet, appended to every post that anybody makes.

Offline TheTraveller


A resonant cavity can ONLY support certain frequencies. If those frequencies change, say due to red or blue shift, they won't/can't resonate, and are lost. That resonant cavity that was once saturated, now has a "hole" which can be filled by more incoming radiation, said another way energy flowing back in. The transient Poynting vector. In layman's terms.

The missing Poynting vector is due to us never considering an accelerating cavity. Shawyer says it has to move first before you observe a force. He isn't just saying that. He probably observed that.
...
See that bottom pic. Those "dips" are the only frequencies that will exist within that range of my cavity. If they get shifted up or down (like by if I pick up the cavity and shake the crap out of it), they're history.


Trying to understand the implication here. If your frustum were mounted on a shaker table can you speculate the most interesting excitation frequencies? Keeping in mind your test setup would a sub-woofer be adequate?

If it were on a shaker table, I wouldn't know what to expect. Guess that depends on how narrow the bandwidth of the cavity is. That is @Rodal quality math.
Chinese did report their cavity bandwidth data:
http://www.emdrive.com/yang-juan-paper-2012.pdf
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 04:56 PM by TheTraveller »
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Online Chris Bergin

Speaking of KM, is there anyone out there that has what it takes and is willing to volunteer and set up a wiki or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I've set up a MediaWiki server before and it wasn't too bad. That is a good platform. I'm simply stretched too thin right now to try it again. My previous attempt at KM (just a simple Google Doc, which was pretty bad didn't catch on so I deleted it:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4PCfHCM1KYoTXhSUTd5ZDN2WnM&usp=sharing

@Mulletron et al., I am happy to assist in this.  I agree, this forum is excellent for reviewing the latest contributions by all the excellent minds here, but newer folks are finding it difficult to get a handle on how we got here over the past hundred pages.  As a result some of the same questions are being re-asked repeatedly.  Ideally it might become the FAQ section that was discussed previously (which @Rodal noted some valid concerns regarding).  Worth a try, at least.

To this end, I have set up a MediaWiki server at http://emdrive.echothis.com and will start by the adding the relevant links in today.  However, I'm just a (non-practicing) mechanical engineer, not a physicist so my role in this would be limited to setting up the organization and linking to the relevant content already posted by people far more knowledgeable than I.  Anyone who has been tracking the forum and would like to join in this endeavor, welcome!

Welcome to the site's forum. That is a very good idea (as we can't really do a wiki style page here).

Top work, good new member :)



Would @Chris Bergin be willing to set up a private thread just for talking with Mr. Shawyer, undisturbed by outside agitators?

http://emdrive.com/
Contact sprltd@emdrive.com

We could create a standalone Q&A thread, like this one?

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37295.0

(Notice the format is different to a normal thread).

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 1030
Speaking of KM, is there anyone out there that has what it takes and is willing to volunteer and set up a wiki or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I've set up a MediaWiki server before and it wasn't too bad. That is a good platform. I'm simply stretched too thin right now to try it again. My previous attempt at KM (just a simple Google Doc, which was pretty bad didn't catch on so I deleted it:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4PCfHCM1KYoTXhSUTd5ZDN2WnM&usp=sharing

@Mulletron et al., I am happy to assist in this.  I agree, this forum is excellent for reviewing the latest contributions by all the excellent minds here, but newer folks are finding it difficult to get a handle on how we got here over the past hundred pages.  As a result some of the same questions are being re-asked repeatedly.  Ideally it might become the FAQ section that was discussed previously (which @Rodal noted some valid concerns regarding).  Worth a try, at least.

To this end, I have set up a MediaWiki server at http://emdrive.echothis.com and will start by the adding the relevant links in today.  However, I'm just a (non-practicing) mechanical engineer, not a physicist so my role in this would be limited to setting up the organization and linking to the relevant content already posted by people far more knowledgeable than I.  Anyone who has been tracking the forum and would like to join in this endeavor, welcome!

Welcome to the site's forum. That is a very good idea (as we can't really do a wiki style page here).

Top work, good new member :)



Would @Chris Bergin be willing to set up a private thread just for talking with Mr. Shawyer, undisturbed by outside agitators?

http://emdrive.com/
Contact sprltd@emdrive.com

We could create a standalone Q&A thread, like this one?

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37295.0

(Notice the format is different to a normal thread).

Okay good, we're getting organized. That kind of venue is perfect. We have a place to collaborate and a KM solution. I am hopeful that Mr. Shawyer will come speak with us, and we will provide a professional venue for a productive Q&A.

Thank you @Chris Bergin.
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline TheTraveller

Would seem from Shawyers latest presentation, recently shared by Mulletron, that flat end plates are out and convex / concave end plates are the new standard to reduce cavity losses and boost cavity Q / thrust generation per kW of cavity stored microwave energy.

While Shawyer did share this cavity variation applied to a superconducting cavity, why it was used and what the curves are based on is new information. Would seem to make very good sense to incorporate it into non superconducting cavities.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 05:25 PM by TheTraveller »
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline Mulletron

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1116
  • Liked: 779
  • Likes Given: 1030
Speaking of KM, is there anyone out there that has what it takes and is willing to volunteer and set up a wiki or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I've set up a MediaWiki server before and it wasn't too bad. That is a good platform. I'm simply stretched too thin right now to try it again. My previous attempt at KM (just a simple Google Doc, which was pretty bad didn't catch on so I deleted it:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4PCfHCM1KYoTXhSUTd5ZDN2WnM&usp=sharing

@Mulletron et al., I am happy to assist in this.  I agree, this forum is excellent for reviewing the latest contributions by all the excellent minds here, but newer folks are finding it difficult to get a handle on how we got here over the past hundred pages.  As a result some of the same questions are being re-asked repeatedly.  Ideally it might become the FAQ section that was discussed previously (which @Rodal noted some valid concerns regarding).  Worth a try, at least.

To this end, I have set up a MediaWiki server at http://emdrive.echothis.com and will start by the adding the relevant links in today.  However, I'm just a (non-practicing) mechanical engineer, not a physicist so my role in this would be limited to setting up the organization and linking to the relevant content already posted by people far more knowledgeable than I.  Anyone who has been tracking the forum and would like to join in this endeavor, welcome!

Seriously thank you bro. That is some serious gettin' stuff done.
A FAQ page would be super helpful and is sorely needed.  But it won't make much difference if it isn't easily accessible.  Ideally there'd be a link to it at the top of every page on this forum- or better yet, appended to every post that anybody makes.

The newly created Emdrive wiki http://emdrive.echothis.com/index.php/Main_Page can fulfill the FAQ requirement. Thanks to @saucyjack for your hard work! :)
Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you. - Velik

Offline Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5895
  • USA
  • Liked: 6045
  • Likes Given: 5325
Would seem from Shawyers latest presentation, recently shared by Mulletron, that flat end plates are out and convex / concave end plates are the new standard to reduce cavity losses and boost cavity Q / thrust generation per kW of cavity stored microwave energy.

While Shawyer did share this cavity variation applied to a superconducting cavity, why it was used and what the curves are based on is new information. Would seem to make very good sense to incorporate it into non superconducting cavities.

NOT NEW information.

Discussed already much earlier in the thread.  I pointed out the reason.  Please take a look at the ends of the truncated cone in my exact solutions and also in Greg Egan's.

The reason for the spherical ends is because the standing waves in a truncated cone cavity are spherical waves.

So, that:

*the standing wave in a truncated cone are spherical waves has been known since the 1930's as per Shelkunoff's. 

*that Shawyer is using spherical ends for his superconducting EM Drive has been known and discussed in this thread multiple times since Oct 2014
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 05:33 PM by Rodal »

Offline TheTraveller

Would seem from Shawyers latest presentation, recently shared by Mulletron, that flat end plates are out and convex / concave end plates are the new standard to reduce cavity losses and boost cavity Q / thrust generation per kW of cavity stored microwave energy.

While Shawyer did share this cavity variation applied to a superconducting cavity, why it was used and what the curves are based on is new information. Would seem to make very good sense to incorporate it into non superconducting cavities.

NOT NEW information at all.

Discussed already much earlier in the thread.  I pointed out the reason.  Please take a look at the ends of the truncated cone in my exact solutions and also in Greg Egan's.

The reason for the spherical ends is because the standing waves in a truncated cone cavity are spherical waves (this is known since the 1930's as per Shelkunoff's analysis)
Is it not new information from Shawyer?

I plan to build and test a Shawyer EM Drive with his new convex / concave end plates. Will take my design lead 100% from Shawyer at 1st as he is the only source that has built multiple EM Drives, measured generated significant force / thrust and shared enough real / practical data to allow replication of his many years of blood, sweat and tears.

The theory talk here is good background but not focused enough to be something an engineer can use to built a successful working EM Drive, at least not in the 1st instance. I believe in not reinventing the wheel, until I have several working wheels to do further development from.

I also plan to duplicate Shawyers vertical force measurement system as used in his Flight Thruster qualification. To me that is a very KISS solution.

I'm not doing this for any monetary gain. My plans will be open sourced. My gut just wants to know how this works. Not in a theory sense but in a practical now do you use this device to achieve a desired end goal as it apparently has very unusual operational modes.

Would welcome any suggestions as I have read others here have started down this pathway.
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 05:48 PM by TheTraveller »
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline TheTraveller

Would seem from Shawyers latest presentation, recently shared by Mulletron, that flat end plates are out and convex / concave end plates are the new standard to reduce cavity losses and boost cavity Q / thrust generation per kW of cavity stored microwave energy.

While Shawyer did share this cavity variation applied to a superconducting cavity, why it was used and what the curves are based on is new information. Would seem to make very good sense to incorporate it into non superconducting cavities.

NOT NEW information at all.

Discussed already much earlier in the thread.  I pointed out the reason.  Please take a look at the ends of the truncated cone in my exact solutions and also in Greg Egan's.

The reason for the spherical ends is because the standing waves in a truncated cone cavity are spherical waves (this is known since the 1930's as per Shelkunoff's analysis)
Is it not new information from Shawyer?

I plan to build and test a Shawyer EM Drive with his new convex / concave end plates. Will take my design lead 100% from Shawyer at 1st as he is the only source that has built multiple EM Drives, measured generated significant force / thrust and shared enough real / practical data to allow replication of his many years of blood, sweat and tears.

The theory talk here is good background but not focused enough to be something an engineer can use to built a successful working EM Drive, at least not in the 1st instance. I believe in not reinventing the wheel, until I have several working wheels to do further development from.

I also plan to duplicate Shawyers vertical force measurement system as used in his Flight Thruster qualification. To me that is a very KISS solution.

Would welcome any suggestions as I have read others here have started down this pathway.

No, the information you posted from Shawyer was not new information on this thread.

The information you posted on Shawyer's including Shawyer's presentation (which dates 6 months ago) has been discussed multiple times in this thread.

One of the discussions was with an European Architect/Designer.  We also discussed paraboloid cavities, for example.
We are talking about the same presentation that Mullerton just received from Shawyer and posted a day ago? The attached information was known 6 months ago?
« Last Edit: 05/04/2015 05:52 PM by TheTraveller »
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline TheTraveller

...
We are talking about the same presentation that Mullerton just received from Shawyer and posted a day ago? The attached information was known 6 months ago?
yes.
Link?
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Tags: