Quote from: X_RaY on 08/05/2015 07:34 PMQuote from: Rodal on 08/05/2015 07:22 PMQuote from: mwvp on 08/05/2015 07:15 PM...I'm not sure its proper to speak of "photon gas" in our context. ...Teaching the photon gas in introductory physicsHarvey S. Leffahttp://www.cpp.edu/~hsleff/PhotonGasAJP.pdfQuote from: LeffaAn important related point is that photons are everywhere.That is, because all matter radiates, it is literally impossibleto have a region of space that is free of photons. In thissense, the photon gas has the distinction of being ubiquitous,another point that can pique the intellectual curiosity of students. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382616#msg1382616note point 2have to study your gerat pdf link rodal Excellent! Thank you for reminding me of that post

Quote from: Rodal on 08/05/2015 07:22 PMQuote from: mwvp on 08/05/2015 07:15 PM...I'm not sure its proper to speak of "photon gas" in our context. ...Teaching the photon gas in introductory physicsHarvey S. Leffahttp://www.cpp.edu/~hsleff/PhotonGasAJP.pdfQuote from: LeffaAn important related point is that photons are everywhere.That is, because all matter radiates, it is literally impossibleto have a region of space that is free of photons. In thissense, the photon gas has the distinction of being ubiquitous,another point that can pique the intellectual curiosity of students. http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1382616#msg1382616note point 2have to study your gerat pdf link rodal

Quote from: mwvp on 08/05/2015 07:15 PM...I'm not sure its proper to speak of "photon gas" in our context. ...Teaching the photon gas in introductory physicsHarvey S. Leffahttp://www.cpp.edu/~hsleff/PhotonGasAJP.pdfQuote from: LeffaAn important related point is that photons are everywhere.That is, because all matter radiates, it is literally impossibleto have a region of space that is free of photons. In thissense, the photon gas has the distinction of being ubiquitous,another point that can pique the intellectual curiosity of students.

...I'm not sure its proper to speak of "photon gas" in our context. ...

An important related point is that photons are everywhere.That is, because all matter radiates, it is literally impossibleto have a region of space that is free of photons. In thissense, the photon gas has the distinction of being ubiquitous,another point that can pique the intellectual curiosity of students.

...The paper do not offers that ad hoc but what do you think about the following?Can S increase in direction of the small end because the photon gas heats up based on the lower volume and decrease in direction of the big end?On the other hand, a hotter side absorb and emit photons faster I am not sure jet, may be i need a little bit help to clarify

Actually, a self-accelerating system does exist in theory, and it operates in the absence of any external fields, and it exhausts nothing.Can anyone guess? (it's more fun this way)

Quote from: deltaMass on 08/05/2015 06:04 PMThere have been quite a few attempts to recast basic physics in terms of some sort of vortex theory. Victor Schauberger springs to mind for example. The mathematics is replete with curl operators as expected. As far as I know none of these has succeeded in displacing fundamental mainstream views.That's not to say that thinking that way is unproductive. Roger Penrose's "twistor" construct has produced many deep and probably useful insights in modern theory. Even Dirac, way back, had his own "spinor". But that's not really a vortex.Thanks for the references to prior stuff. Can't seem to find a lot of links on EM vortices that don't involve Bigfoot or Time Travel Best I can determine, there's nothing precluding photons from sinking down the perverbial drain with the exception that gravity has a much weaker impact on a photon that it does a water molecule for your typical vortex. Vortices can be shaped outside of gravity via deflection, so here's where I'm stuck for now.

There have been quite a few attempts to recast basic physics in terms of some sort of vortex theory. Victor Schauberger springs to mind for example. The mathematics is replete with curl operators as expected. As far as I know none of these has succeeded in displacing fundamental mainstream views.That's not to say that thinking that way is unproductive. Roger Penrose's "twistor" construct has produced many deep and probably useful insights in modern theory. Even Dirac, way back, had his own "spinor". But that's not really a vortex.

Quote from: teitur on 08/05/2015 06:04 PMI just watched "Back to the Future 2" and there they travel to october 21, 2015 where there are hoverboards and a lot of flying cars, so you guys still have two and a half months Well, they had better hurry. The completion is already here!! <snip>

I just watched "Back to the Future 2" and there they travel to october 21, 2015 where there are hoverboards and a lot of flying cars, so you guys still have two and a half months

Quote from: SeeShells on 08/05/2015 02:34 PMQuote from: Rodal on 08/05/2015 02:02 PMQuote from: WarpTech on 08/05/2015 01:51 PM...I doubt it will fix it. The "rotation" looks more like simply reflections bouncing side to side, around a circle. 3 antenna will just have 3 overlapping sets of random reflections. We shall see...ToddTo solve it, it is necessary to understand the fundamental mode shape one wants to excite: how the amplitude of the mode shape is supposed to vary along the intrinsic spherical coordinate system (certainly not the extrinsic Cartesian coordinate system). The variation is governed by Associated Legendre Functions in the spherical polar angle, Spherical Bessel in the spherical radii, and Harmonic in the spherical azimuthal angle. The Cartesian system, and anything based on it is unnatural to the physical problem.Dr. Rodal, I had to read that three times to pack that comment in....shellOK, maybe this is better:It is very difficult to excite a Transverse mode by trying to excite the circumferential field because 1) such attempts result in asymmetries: non-symmetric fields, and 2) The excitation has to be done with a precision as to location, and orientation that is usually impractical. Both of these problems are due to the fact that the transverse circumferential field is at the periphery of the cavity, and that it is difficult to excite a circumferential field with an antenna defined in rectilinear Cartesian axes.This is what Alesini, from CERN advises:The best thing is to excite the longitudinal component of the mode shape:The longitudinal axis is readily aligned with one of the Cartesian axes.A) For the TM modes, excite the Electric longitudinal component by using a dipole antenna oriented perpendicular to the longitudinal Electric field. Aero was very successful at doing this both with rfmwguy and Yang/Shell by placing a dipole antenna with its center at the axis of axi-symmetry of the truncated cone, perpendicular to the axis, at either end. Please observe in the image below for TM113 in Yang/Shell that the antenna has to be long enough because there is NO electric field along the central axis itselfB) For the TE modes, excite the Magnetic longitudinal component by using a loop antenna oriented such that the magnetic field goes through its loop. Please observe in the image below for TE012 in Yang/Shell that the loop antenna should be positioned on the axis of axi-symmetry because the magnetic field is strongest there. Position the loop where the vector field is strongest (orange-red)Observe that for TM113, the electric field is strongest near the small base, that is why placing the antenna at the small end was so successful to excite the mode.Observe that for TE012 the electric field is strongest at some distance from the end.See attachments

Quote from: Rodal on 08/05/2015 02:02 PMQuote from: WarpTech on 08/05/2015 01:51 PM...I doubt it will fix it. The "rotation" looks more like simply reflections bouncing side to side, around a circle. 3 antenna will just have 3 overlapping sets of random reflections. We shall see...ToddTo solve it, it is necessary to understand the fundamental mode shape one wants to excite: how the amplitude of the mode shape is supposed to vary along the intrinsic spherical coordinate system (certainly not the extrinsic Cartesian coordinate system). The variation is governed by Associated Legendre Functions in the spherical polar angle, Spherical Bessel in the spherical radii, and Harmonic in the spherical azimuthal angle. The Cartesian system, and anything based on it is unnatural to the physical problem.Dr. Rodal, I had to read that three times to pack that comment in....shell

Quote from: WarpTech on 08/05/2015 01:51 PM...I doubt it will fix it. The "rotation" looks more like simply reflections bouncing side to side, around a circle. 3 antenna will just have 3 overlapping sets of random reflections. We shall see...ToddTo solve it, it is necessary to understand the fundamental mode shape one wants to excite: how the amplitude of the mode shape is supposed to vary along the intrinsic spherical coordinate system (certainly not the extrinsic Cartesian coordinate system). The variation is governed by Associated Legendre Functions in the spherical polar angle, Spherical Bessel in the spherical radii, and Harmonic in the spherical azimuthal angle. The Cartesian system, and anything based on it is unnatural to the physical problem.

...I doubt it will fix it. The "rotation" looks more like simply reflections bouncing side to side, around a circle. 3 antenna will just have 3 overlapping sets of random reflections. We shall see...Todd

Well done. The system consists of an object of negative mass next to an object of ordinary, positive mass.Another way to do this would be if you could vary mass without incurring any local back-reaction, as Woodward proposes. In this case, the algorithm is "push heavy, pull light".

Imagine a rigid container divided internally into two compartments. One side contains high pressure gas and the other side contains vacuum.Does it move?No, eppur si no muove!I hope this helps with your "photon gas" musings.

...I was all over the place trying to figure out what was going on with the "Square Loop" that I thought aero used in this latest presentation of meep off the sidewall. That's why I said a thank you to aero and imbfan a page or so ago for getting the square loop going. Now I know it was the snub monopole this makes more sense.ShellShell

But there is another aspect I believe. Resonance shapes a locally stable 4-dimensional "body" of energy. 4-dimensional because we have real and imaginary parts that depend on locality.(I do remember calculating these field forms back in college and I was always flabbergasted about their weird physical forms.)Now, when we discuss Conservation of Energy we work under the assumption of a 3-dimensional space.Hence when we bounce energy in a closed system back and forth, both directions should cancel out. But what happens if we expand that thought to 4 dimensions (add the imaginary part)?If we could physically shape a frustum complementary to our energy "body" in a way that exposes its surface only in areas of the real part in one direction and the imaginary part in the other direction, should we get a "thrust"?We would not need new particles. We would only work with complex (real and imaginary) physical concepts we already know.Is such construct even possible?