Author Topic: Light/space-time toroid with transverse angular velocity axis for propulsion  (Read 2921 times)

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 267
This latest idea is based on the concept that space time behaves like a super-fluid.  An attempt to lay out why it is suspected that space time may be fluid like is in the png image below.  To then expand on this, an idea for propulsion using the concept is given in the next png.  The idea of the fluid space I think makes an attempt to understand General Relativity in the context of Special relativity. 

Before any engine were to be made I would imagine the toroid might be first be used for a test if light can actually drag on space time.  The real question is if light can have much of a drag on space time at all.  While the earth is large it has no where near the velocity of light so then maybe an appreciable amount of accelerating light could have a comparable drag? (frame dragging)

The idea for the cinnamon roll of metal, to make a cavity that lets light in but traps it inside, I believe came some time ago in the EM drive thread.  I can't remember who it was that suggested it or which thread of the EM drive it would be in. 


Maybe I should have used the word torus instead of toroid but I guess it's not a perfect torus.  I was also contemplating if it would be more appropriate to call it frame dragging propulsion.  Would it be possible to change the thread name to "Toroidal frame dragging propulsion?"  Seems like friendlier name than what I first came up with. 
« Last Edit: 01/30/2016 08:37 AM by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 267
Another perspective that attempts to parallel special relativity to general relativity but results in a flow of space-time into matter.  An old quote from a long time ago and modified since it was me.

"Ok so then we have some one on the ground observing a space craft directly above their head at near the speed of light and it appears contracted. It having a forward velocity then you subtract time from the front of the craft and add time to the rear of the craft and this contracts it. You can then visualize as the craft travels forward continually subtracting time from it and preserving the occupants life span. However, the contraction in space time doesn't seem to change at constant velocity. This suggests the culprit of space time contraction as being due to acceleration. So then as we accelerate is when space time should be busy contracting or pancaking objects.

Now lets consider gravity and the earth for instance. If we placed a clock high above the earth at a lower acceleration and another clock at the base of the earth at higher acceleration the clocks should also appear to undergo contraction in time and space. However for the earth this contraction of time and space would seem to be in all directions. Almost suggesting the flow of time and space into the gravitational well.  This flow also appears to disappear as we move towards the center of the earth suggesting that flow slowing down.
« Last Edit: 02/03/2016 06:03 AM by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 267
I found this discussion in another thread and quoted it here.  I feel it relates to the concept I am discussing. 

...

Just want to make sure I am following the discussion correctly.

Maxwells equations for Electromagnetism take as an assumption that EM waves/photons must propagate through some continuous "aether" which has a finite modulus of elasticity.

Fast forward to modern times

Are we assuming the aether which is assumed in Maxwells work would be considered to be dirac's quantum vaccum sea? If so given all of the valid observations we have for Maxwell's equations does that mean the quantum vaccum sea must also be continuous with a finite modulous of elasticity?

(Disclaimer and explanation: Zhixian Lin has not invoked any theory of the superfluid vacuum for his proposed concept.  I advanced the idea of a superfluid vacuum in one of our exchanges.)

Answer to birchoff's question:

There are several theories of a superfluid vacuum.  These theories have a "speed of sound" of the vacuum superfluid equal to (in the simplest theories) or higher than the speed of light.

The speed of sound in the superfluid vacuum can be associated with quasiparticles which are thus phonons: quanta of sound waves.  The superfluid vacuum theories thus have "sound waves" in addition to "gravitational waves".   

One can think of the speed of sound of the vacuum as being associated with a (very large value) bulk modulus of elasticity (and density) of the superfluid vacuum, but these theories usually discuss the speed of sound (*) of the vacuum in terms of vacuum energy considerations and not specifically in terms of a bulk modulus of elasticity of the vacuum superfluid.

If an external observer could measure the propagation of ‘light’ ("vacuum sound", or other massless low-energy quasiparticles), she would find that the speed of light is coordinate-dependent. Moreover, it is anisotropic: it depends on the direction of propagation with respect to the flow of the superfluid vacuum. 

However, an inner observer (inside the superfluid vacuum) always finds that the ‘speed of light’ (the maximum attainable speed for low-energy quasiparticles) is invariant. The inner observer inside the superfluid vacuum cannnot know that this invariance is the result of the flexibility of the clocks of quasiparticles: the slowing down of such a clock (the time dilation). These physical effects experienced by low-energy instruments do not allow the inner observer to measure the ‘ether drift’, i.e. the motion of the superfluid vacuum: the Michelson–Morley-type measurements of the speed of massless quasiparticles in moving ‘ether’ would give a negative result. The low-energy rods and clocks also follow the anisotropy of the vacuum and thus cannot record this anisotropy. As a result, all the inner observers would agree that the speed of light is the fundamental constant.

Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superfluid_vacuum_theory ) puts it this way:

Quote
An observer who resides inside such vacuum and is capable of creating or measuring the small fluctuations would observe them as relativistic objects - unless their energy and momentum are sufficiently high to make the Lorentz-breaking corrections detectable. If the energies and momenta are below the excitation threshold then the superfluid background behaves like the ideal fluid, therefore, the Michelson–Morley-type experiments would observe no drag force from such aether

and it lists these experiments associated with the superfluid vacuum theories:

ANNIE
Gran Sasso
INO
LHC
SNO
Super-K
Tevatron
NOνA

____________________________________________________
Some superfluid vacuum theories explain Dark Energy and Dark Matter as follows:


Dark energy = Energy density of superfluid vacuum.
Dark matter = Density fluctuations of superfluid vacuum.


Dark energy and dark matter in a superfluid universe
Kerson Huang
Physics Department, MIT, Cambridge, USA

Talk given at Dyson's 90th birthday symposium, 26‐29 AUG 2013, NTU, Singapore

http://www.mit.edu/people/kerson/cosmologystuff/Dyson.pdf

________

(*) for example a speed of sound "c" in the superfluid vacuum may be defined by the following expression

c² = (n/m) ∂²U/∂n²

where

U = vacuum energy density as a function of the quasiparticle density
n = quasiparticle number density
m = bare mass of quasiparticle

one may infer from this an equivalent bulk modulus of elasticity of the superfluid vacuum (which follows readily from the fact that the bulk modulus of elasticity for a hyperelastic material is the second derivative of the strain energy density with respect to the volumetric logarithmic strain):

c² = (1/ρ) ∂²U/∂ε²
     = Ks / ρ

where

U = strain energy density of the superfluid vacuum
ε = volumetric strain (logarithmic measure)
ρ = mass density of the superfluid vacuum
Ks = inferred bulk modulus of elasticity of the supefluid vacuum



Since the density and the speed of sound of the superfluid vacuum are finite, it readily follows that the bulk modulus of elasticity of the superfluid vacuum is finite.  But the physical interpretation is better grasped by the superfluid mathematical description and analysis

Superfluids also have thermal sound waves and hence a so called second sound (a second speed of sound due to entropy/temperature fluctuations instead of pressure/density fluctuations):


« Last Edit: 01/29/2016 07:58 PM by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 267
I wanted to take back any speculation that space time might be a form of matter other than light that has friction with matter while it flows into a planet.  This idea is flawed.  The problem is a rocket falling from infinity to some height can acquire escape velocity which for a gravitational well is some limited velocity. 

We all know a rocket can exceed this velocity with a boost and still be accelerated along the way, exceeding escape velocity, which excludes the concept of friction between some massive flowing space time and the rocket.

I don't think this excludes electromagnetic interaction with the vacuum though.   

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 267
Also, could we induce a flow of space time if we have a cavity where light is added but by the shape of the cavity light is trapped inside?  After adding such energy flip the polarization of light into the cavity by 180 degrees and cancel all the stored light.  What happened to all the momentum?  Did is just disappear or is it possible it could be transferred to the vacuum? 

Another interesting question is if the wave in the cavity is a standing wave or a traveling wave.  I want to think it's traveling.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 613
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 267
A modification of the above existing idea. 

I just had an idea that kind of merges EM Cavities, Dielectrics, and may possibly be related to the Woodward idea but not in an obvious way.  At the moment it seems like a closed system, so far. 

We start with a cavity that lets light in one way (cinnamon roll shape) and was suggested by some one in the early threads. I can not remember where, but am grateful for their suggestion of the cavity shape.  I think I remember rfmwguy commenting on their cavity shape.  The light should travel around one way in a circle. 

The next idea is to fill half this cavity with a dielectric such that when the light enters the dielectric it slows down.  I assumed momentum is conserved so to slow down the light I changed the effective mass of the light by adding "dm".

I then considered the circular path the light takes and assumed a force F = m*a = m*v^2/r which isn't relativistic but the photon doesn't approach infinite mass at light speed anyways.  Maybe I am making the wrong assumption here.  The force around the circular path appears to be different for the photon in the dielectric than for free space. 

I found another paper called, "An Effective Photon Momentum in a Dielectric Medium:
A Relativistic Approach" which appears relatively new 2015.  Department of Physics, Weber State University, Ogden, UT.  I can't seem to find it on googlescholar but the link is here: http://physics.weber.edu/galli/EffectivePhotonV2-1.PDF 

Their paper suggest the effective momentum P_eff = P/n where n is index of refraction so that unless I am mistaken they don't take momentum to be conserved.  Maybe upon entry and exit of the dielectric some momentum is transferred.  I am not certain about equation 10 where they say it reduces to Snell's law when u->0.  With u->0 I think it reduces to sin(theta2)/cos(theta2)=sin(theta1)/[n*sqrt(1-sin(theta2)^2/n^2)] where (1-sin(theta)^2)=cos(theta)^2, which is close but I don't think it is the same, unless I am mistaken.  Regardless I think their effect may only enhance the Force difference in the idea I was contemplating (or come out the same possibly if momentum is transfered to the dielectric upon entry and back to the photon upon exit. - momentum is conserved.).  Image attached below. 

It is interesting it requires a cavity and it appears the Q of the cavity may enhance the effect.  At the moment it looks like a closed system and possibly related to the Woodward idea based on the light changing in mass.  If the photon changes in relativistic mass upon entering a dielectric then the parallel to the Woodward effect (called by another name by Woodward) then the force of changing the photons path after it changes mass is the parallel. 

Edit: When I think about it, there must be some force from speeding up and slowing down of the photon when entering/exiting the dielectric that would work against the estimated thrust.  There is the possibility it could cancel out any thrust altogether.
« Last Edit: 02/16/2016 08:01 AM by dustinthewind »

Tags: