Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 3  (Read 1801984 times)

Offline DaCunha

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
  • Liked: 38
  • Likes Given: 14
Neither your simulations nor tests which yield N or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.

The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!

We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.

You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a  populistic way.

What else did you expect?!

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 2956
  • Likes Given: 2589
Here is power! 9 tubes at 20MW each.
Shell

Only need 2MWs of microwave energy, fed to 20 x 100N/100kW EMDrives. Total Force is then 2,000N. Apply that to a 90t crewed ship and it will accelerate at 0.0023g.

That ship can enter Pluto's orbit (40AU avg distance) in 12.4 months.

Can do Mars at avg distance 225mkm in 73 days or at close approach, 60mkm, in 38 days.

So no need for massive levels of Rf power. 2MWs of Rf (100kW of Rf per EMDrive) is more than enough to explore and colonise the whole solar system.

We need to get it out of the dirt first.

Shell

That is the plan and why I'll be building a commercial quality EMDrive full system from the start.

Is always important to understand where you are going and what are the end goals, before you finalise the design and start the build. What I call integrated product development.

:) I've built companies from almost nothing to compete in a multi-billion dollar industry with a game plan from the first step and the game plan was still viable 10 years later. Not my first rodeo as we say out here in the Old West.

I've always held this close but now I think I have found what.

I want to do something splendid...something heroic or wonderful that won't be forgotten after I'm dead. I don't know what, but I'm on the watch for it and mean to astonish you all someday.
― Louisa May Alcott, Little Women

Michelle Broyles
You can see it on my http://www.gofundme.com/yy7yz3k page anyway.
Shell

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 2956
  • Likes Given: 2589
Neither your simulations nor tests which yield N or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.

The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!

We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.

You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a  populistic way.

What else did you expect?!
You are right, buzz sells and funds.
But...
For a fact several designs comprised of different constructions and theories have produced thrust. You tell me which one will scale to lift off the ground? In the 60's I watched NASA launch rocket after rocket and end in a spectacular ball of fire. The theories were solid and the engineering the finest there ever was, but still boom. It took the combined brilliance of Robert Goddard, Von Braun, Korolev and scores of others I can't think of right off my head to simply combine reactive fuels to punch into space.

I don't want to see extravagant claims of leaping buildings with a single bound go boom, good press and bad press works both ways.

Offline WarpTech

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1228
  • Do it!
  • Vista, CA
  • Liked: 1295
  • Likes Given: 1749

Very interesting line of thought.   Since in this concept "The EM Drive mimics gravity over a narrow bandwidth of the EM spectrum, near the cut-off modes of the cavity" then it would be interesting to see how the overall effect varies with the cut-off mode and frequency of the cavity (i.e. 1.2 Ghz, 2.4 Ghz. 5.8 etc).   You mention "as small as possible" which would seem to imply as high a freq as possible but how does it vary (linear, exponential, ???).  Cost to generate clean RF goes up much faster than linear as frequency increases into the millimeter range so this will be a cost driver - hence the need to find the "sweet spot" for N/kg AND N/$.

   Its late and I may not be expressing this very well.

Herman

Not exactly the same as Todd's but...

http://emdrive.wiki/@notsosureofit_Hypothesis

@notsosureofit, Last equation lost the "n" in the numerator in NT2, but thanks! Nice!
Todd

Offline deltaMass

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • A Brit in California
  • Liked: 671
  • Likes Given: 275
The horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.

Online Rodal

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5838
  • USA
  • Liked: 5919
  • Likes Given: 5260
The horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.
Unfortunately, the "complete and utter disappointment" will belong to those honest people who sincerely believe the extravagant predictions of an anonymous prophet.  The prophet, being anonymous, suffers no loss of prestige, since such prophesies were posted anonymously and not using a real name. 
« Last Edit: 07/16/2015 01:53 PM by Rodal »

Offline TheTraveller

I have a question:

What is the most powerful microwave source that is available to private persons?
And what is the maximum intensity that, say, copper can withstand without melting, exploding or whatever?

Could we just buy a 1 MW+ microwave source build a frustrum resonator and see what happens?

After seeking cover of course.

Let us find a bored millionaire.

This can't be too expensive. We don't have to optimize the system, which would become expensive at long term of course.

Just apply the maximum power to a frustrum and check what will happen.

Ask the Myth Busters. They like blowing things up. :D

Sea! You are ingenious!

That is the idea!

It could be the solution to our problem!:

NASA EW doesn't have the funds to check the behaviour of frustrum at 1 MW input and we are not allowed to fund their work.

BUT: Tax payer is not as interested in professional research as he is in entertainment!!That is why TV has millions and of dollars while NASA EW does not even have 100000 $.

Let us use this circumstance for our purpose!!

Mythbusters could demonstrate the Shawyer effect for 1 MW input power. (Of course without all the optimization that has to be done as a result of long and serious science) But a demonstration of an unoptimized system just fed with a lot of power to compensate for this unoptimized state is all we need to raise awareness of NASA and the rest of the community!


I have found out that you can actually send e-Mails with proposals for "Myths" to the producers!
Let us work together and send  E-Mails:  Send an email to mythfans@beyond.com.au with the title of your myth in the subject heading. This email goes directly to the team that makes the show.

You can read about it here: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/about-this-show/mythbusters-submit-a-myth/


I already sent them an E-Mail but I think we need a lot more people to raise their awareness. I received an automatic answer, that they can not answer to individual mails but will "eventually" read it.

No need for a MW of Rf. 100Ws of Rf will make my rotary test rig rotate at least at 120 rpm or 2 rps. Depending on how well I reduce windage, maybe up to 600 rpm or 10 rps.

More than enough for Myth Busters, Eagleworks, SpaceX, whoever to know for sure it is real.
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Online WBY1984

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 174
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 100
The horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.
Unfortunately, the "complete and utter disappointment" will belong to those honest people who sincerely believe the extravagant predictions of an anonymous prophet.  The prophet, being anonymous, suffers no loss of prestige, since such prophesies were posted anonymously and not using a real name.

This is what I don't get: The measurements are so small and inconsistent, and the originator of this propulsion concept has been shown to not understand the physics of his own device. Why are people proclaiming we are on the verge of some grand new era of spaceflight when the foundations of all this are so dodgy? It just seems like wishful thinking.

Offline TheTraveller

Neither your simulations nor tests which yield N or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.

The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!

We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.

You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a  populistic way.

What else did you expect?!

So a totally self contained cordless rotary test rig, setup in any inside wind free location, accelerating from stop to say 120 rpm or 2 rps, then stopping and doing it again 10 times will not convince you?
"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

The horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.
Unfortunately, the "complete and utter disappointment" will belong to those honest people who sincerely believe the extravagant predictions of an anonymous prophet.  The prophet, being anonymous, suffers no loss of prestige, since such prophesies were posted anonymously and not using a real name.

This is what I don't get: The measurements are so small and inconsistent, and the originator of this propulsion concept has been shown to not understand the physics of his own device. Why are people proclaiming we are on the verge of some grand new era of spaceflight when the foundations of all this are so dodgy? It just seems like wishful thinking.

That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline MyronQG

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 5
Neither your simulations nor tests which yield N or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.

The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!

We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.

You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a  populistic way.

What else did you expect?!

So a totally self contained cordless rotary test rig, setup in any inside wind free location, accelerating from stop to say 120 rpm or 2 rps, then stopping and doing it again 10 times will not convince you?

You will have to convince people that there are no EM interaction between the currents flowing in the wirings of your test rig and the surrounding medium, or that interaction averages out to zero on each turn.

Online WBY1984

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 174
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 100
Quote
That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.

How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.
« Last Edit: 07/16/2015 02:26 PM by WBY1984 »

Offline Blaine

  • Member
  • Posts: 58
  • Spring Hill, KS
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 122
This will be one of the few times I defend the Traveller for what he says in regards to Shawyer.  If one cannot prove that its just magentic forces going trough wires, or some mysterious force, than one must do more tests.  Science doesn't form opinions. Science is all about the facts.  So straighten up people.  That includes the TheTraveller.
Weird Science!

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
Quote
That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.

How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.
Thus the genesis of these threads and independent builders. If it were taken for granted, there would be no need to be here.

Online WBY1984

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 174
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 100
Quote
That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.

How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.
Thus the genesis of these threads and independent builders. If it were taken for granted, there would be no need to be here.

Indeed, I'm just put off by what seems to be a lot of 'jumping the gun' before enough independent verification has taken place.

Offline TheTraveller

Neither your simulations nor tests which yield N or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.

The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!

We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.

You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a  populistic way.

What else did you expect?!

So a totally self contained cordless rotary test rig, setup in any inside wind free location, accelerating from stop to say 120 rpm or 2 rps, then stopping and doing it again 10 times will not convince you?

You will have to convince people that there are no EM interaction between the currents flowing in the wirings of your test rig and the surrounding medium, or that interaction averages out to zero on each turn.

The rotary test rig is portable. Made from compressed wood fibre. 2 low stiction bearing and a magnetic thrust bearing in the lower end of the rotary shaft. 8 fully visible components. 4 x 12v 6AH SLA batteries, USB Rf gen, Rf amp, Raspberry Pi 2B based real time controller and monitoring system and the EMDrive. Easy to move and set up wherever. No hidden wires, air currents, fishing line, gyro torquers.

The people seeing the demo select the indoor site.

I then put together the rotary test rig, which they can fully inspect, even xray if they wish.

Will then install all the EMDrive system components on the rotary test table and do a few checks to be sure it is all working as expected.

Will then step away and invite further inspection.

When that is completed, will wirelessly switch on the system and explain how it auto configures itself, finds the best frequency to use and how it starts out at low power (continually testing for the best frequency) and builds up the power to obtain a set acceleration rate, continues acceleration until a set RPM is achieved and then switches off for the next test run, all data recorded. This way I can let it auto search, accelerate, hit target RPM, switch off and repeat the process, while recording heaps of data.

It is based on Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) engineering
« Last Edit: 07/16/2015 02:58 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 RonM

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2104
  • Atlanta, Georgia USA
  • Liked: 988
  • Likes Given: 761
Its the missing link of GUT...giving away some working theories of mine, if thrust appears, I predict it will differ towards and away from a gravitational source. Interested? Hope so...its a hot potato subject you know.

I would have to agree, the gravitational dispersion would add or subtract with the direction of the cavity.
I am curious as to where you intend to get a "good supply" of gravity (or of its gradient or indeed of the curl of its potential  ;) ) when navigating in deep space?
Here is where it may fall apart...perhaps the effect is only noticeable in an intense gravity field. Lots of testing needs to be completed...onwards and upwards.

If EM drives requires a "good supply" of gravity, it won't work in deep space, but it would still be a very useful device for interplanetary travel. A spacecraft with EM drives in LEO could rapidly accelerate and build up enough velocity to travel to another planet before it is too far out of Earth's gravitational field.

Offline TheTraveller

Quote
That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.

How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.

Proof will be in my test results.
« Last Edit: 07/16/2015 02:59 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 rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
Quote
That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.

How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.
Thus the genesis of these threads and independent builders. If it were taken for granted, there would be no need to be here.

Indeed, I'm just put off by what seems to be a lot of 'jumping the gun' before enough independent verification has taken place.
Point well taken. I admire big picture ideas, but personally prefer to take small steps first. IMHO, we need to avoid a P.T. Barnum mentality and report things as we see them...small scale then large scale.

Offline Ricvil

  • Member
  • Posts: 62
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 22
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0704.0373

Some troubles about definitions of momentum  in general coordinates system.
So the question about momentum in a tappered waveguide is not trivial.
 

Tags: