Accepting that it's a physical medium, then what about the idea that it's non-local? That what you're pushing against is so far away?
If you're asking about the M-E work, Jim is on vacation until the end of the Summer. He'll have a UFG on the thrust stand by early Fall so given no unforeseen engineering issues, we might have thrust figures by late September. There has already been made an offer of help in constructing next gen power equipment including active phase tracking and modulation so there's an oportunity there for a generational leap forward in test controls. There is also talk of a next generation rotator that can manage a higher DC offset in order to examine the parametric amplification issue, but no word as to when that will be approached. Paul is working a different schedule with his MLT so he'll have to weigh in with what he thinks is reasonable.
Quote from: GI-Thruster on 06/28/2009 10:04 pmIf you're asking about the M-E work, Jim is on vacation until the end of the Summer. He'll have a UFG on the thrust stand by early Fall so given no unforeseen engineering issues, we might have thrust figures by late September. There has already been made an offer of help in constructing next gen power equipment including active phase tracking and modulation so there's an oportunity there for a generational leap forward in test controls. There is also talk of a next generation rotator that can manage a higher DC offset in order to examine the parametric amplification issue, but no word as to when that will be approached. Paul is working a different schedule with his MLT so he'll have to weigh in with what he thinks is reasonable.I finished the MLT-2009 this morning and I'm currently running instrumentation calibration tests on it to see if the beast will work as advertised. I did find out today though that it resonates at ~51.6 MHz verses the 52.0 MHz design point, but the capacitive voltage divider for the cap-ring doesn't seem to be working as planned. However the 2-turn B-field sensor coil is working to spec. I hope to have this test article on a shielded load cell by the end of July to see if it will produce any detectable thrust with the maximum peak voltages obtainable uising my 100W, 52MHz RF generator driving it.
Excuse me, guys, but the measurement is in inches or metres? I mean - what is the lenght of the device anyway btw, I apologize for mention it, but you have to know that there are many europeans here and we have different measurement scale. Not that we can't calculate, but it's about convenience
The coil on the underside (lower left) is for matching? What happened with the stray capacitance issue and how does that affect your Q?
4.00" = 4.00 inches = 10.16cm = 0.1016 meter.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 06/19/2009 12:21 pmAccepting that it's a physical medium, then what about the idea that it's non-local? That what you're pushing against is so far away?Ok you need to understand that inertia, the resistance to acceleration, is a sort of gravity tension on any mass by all the other mass in the universe. Imagine that every mass is linked to every other mass in the universe by long rubber bands. Obviously this causes a lot of tension in every direction and would inhibit any object so linked to everything else from changing their acceleration. Velocity is fine, things stay in motion that are in motion, and stay at rest that are at rest. Changing those states with acceleration creates resistance to the acceleration via those rubber bands, much as CEMF arises within an electric coil in response to application of EMF. Inertia is a reaction against acceleration.Now, if you are able to change the mass of an object when its accelerating in one direction, versus its mass when its moving in the opposite direction, then the reaction will change and result in a net acceleration.
Considering the promise of this new gravinertial (G/I) field based Mach-Effect (M-E) science and technology, and remember that it is based on Einstein's already well vetted General Relativity Theory (GRT) with only minor tweaks by Dennis Sciama and James Woodward along the way, why do you say that this technology is; "it's highly doubtful is at all possible"?
Lampy:The delayed conservation of momentum in the cosmological gravinertial field problem is very much akin to the case of the submarine's propeller back-reacting off the expelled water. If the sub is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, how long does the expelled water from the prop take to interact with the crust of the Earth if the water flux is directed horizontally to the surface of the ocean where the nearest land could be thousands of miles away? And how washed out will that water flux become before it gets there?? The time lags, velocity magnitudes and amount of water participating in the propeller's conservation dance with the Earth will be very much different than when this water flux started at the prop.BTW, I like your Jesus Lizard example, for it makes for a great visual example of describing this "by your bootstraps" propulsion system. The devil IS in the details! And just for fun find below a U-Tube URL to the Lizard in question:
"permittivity" and "permeability" are both used to describe the vacuum WRT magnetic fields.One of the objections against rocket motors in space was that they "don't have anything to push against." Picture a charged particle (a proton), rushing through space. It encounters a big positively charge particle (Fe3+?) directly in its path.What happens is that the proton is nudged aside *before* the Fe3+ ion feels the effects. If you think of the ions as being nuts embedded in balls of (weightless) jelly you get the idea. The momentum is stored in the jelly before the nuts (and the rest of the jelly) feel it. Exactly the same thing happens with the G/I field except on a much longer time scale.
The effect probably does occur in many other situations, such as when a steel ball bounces. The trouble is that unless you specifically design a thruster to take advantage of the effect, it is too small to note. This is much the same as many other forces--magnetism for instance. Unless you mine magnetite and refine it, or later make a permanent magnet out of a specific material suited to this, it's very unlikely you'll make use of magnetism. It was certainly studied and used many centuries before it was understood, but only used in the most simple ways. A makeshift compass from floating a magnetite sliver on a leaf, etc. What it took for magnets to come into their own was a fuller understanding of the field theory behind the force, a description of how magnetism works, that enabled construction of things like induction motors.That's what we have with Jim's theory, an explanation for how/why M-E ought to work that should enable us to move past the seeming inconsequential natural occurrence of the force, like a magnetized sliver on a leaf; to a gravinertial induction motor.You have to look at the literature and decide from there. But certainly, M-E does not contradict GR in any way and it is not a violation of conservation in any way. If it were, it would have been dismissed as a bad joke more than a decade ago.Forget the "its too good to be true" argument. If the folks had known where Maxwell and Lorentz's theories would lead them, no one would have believed it.