Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 3  (Read 1799770 times)

Offline RotoSequence

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 751
  • Liked: 554
  • Likes Given: 763
Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 10:30 AM by RotoSequence »

Offline TheTraveller

Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

The image I posted was from the 188 run of the SPR Demonstrator rotary test. Same test run as the video.

What I read from that rotary test experimental data is there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing. Shawyer has explained this happens because acceleration shifts the cavity resonant frequency, Q drops from some of the EM wave cavity energy being converted into kinetic, increasing cavity losses, Force generated drops, stopping overunity operation.

Shawyer has been saying this for years and in the graphic we can see it actually happening.

Sorry but there is no overunity as multiple acceleration related effects inside the cavity stop OU happening.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 10:44 AM 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 Notsosureofit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Liked: 704
  • Likes Given: 1362
Weyl fermions; massless particle found.

http://phys.org/news/2015-07-year-massless-particle-next-generation-electronics.html

how many more of these sorts of things are there out there?

", the researchers used the Princeton Institute for the Science and Technology of Materials (PRISM) and Laboratory for Topological Quantum Matter and Spectroscopy in Princeton's Jadwin Hall to research and simulate dozens of crystal structures before seizing upon the asymmetrical tantalum arsenide crystal, which has a differently shaped top and bottom."


« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 11:41 AM by Notsosureofit »

Offline deltaMass

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • A Brit in California
  • Liked: 671
  • Likes Given: 275
Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

The image I posted was from the 188 run of the SPR Demonstrator rotary test. Same test run as the video.

What I read from that rotary test experimental data is there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing. Shawyer has explained this happens because acceleration shifts the cavity resonant frequency, Q drops from some of the EM wave cavity energy being converted into kinetic, increasing cavity losses, Force generated drops, stopping overunity operation.

Shawyer has been saying this for years and in the graphic we can see it actually happening.

Sorry but there is no overunity as multiple acceleration related effects inside the cavity stop OU happening.
If that is Shawyer's reason for there being no over-unity, then the man believes that a radio can never be tuned. It is an unbelievably weak and pathetic explanation.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 11:48 AM by deltaMass »

Offline TheTraveller

Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

The image I posted was from the 188 run of the SPR Demonstrator rotary test. Same test run as the video.

What I read from that rotary test experimental data is there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing. Shawyer has explained this happens because acceleration shifts the cavity resonant frequency, Q drops from some of the EM wave cavity energy being converted into kinetic, increasing cavity losses, Force generated drops, stopping overunity operation.

Shawyer has been saying this for years and in the graphic we can see it actually happening.

Sorry but there is no overunity as multiple acceleration related effects inside the cavity stop OU happening.
If that is Shawyer's reason for there being no over-unity, then the man believes that a radio can never be tuned. It is an unbelievably weak and pathetic explanation.

The measured rotary test data is hard to ignore.

Follow the DATA, theory or desired OU outcome be damned!!!
"As for me, I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas.
Herman Melville, Moby Dick

Offline graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 159
  • Likes Given: 636
Here's an article I had published in MW&RF: http://mwrf.com/commercial/assemble-high-power-attenuator-systems

Cool. The highest power systems I've worked on, cellular and an tactical satellite, were only a few hundred watts (cooking in the microwave oven notwithstanding). The fusor-guy, Coulter, I referenced mentioned his (IIRC) RG-58 getting a bit warm at the current-nodes along the coax. Wonder if I could get away with a 30 second run with a meter of RG-178, 500 W @ 2.4 GHz? Probably not

Check out the specs on RG-178. 

http://www.datasheets.pl/coaxial_cables/RG-178_COAXIAL_CABLE.pdf
http://www.belden.com/techdatas/english/83265.pdf

at 2.4 Ghz there is 2.9 dB of loss in 1 meter of cable.   That is nearly 1/2 your power going into heat. Note - the loss specs are a VSWR of 1.3 max so unless load and source are well matched coax loss will be even greater.

  Belden specs their RG-178 only to 1 Ghz but max power handling at that freq is only 66 watts.  After all the center conductor is only 30 AWG.   

I used a lot of 178 for small signal work at HF and VHF in DIY projects (half way through my second 1000ft roll).  It is GREAT for small signal work and runs up to say 5 meters at up to maybe 100Mhz but I  think 30 seconds with 500 watts at 2.4 Ghz will convert 1 meter of 178 into an open circuit - which would be bad for your source too.

Herman
EMdrive - finally - microwaves are good for something other than heating ramen noodles and leftover pizza ;-)

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 2956
  • Likes Given: 2588
Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

Very true.

I also realize we know so little. We don't know how the universe started or how the universe will end, in between we don't know what it's made of,, we only understand a little of it. 4.6% is the stuff we know about.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_matter.html

I'm reminded of the three blind men describing a elephant, one feels the tail, one feels the trunk and one feels the body and each describe it differently. We only can feel the trunk and sometimes building this EMDrive I think I got ahold of the other end, so I try to keep an open mind and duck and cover when the time calls for it. :D

Will be working in the shop most of the day, I've got a lot to prepare for and building the test stand for the DUT.

Shell
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 12:30 PM by SeeShells »

Offline TheTraveller

Here's an article I had published in MW&RF: http://mwrf.com/commercial/assemble-high-power-attenuator-systems

Cool. The highest power systems I've worked on, cellular and an tactical satellite, were only a few hundred watts (cooking in the microwave oven notwithstanding). The fusor-guy, Coulter, I referenced mentioned his (IIRC) RG-58 getting a bit warm at the current-nodes along the coax. Wonder if I could get away with a 30 second run with a meter of RG-178, 500 W @ 2.4 GHz? Probably not

Check out the specs on RG-178. 

http://www.datasheets.pl/coaxial_cables/RG-178_COAXIAL_CABLE.pdf
http://www.belden.com/techdatas/english/83265.pdf

at 2.4 Ghz there is 2.9 dB of loss in 1 meter of cable.   That is nearly 1/2 your power going into heat. Note - the loss specs are a VSWR of 1.3 max so unless load and source are well matched coax loss will be even greater.

  Belden specs their RG-178 only to 1 Ghz but max power handling at that freq is only 66 watts.  After all the center conductor is only 30 AWG.   

I used a lot of 178 for small signal work at HF and VHF in DIY projects (half way through my second 1000ft roll).  It is GREAT for small signal work and runs up to say 5 meters at up to maybe 100Mhz but I  think 30 seconds with 500 watts at 2.4 Ghz will convert 1 meter of 178 into an open circuit - which would be bad for your source too.

Herman

I plan to use EcoFlex15 PLUS coax (specs attached) unless anyone knows of anything better?

0.149dB loss / mtr at 2.45GHz & 350W capacity.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 12:44 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 graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 159
  • Likes Given: 636
Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

Very true.

I also realize we know so little. We don't know how the universe started or how the universe will end, in between we don't know what it's made of,, we only understand a little of it. 4.6% is the stuff we know about.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_matter.html

I'm reminded of the three blind men describing a elephant, one feels the tail, one feels the trunk and one feels the body and each describe it differently. We only can feel the trunk and sometimes building this EMDrive I think I got ahold of the other end, so I try to keep an open mind and duck and cover when the time calls for it. :D

Will be working in the shop most of the day, I've got a lot to prepare for and building the test stand for the DUT.

Shell

"I think I got ahold of the other end, so I try to keep an open mind and duck and cover when the time calls for it. :D

- You quack me up!   ;D  Sorry - couldn't resist.

Herman

EMdrive - finally - microwaves are good for something other than heating ramen noodles and leftover pizza ;-)

Offline graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 159
  • Likes Given: 636
Here's an article I had published in MW&RF: http://mwrf.com/commercial/assemble-high-power-attenuator-systems

Cool. The highest power systems I've worked on, cellular and an tactical satellite, were only a few hundred watts (cooking in the microwave oven notwithstanding). The fusor-guy, Coulter, I referenced mentioned his (IIRC) RG-58 getting a bit warm at the current-nodes along the coax. Wonder if I could get away with a 30 second run with a meter of RG-178, 500 W @ 2.4 GHz? Probably not

Check out the specs on RG-178. 

http://www.datasheets.pl/coaxial_cables/RG-178_COAXIAL_CABLE.pdf
http://www.belden.com/techdatas/english/83265.pdf

at 2.4 Ghz there is 2.9 dB of loss in 1 meter of cable.   That is nearly 1/2 your power going into heat. Note - the loss specs are a VSWR of 1.3 max so unless load and source are well matched coax loss will be even greater.

  Belden specs their RG-178 only to 1 Ghz but max power handling at that freq is only 66 watts.  After all the center conductor is only 30 AWG.   

I used a lot of 178 for small signal work at HF and VHF in DIY projects (half way through my second 1000ft roll).  It is GREAT for small signal work and runs up to say 5 meters at up to maybe 100Mhz but I  think 30 seconds with 500 watts at 2.4 Ghz will convert 1 meter of 178 into an open circuit - which would be bad for your source too.

Herman

I plan to use EcoFlex15 PLUS coax (specs attached) unless anyone knows of anything better?

0.149dB loss / mtr at 2.45GHz & 350W capacity.

That is good stuff.   I have seen it used and worked with it on both L band and Ku band (short run) projects - Only advice is to watch the minimum bend radius carefully.  I would use the 15 cycle bend radius rather than the single time bend radius just to be on the safe side.  To tight and it will either short circuit or your loss will go up radically (and the effect may not be seen right away.

Herman
EMdrive - finally - microwaves are good for something other than heating ramen noodles and leftover pizza ;-)

Offline TheTraveller

Here's an article I had published in MW&RF: http://mwrf.com/commercial/assemble-high-power-attenuator-systems

Cool. The highest power systems I've worked on, cellular and an tactical satellite, were only a few hundred watts (cooking in the microwave oven notwithstanding). The fusor-guy, Coulter, I referenced mentioned his (IIRC) RG-58 getting a bit warm at the current-nodes along the coax. Wonder if I could get away with a 30 second run with a meter of RG-178, 500 W @ 2.4 GHz? Probably not

Check out the specs on RG-178. 

http://www.datasheets.pl/coaxial_cables/RG-178_COAXIAL_CABLE.pdf
http://www.belden.com/techdatas/english/83265.pdf

at 2.4 Ghz there is 2.9 dB of loss in 1 meter of cable.   That is nearly 1/2 your power going into heat. Note - the loss specs are a VSWR of 1.3 max so unless load and source are well matched coax loss will be even greater.

  Belden specs their RG-178 only to 1 Ghz but max power handling at that freq is only 66 watts.  After all the center conductor is only 30 AWG.   

I used a lot of 178 for small signal work at HF and VHF in DIY projects (half way through my second 1000ft roll).  It is GREAT for small signal work and runs up to say 5 meters at up to maybe 100Mhz but I  think 30 seconds with 500 watts at 2.4 Ghz will convert 1 meter of 178 into an open circuit - which would be bad for your source too.

Herman

I plan to use EcoFlex15 PLUS coax (specs attached) unless anyone knows of anything better?

0.149dB loss / mtr at 2.45GHz & 350W capacity.

That is good stuff.   I have seen it used and worked with it on both L band and Ku band (short run) projects - Only advice is to watch the minimum bend radius carefully.  I would use the 15 cycle bend radius rather than the single time bend radius just to be on the safe side.  To tight and it will either short circuit or your loss will go up radically (and the effect may not be seen right away.

Herman

Thanks. Will follow the 15 bend radius even though it will only be bent once and then clamped to the rotary table surface, where possible, as will all the other wiring.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 01:35 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 frobnicat

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 518
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 151
Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

A lot more effort and reputation of advanced concepts research could be wasted on illusory claims. There is ongoing outright intellectual dishonesty with the proponents insisting on selling an effect enabling extravagant deep space deltaVs at clearly overunity discount energetic costs and insisting on non overunity of the effect.

...
Assuming a 1N/kW EMDrive could power wise scale to 100N/100kW and using 20 of these on a 90t crewed ship could do at 0.0023g:

LEO to Pluto low orbit (40AUs), 12.4 months.
LEO to Mars low orbit, at min 60mkm, 37 days.
LEO to Mars low orbit, at avg 225mkm, 78 days.

So with just 100N/100kW EMDrives, the entire solar system would be open to human exploration and colonisation. Would still need propellant based rockets to Taxis from low orbit >< the surface.

Going straight trajectory for simplicity : 0.0023g (2.25e-2 m/s) for 6.2 month (1.6e7 s) is a deltaV (at half travel) of 360 km/s.
2MW generator power for 6.2 month : cost = 3.2e13 J  (32 terajoules)
90 t at 360km/s, .5*m*v : benefit = 5.8e15 J (5800 terajoules)

180 times more kinetic energy out than energy that was put in. 

This is not something we could do even if solar system were paved from Sun to Pluto and we had tyres to pull on that ground at 100% efficiency. So this extravagant claim of Pluto at 12.4 month is not dependant on cheap momentum, it is entirely, utterly, irremediably dependant on cheap energy.

This is something we could do if solar system were crossed by a conveyor belt that happen to move from sun outward to Pluto at above 360km/s and our ship could drag on that flow. Solar wind fits the bill, but it is not of high enough density (and clearly can't explain results down in earth labs). If EM drive is possible and enables such deep space transit times, then the problem is not that it respects CoE or not, the problem is how it could respect CoE when we see the required energy leverage ratio : this makes it closer to sailing than driving. And no proponent claiming both those transit times (implicitly overunity energy) and respect of CoE have ever cared to publish the slightest remark or experimental sidereal time check about a possible preferred frame to sail on (heliocentric ?  galactocentric ? CMBcentric ?). They clearly don't believe in such possibility despite being the only way to reconcile both short transit times and serious CoE (short of plain ZPF energy extraction).

...
The image I posted was from the 188 run of the SPR Demonstrator rotary test. Same test run as the video.

What I read from that rotary test experimental data is there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing. Shawyer has explained this happens because acceleration shifts the cavity resonant frequency, Q drops from some of the EM wave cavity energy being converted into kinetic, increasing cavity losses, Force generated drops, stopping overunity operation.

Shawyer has been saying this for years and in the graphic we can see it actually happening.

Sorry but there is no overunity as multiple acceleration related effects inside the cavity stop OU happening.

So why in hell are you never ever applying those purported OU limiting effect with mission profiles ? How can you decently say "1N/kW => Pluto in a year" in a post and "there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing" the following post ? Please apply those purported OU protecting effect in the sold mission profiles. Otherwise it's like saying that your Unicorn can find shortcuts through fairyland in one post, and saying that of course fairies don't exist the next one. Hope you understand why this feels dishonest, and why a number of contributors will always strongly object as long as such canards are sold as perfectly all right.

Offline rq3

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 226
  • USA
  • Liked: 253
  • Likes Given: 41
SeeShells: notice

<< to my specs ....and N2 filled >> chirality and nitrongen inversion at room temperature

Pure N2 in my cavity can convert to chiral molecules???????????
Are you using polymer O Rings ?

Was planning on using space qualified (no outgassing) silicon O rings.

I've never heard of a silicon "O" ring. If there is such an animal, it would be fantastically brittle.

If you actually mean "silicone", they may be low outgassing and "space qualified" but will be VERY gas permeable. Perhaps almost as bad as polytetrafluoroethylene.

You might want to contact a company like Chomerics, who specializes in conductive "O" rings for applications like this.

Good luck.
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 02:19 PM by rq3 »

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
Proper scientific study is small steps with valid results. Hyperbole like heavy lifters, mass production and pluto missions are, well...hyperbole. Yes, I am a sales and marketing expert with a very technical background. I would humbly suggest we leave sales & marketing/blue sky plans to another forum. Not that we can't deam, however...
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 11:52 PM by rfmwguy »

Offline TheTraveller

Fission reactor? Heat radiators? Why use any fuel at all? Just power the main engines with a rotary overunity EmDrive power unit  8)

A lot of us are axiomatically opposed to EM Drives being both a real effect and a free energy device, and insist that it must have some sort of over-unity protection mechanism. I'm not very good at following the math that's been sent back and forth, so I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that a lot of time, electronic breath, and effort is being wasted arguing around the acceptance or refusal of this axiom. Without a concrete demonstration of a working drive, I'm not sure we'll know if there is a mechanism that prevents over-unity or not. I'm certainly not under the impression that anyone's going to be convinced by talking about it some more.  :-\

A lot more effort and reputation of advanced concepts research could be wasted on illusory claims. There is ongoing outright intellectual dishonesty with the proponents insisting on selling an effect enabling extravagant deep space deltaVs at clearly overunity discount energetic costs and insisting on non overunity of the effect.

...
Assuming a 1N/kW EMDrive could power wise scale to 100N/100kW and using 20 of these on a 90t crewed ship could do at 0.0023g:

LEO to Pluto low orbit (40AUs), 12.4 months.
LEO to Mars low orbit, at min 60mkm, 37 days.
LEO to Mars low orbit, at avg 225mkm, 78 days.

So with just 100N/100kW EMDrives, the entire solar system would be open to human exploration and colonisation. Would still need propellant based rockets to Taxis from low orbit >< the surface.

Going straight trajectory for simplicity : 0.0023g (2.25e-2 m/s) for 6.2 month (1.6e7 s) is a deltaV (at half travel) of 360 km/s.
2MW generator power for 6.2 month : cost = 3.2e13 J  (32 terajoules)
90 t at 360km/s, .5*m*v : benefit = 5.8e15 J (5800 terajoules)

180 times more kinetic energy out than energy that was put in. 

This is not something we could do even if solar system were paved from Sun to Pluto and we had tyres to pull on that ground at 100% efficiency. So this extravagant claim of Pluto at 12.4 month is not dependant on cheap momentum, it is entirely, utterly, irremediably dependant on cheap energy.

This is something we could do if solar system were crossed by a conveyor belt that happen to move from sun outward to Pluto at above 360km/s and our ship could drag on that flow. Solar wind fits the bill, but it is not of high enough density (and clearly can't explain results down in earth labs). If EM drive is possible and enables such deep space transit times, then the problem is not that it respects CoE or not, the problem is how it could respect CoE when we see the required energy leverage ratio : this makes it closer to sailing than driving. And no proponent claiming both those transit times (implicitly overunity energy) and respect of CoE have ever cared to publish the slightest remark or experimental sidereal time check about a possible preferred frame to sail on (heliocentric ?  galactocentric ? CMBcentric ?). They clearly don't believe in such possibility despite being the only way to reconcile both short transit times and serious CoE (short of plain ZPF energy extraction).

...
The image I posted was from the 188 run of the SPR Demonstrator rotary test. Same test run as the video.

What I read from that rotary test experimental data is there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing. Shawyer has explained this happens because acceleration shifts the cavity resonant frequency, Q drops from some of the EM wave cavity energy being converted into kinetic, increasing cavity losses, Force generated drops, stopping overunity operation.

Shawyer has been saying this for years and in the graphic we can see it actually happening.

Sorry but there is no overunity as multiple acceleration related effects inside the cavity stop OU happening.

So why in hell are you never ever applying those purported OU limiting effect with mission profiles ? How can you decently say "1N/kW => Pluto in a year" in a post and "there is no overunity as magnetron Power is dropping as Velocity is increasing" the following post ? Please apply those purported OU protecting effect in the sold mission profiles. Otherwise it's like saying that your Unicorn can find shortcuts through fairyland in one post, and saying that of course fairies don't exist the next one. Hope you understand why this feels dishonest, and why a number of contributors will always strongly object as long as such canards are sold as perfectly all right.

Glad you read and enjoyed the data.

Hope to keep you further entertained when I publish my rotary test data.

BTW after careful examination of Prof Yang's experimental data, it would seem 4N/kW is doable.

Click here and scroll down for Dr. Whites 4N/kW solar system transit times:
http://emdrive.wiki/Potential_EMDrive_solar_system_explorer_ship
"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

SeeShells: notice

<< to my specs ....and N2 filled >> chirality and nitrongen inversion at room temperature

Pure N2 in my cavity can convert to chiral molecules???????????
Are you using polymer O Rings ?

Was planning on using space qualified (no outgassing) silicon O rings.

I've never heard of a silicon "O" ring. If there is such an animal, it would be fantastically brittle.

If you actually mean "silicone", they may be low outgassing and "space qualified" but will be VERY gas permeable. Perhaps almost as bad as polytetrafluoroethylene.

You might want to contact a company like Chomerics, who specializes in conductive "O" rings for applications like this.

Good luck.

So quick to attach! Apologies, dropped the e.

Sometime my big fingers on a small mobile phone screen gens typos or my old eyes miss errors.

Will probably be a gasket. Have a few mates in the aerospace industry that are working on the best material to provide good electrical conductivity and good sealing, with min outgassing using N2 inside the frustum at 1/2 atmo pressure.

You have any suggestions?
"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: 5835
  • USA
  • Liked: 5915
  • Likes Given: 5253
Proper scientific study is small steps with valid results. Hyperbole like heavy lifters, mass production and pluto missions are, well...hypobole. Yes, I am a sales and marketing expert with a very technical background. I would humbly suggest we leave sales & marketing/blue sky plans to another forum. Not that we can't deam, however...
The big difference between Internet Forums and sales and marketing in the real commercial world is that in an Internet Forum sales and marketing hyperbole can be done posting anonymously in various forums, so when the dreams of honest followers and believers that have invested their time in such hopes are eventually dashed, there will be no loss of reputation of the anonymous poster, who can then quietly disappear and assume another moniker.

In the stock market it is well known that financial message boards are full of anonymous posters that use financial message board forums to "pump and dump" stocks playing on the hope and fear of honest stock market investors:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump
« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 03:05 PM by Rodal »

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
  • Liked: 2681
  • Likes Given: 1124
Proper scientific study is small steps with valid results. Hyperbole like heavy lifters, mass production and pluto missions are, well...hypobole. Yes, I am a sales and marketing expert with a very technical background. I would humbly suggest we leave sales & marketing/blue sky plans to another forum. Not that we can't deam, however...
The big difference with sales and marketing in the real commercial world is that in an Internet Forum sales and marketing hyperbole are done posting anonymously in various forums, so when the dreams of honest followers and believers that have invested their time in such hopes are eventually dashed, there will be no loss of reputation of the anonymous poster, who can then quietly disappear and assume another moniker.

In the stock market it is well known that financial message boards are full of anonymous posters that use the forum to "pump and dump" stocks playing on the hope and fear of honest stock market investors.
Well said, Doc. One I outted my name with my prelim paper, I have a whole new appreciation for keeping it real, so to speak...you, shell, and several other serious scientific types have done the same. Bravo.

Offline Notsosureofit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 656
  • Liked: 704
  • Likes Given: 1362
FYI

Roughly 8 X 10^8 Nm/kg is the minimum needed from Earth orbit to Pluto's ..

Just passing thru so maybe not relevant ?
 

Offline tidux

  • Member
  • Posts: 11
  • Sol III
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 3
Hello,

I've been tinkering around with meep on Debian, and I have a procedure for installing meep 1.3 on Debian 8, which packages the older meep 1.2 by default:

# apt-get install h5utils openmpi-bin
# apt-get build-dep meep-openmpi
This installs everything we'll need for dependencies, but by default ./configure won't find libhdf5, so we need to do this.
# cd /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/
# ln -s libhdf5_openmpi.so libhdf5.so
# export CPPFLAGS="-I/usr/include/hdf5/openmpi"
Now we can head back to our source-building directory and get on with it.
# wget http://ab-initio.mit.edu/meep/meep-1.3.tar.gz
# cd meep-1.3
# ./configure --with-mpi --prefix=$HOME
Obviously this assumes $HOME is in your path, you can install it wherever.
# make
# make install


If anyone has meep files that they lack the time to process on their own hardware, I have a reasonably powerful system that can crank through a 12-thread run of NSF-1701.ctl in about 40 minutes, as well as a web server (nginx) running so I can package the output files (h5, csv, png, whatever) and provide a link.  I'm a sysadmin by trade, and the last physics I took was Newton, so I don't yet know enough to write my own Scheme scripts for meep and get any meaningful output.

Yes, for those wondering, I'm also tidux on /r/emdrive.

« Last Edit: 07/18/2015 03:20 PM by tidux »

Tags: