excuse me but isn't the laser thing is an accomplished fact now? A few years ago there was a couple of related articles on a desktop accelerator that generated electrons and positrons then separated them with magnets. http://phys.org/news/2013-06-physicists-tabletop-antimatter-gun.htmlhttp://phys.org/news/2013-06-particle-tabletop-chapter-science.htmlhere is one of them and then there were two more. the third talks about (the rapidly approaching future ability) using colliding laser beams to create matter out of photons.http://phys.org/news/2014-05-scientists-year-quest.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19327-lasers-could-make-virtual-particles-real.html
Quote from: Star-Drive on 04/10/2015 03:38 amDr. Rodal:As promised, find attached a few related papers from work. As to the rest of your and Mulletron's concerns over the Eagleworks evolving theoretical musings on the EM-Drive propulsion topic, I leave you with Boyd Bushman's, (was senior scientist at LM/FW, now retired and passed-on), admonition to me when I first met him back in 2000 when discussing Jim Woodward's Mach-Effect work with Boyd's boss, "Follow the data, theory be dammed!" We intend to do just that, no matter where it might take us.Best, Paul M.Paul, Thanks so much for taking the time to dig and post these papers. The new paper by Bush (2015) from MIT, showing that one can model quantum statistics hydrodynamically, is outstanding, very clearly written. ...
Dr. Rodal:As promised, find attached a few related papers from work. As to the rest of your and Mulletron's concerns over the Eagleworks evolving theoretical musings on the EM-Drive propulsion topic, I leave you with Boyd Bushman's, (was senior scientist at LM/FW, now retired and passed-on), admonition to me when I first met him back in 2000 when discussing Jim Woodward's Mach-Effect work with Boyd's boss, "Follow the data, theory be dammed!" We intend to do just that, no matter where it might take us.Best, Paul M.
Tried to search for answer, could not find...my apologies if already discussed:Has there been an accurate mass comparison on the dielectric (PTFE et al) prior to and after RF excitation?
Quote from: Rodal on 04/10/2015 12:14 pmQuote from: Star-Drive on 04/10/2015 03:38 amDr. Rodal:As promised, find attached a few related papers from work. As to the rest of your and Mulletron's concerns over the Eagleworks evolving theoretical musings on the EM-Drive propulsion topic, I leave you with Boyd Bushman's, (was senior scientist at LM/FW, now retired and passed-on), admonition to me when I first met him back in 2000 when discussing Jim Woodward's Mach-Effect work with Boyd's boss, "Follow the data, theory be dammed!" We intend to do just that, no matter where it might take us.Best, Paul M.Paul, Thanks so much for taking the time to dig and post these papers. The new paper by Bush (2015) from MIT, showing that one can model quantum statistics hydrodynamically, is outstanding, very clearly written. ...Great YouTube video by Harris and Bush at MIT. Watch that droplet ride its own guiding pilot wave, "magically" hovering over the fluid (can you describe what's responsible for its motion ? : instability due to nonlinear standing waves):The great (7th duc) de Broglie, Noble Prize in Physics, recognized 90 years after his Solvay presentation: a triumph of creative imagination
Thanks for the welcome. I've been around high power RF for many years and have seen low temp PTFE issues at relatively low temps. Specifically, changes in capacitance, yeilding center frequency drift in tchebychev bandpass filters using PTFE tape and discs. Outgassing in hermetically sealed tubes were noticed. Could be totally unrelated but...maybe not.
Quote from: rfmwguy on 04/11/2015 03:30 pmThanks for the welcome. I've been around high power RF for many years and have seen low temp PTFE issues at relatively low temps. Specifically, changes in capacitance, yeilding center frequency drift in tchebychev bandpass filters using PTFE tape and discs. Outgassing in hermetically sealed tubes were noticed. Could be totally unrelated but...maybe not.Agreed, outgassing (due to microwave heating of water vapor previously trapped in the HDPE or PTFE polymer dielectric) would be something to watch out for in a vacuum environment at significantly lower temperatures (near 200 deg F) than pyrolysis (>700 deg F).
Quote from: Rodal on 04/10/2015 12:14 pmQuote from: Star-Drive on 04/10/2015 03:38 amDr. Rodal:As promised, find attached a few related papers from work. As to the rest of your and Mulletron's concerns over the Eagleworks evolving theoretical musings on the EM-Drive propulsion topic, I leave you with Boyd Bushman's, (was senior scientist at LM/FW, now retired and passed-on), admonition to me when I first met him back in 2000 when discussing Jim Woodward's Mach-Effect work with Boyd's boss, "Follow the data, theory be dammed!" We intend to do just that, no matter where it might take us.Best, Paul M.Paul, Thanks so much for taking the time to dig and post these papers. The new paper by Bush (2015) from MIT, showing that one can model quantum statistics hydrodynamically, is outstanding, very clearly written. ...Great YouTube video by Harris and Bush at MIT. Watch that droplet ride its own guiding pilot wave, "magically" hovering over the fluid (can you describe what's responsible for its motion ? : instability due to nonlinear standing waves):...
There's one thing that has bothered me about virtual particle pairs popping in and out of existence:When besaid pairs, for instance, pop into existence in a gravitational field like the Earth's, they do exist for a minute time span. During that time span, they are 'real' due to borrowed energy from the quantum vacuum. But real particles with mass experience an acceleration in a gravitational field and thus gain momentum. There are two cases to consider, of which only one should be correct:1) The pair's particles react to gravity the same way and experience a momentum gain in the same direction. When they pop out of existence again, the gained momentum 'magically' disappears with the pair and CoM is broken. Momentum must not simply 'disappear' (in lack for a better word). I read somewhere that CoM is not applicable to virtual particles (can't find the link), but still this doesn't seem right.Quote from: DustinTheWindInteresting line of thought. What if when imaginary particles become real we measure them in gravity having downward momentum, they accelerate, then go back to imaginary. Later we do the same experiment lower in the gravity field and they become real but this time they have greater momentum, accelerate, then go imaginary again. We might then suspect the quantum vacuum was already in motion and accelerating before they came into existence. Maybe the rate they pop in and out of existence determines the drag they have on normal matter? In relation to the cavity then what if the particles become real, we give them a shove, then they become non-real and are allowed to exit the cavity by way of the quantum vacuum. Could that momentum then be imparted to the vacuum? Would we measure time space waves from it? 2) The anti-particle gains a momentum opposite to the particle's momentum due to repulsive forces on an anti-particle within a gravitational field, and so the force and momentum vectors add up to Zero at any instance in time. CoM is maintained.What do you think?Quote from: DustinTheWindMatter that was repelled from gravity would remind me of negative energy density. I think that would be the stuff like the Alcubierre warp bubble where it shows negative energy density on one side and positive on the other to make the ship go forward by warp. Maybe gravity propulsion? Might be related to this, link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass, "Runaway motion" top paragraph, "Although no particles are known to have negative mass..." towards the bottom, "Hence Bondi pointed out ..."<-- is he talking about the warp bubble effect?Under this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass under "Gravitational interaction of antimatter" it states, "The overwhelming consensus among physicists is that antimatter has positive mass and should be affected by gravity just like normal matter. Direct experiments on neutral antihydrogen have not detected any difference between the gravitational interaction of antimatter, compared to normal matter.[19]"As far as I knew I thought imaginary particles were matter and anti-matter. One big mystery is where did all the anti-mater in the universe go. I guess I can't say that they have measured the gravitational attraction of anti-matter yet that I know of though wiki suggests in section, "Gravitational interaction of antimatter" the "Bubble chamber experiments" as an arrow that suggests they have positive mass though don't ask me how conclusive that is.
Interesting line of thought. What if when imaginary particles become real we measure them in gravity having downward momentum, they accelerate, then go back to imaginary. Later we do the same experiment lower in the gravity field and they become real but this time they have greater momentum, accelerate, then go imaginary again. We might then suspect the quantum vacuum was already in motion and accelerating before they came into existence. Maybe the rate they pop in and out of existence determines the drag they have on normal matter? In relation to the cavity then what if the particles become real, we give them a shove, then they become non-real and are allowed to exit the cavity by way of the quantum vacuum. Could that momentum then be imparted to the vacuum? Would we measure time space waves from it?
Matter that was repelled from gravity would remind me of negative energy density. I think that would be the stuff like the Alcubierre warp bubble where it shows negative energy density on one side and positive on the other to make the ship go forward by warp. Maybe gravity propulsion? Might be related to this, link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass, "Runaway motion" top paragraph, "Although no particles are known to have negative mass..." towards the bottom, "Hence Bondi pointed out ..."<-- is he talking about the warp bubble effect?Under this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass under "Gravitational interaction of antimatter" it states, "The overwhelming consensus among physicists is that antimatter has positive mass and should be affected by gravity just like normal matter. Direct experiments on neutral antihydrogen have not detected any difference between the gravitational interaction of antimatter, compared to normal matter.[19]"As far as I knew I thought imaginary particles were matter and anti-matter. One big mystery is where did all the anti-mater in the universe go. I guess I can't say that they have measured the gravitational attraction of anti-matter yet that I know of though wiki suggests in section, "Gravitational interaction of antimatter" the "Bubble chamber experiments" as an arrow that suggests they have positive mass though don't ask me how conclusive that is.
@dustinthewind:About creating an ExB = S Poynting vector.. wouldn't it be much easier to do this if one takes a circular electromagnet with iron core that has a relatively big air gap, and puts a highly charged plate capacitor on opposite sides of the air gap? The resulting space should be 'filled' with Poynting vectors ExB that can interact with the theorized QV plasma, which is supposed to accelerate the QV plasma and in turn accelerate the contraption.Does that make sense, or am I missing something relevant concerning how a QV thruster should work?EDIT: I made a drawing of a contraption I call 'Poynting vector field generator' and attached it to this message. If there's something wrong with the drawing, please tell.EDIT: Sorry for the mix of wire frame and solid view. I was a bit lazy to tinker with the drawing program for dotted lines to indicate hidden edges ;-) .
Quote from: CW on 04/12/2015 01:35 pm@dustinthewind:About creating an ExB = S Poynting vector.. wouldn't it be much easier to do this if one takes a circular electromagnet with iron core that has a relatively big air gap, and puts a highly charged plate capacitor on opposite sides of the air gap? The resulting space should be 'filled' with Poynting vectors ExB that can interact with the theorized QV plasma, which is supposed to accelerate the QV plasma and in turn accelerate the contraption.Does that make sense, or am I missing something relevant concerning how a QV thruster should work?EDIT: I made a drawing of a contraption I call 'Poynting vector field generator' and attached it to this message. If there's something wrong with the drawing, please tell.EDIT: Sorry for the mix of wire frame and solid view. I was a bit lazy to tinker with the drawing program for dotted lines to indicate hidden edges ;-) .A Poynting vector is not a field. In your drawing the Poynting vector is dispersed in all directions because the energy flow is entirely due to thermal loss. (DC case) If there are AC drives to the capacitor and gap magnet then some energy is transferred to near field RF radiation. Nothing exotic happens here. The em fields just combine.
@dustinthewind:Hmm.. so if we go by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass as referred by you and if we assume that the 'overwhelming consensus' is that antimatter shows the same gravitational behavior as does matter, then my case 1) should be correct and CoM be broken for matter-antimatter pairs popping in and out of existence within gravitational fields. Either this is true, or CoM does not apply for those pairs. Hmm..
A Poynting vector is not a field. In your drawing the Poynting vector is dispersed in all directions because the energy flow is entirely due to thermal loss. (DC case) If there are AC drives to the capacitor and gap magnet then some energy is transferred to near field RF radiation. Nothing exotic happens here. The em fields just combine.
Quote from: zen-in on 04/12/2015 04:30 pmA Poynting vector is not a field. In your drawing the Poynting vector is dispersed in all directions because the energy flow is entirely due to thermal loss. (DC case) If there are AC drives to the capacitor and gap magnet then some energy is transferred to near field RF radiation. Nothing exotic happens here. The em fields just combine.I don't get your point.1. CW's drawing does not show a Poynting vector dispersed in all directions, but a very directional vector going from the left to the right in the picture.2. That Poynting vector S = ExB actually gives a Lorentz force F = q(E + vxB) when electric charges are able to flow within the electric field. If the sum of those electric charges in movement are able to create an electric current in a continuous charge distribution, i.e. with a current density J due to the charge density ρ, the Lorentz Force is then a "3D volumetric force", accelerating all electric charges in the same direction whatever their sign, and also the neutral atoms in the plasma with them, through collisions. This is the basis of magnetohydrodynamics applied to propulsion (MHD accelerators), sometimes called magnetoplasmadynamic (MPD) thrusters when the accelerating fluid is a ionized gas.Really I'm not sure if Harold White's idea of pushing upon virtual particles from the quantum vacuum with MHD (Lorentz forces) as if it was a real plasma is the answer. But I second CW's question about a setup like an MPD thruster, with crossed E and B fields. Applying an orthogonal magnetic field with an electromagnet would considerably enhance the propulsive Lorentz force. If I remember correctly, White's first Q-thruster (The DC version of Woodward's first Mach-Lorentz Thruster or MLT, that ran on AC) was based on that concept but was a failure -except while being powered on and off (so the DC current would transiently become AC, as per Woodward). White's Quantum Vacuum Fluctuation (QVF) conjecture does not need AC currents, only DC, contrary to Woodward's Mach Effect (ME) conjecture. Maybe Paul could clarify all this.
Feynmans's species of antiparticle might be alice matter AKA Mirror matter? If so it is theoretically possible to get some. http://phys.org/news/2012-06-neutrons-parallel-world.htmlhttp://www.technologyreview.com/view/426676/how-neutrons-might-escape-into-another-universe/