Quote from: TheTraveller on 12/11/2018 02:22 amEnjoy the latest www.emdrive.com newsQuoteDecember 2018A short Technical Note on Thrust performance versus Load conditions of EmDrive Thrusters is given here. The note explains why EmDrive complies with both the Law of Conservation of Momentum, as well as the Law of Conservation of Energy.Technical Note on Emdrive Thrust v Loadhttp://www.emdrive.com/thrustvload.pdfTT,Most of your argument just doesn’t make sense. Still a single sentence from early in the link above seems to suggest I have missed something very important... These have been repeatedly observed during experimental work extending over many years, and under many different test conditions, including reports of in orbit tests.Where is the data from these, “…in orbit tests.”?
Enjoy the latest www.emdrive.com newsQuoteDecember 2018A short Technical Note on Thrust performance versus Load conditions of EmDrive Thrusters is given here. The note explains why EmDrive complies with both the Law of Conservation of Momentum, as well as the Law of Conservation of Energy.Technical Note on Emdrive Thrust v Loadhttp://www.emdrive.com/thrustvload.pdf
December 2018A short Technical Note on Thrust performance versus Load conditions of EmDrive Thrusters is given here. The note explains why EmDrive complies with both the Law of Conservation of Momentum, as well as the Law of Conservation of Energy.Technical Note on Emdrive Thrust v Loadhttp://www.emdrive.com/thrustvload.pdf
including reports of in orbit tests.[/b]Where is the data from these, “…in orbit tests.”?
Mike McCulloch's article on "propellantless horizon drives" (including hypotheses about the EmDrive and Mach Effect thrusters) has been recently accepted for publication in the Journal of Space Exploration. Here is the preprint: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329754104_Propellant-less_Propulsion_from_Quantised_Inertia
Pretty sure he means "conductor of asymmetric geometry".
Quote from: flux_capacitor on 12/18/2018 01:50 pmMike McCulloch's article on "propellantless horizon drives" (including hypotheses about the EmDrive and Mach Effect thrusters) has been recently accepted for publication in the Journal of Space Exploration. Here is the preprint: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329754104_Propellant-less_Propulsion_from_Quantised_Inertia[…]Possibly a worse infraction from the standpoint of academic behavior is an inaccurate citation of Tajmar. The cited paper is a purely theoretical one, and the value of the supposedly observed measurement is apparently taken from the theoretical model that is the worst fit to the experimental data from Fearn et al referenced by Tajmar. This complete misrepresentation is made worse by the fact that Tajmar has in fact taken experimental data, but there was no real measured force. (The actual report from Tajmar identifies an error in the setup, (refining the setup was the main point) and if there was any real signal, the expectation was that it was too small to detect due to the error present.)
Here's what Mike McCulloch said to me in email, posted here with permission:"1. I did not cherry pick. The publications in this area are usually non verycomprehensive and those were the only papers I could find with all the information Ineeded in them.2. The early data of Shawyer has not be falsified at all. Tajmar's emdrive resultsappear to be about 10 times smaller than what were expected and seem to be due to athermal deformation. According to Shawyer, he has no resonance in his cavity.3. By asymmetric conductor, I simply mean any conductor that has an asymmetricshape. This fits the emdrive, MET and asymmetric capacitor.4. The last criticism is a good one and it seems I have made a mistake somehow inmisinterpreting Tajmar's paper. In my rush I may have confused that one with hislater one. Very embarrassing, but what can you do? I will be changing the paper assoon as I can."He also asked me to thank the fellow who originally pointed it out, and that's you, meeberbs.If anyone feels as though there is data that he left out, that he should have included, please cite the data.I have found Prof. McCulloch to be very approachable, responsive, and committed to good science.
Here's what Mike McCulloch said to me in email, posted here with permission:"1. I did not cherry pick. The publications in this area are usually non verycomprehensive and those were the only papers I could find with all the information Ineeded in them.2. The early data of Shawyer has not be falsified at all. Tajmar's emdrive resultsappear to be about 10 times smaller than what were expected and seem to be due to athermal deformation. According to Shawyer, he has no resonance in his cavity.3. By asymmetric conductor, I simply mean any conductor that has an asymmetricshape. This fits the emdrive, MET and asymmetric capacitor.4. The last criticism is a good one and it seems I have made a mistake somehow inmisinterpreting Tajmar's paper. In my rush I may have confused that one with hislater one. Very embarrassing, but what can you do? I will be changing the paper assoon as I can."He also asked me to thank the fellow who originally pointed it out, and that's you, meberbs.If anyone feels as though there is data that he left out, that he should have included, please cite the data.I have found Prof. McCulloch to be very approachable, responsive, and committed to good science.
Hi, all!First post, won't bother you too much.But I've been following this story for years, coming from bioscience, can someone please explain to me why people are still arguing about stuff that won't ever get any closure.
Last year I saw Sonny White presenting not vague ideas, not theoretical paper, but a full blown computer simulation of what he thinks in going inside the device.
This simulation shows how inefficient the current geometry is and seems perfectly able to be the virtual test bed for potential huge increase in the thrust efficiency or at least to test the theory.
Would the numerical optimization of the EMdrive not be a more direct path to clear science that the current fumbling with non linearities of torsion pendulum and ultra tiny weird interaction with earth magnetic field etc
Isn't the pinnacle of science to be able to design a simulation that fit the experiments? :-)