Quote from: Mulletron on 10/04/2014 12:24 pm.....This problem is related to a whole other obsession I had since I learned about "A new kind of Science" where I was trying to make sense of information and computation giving rise to the universe. ...Concerning Wolfram's "A new kind of science," do you use Wolfram's Mathematica ? I use Mathematica a lot since version 1, was quite happy with version 9. Disappointed with all the bugs in initial version 10. They just came out with a patch for version 10, and I'm testing it now, while I continue to use my version 9 programs for my work.
.....This problem is related to a whole other obsession I had since I learned about "A new kind of Science" where I was trying to make sense of information and computation giving rise to the universe. ...
.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...
And I want a hovercar.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:38 pm.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...Sorry to skip the rest but, about that, do you know of any possible rectifier effect in dielectrics, that is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term ?
Having said that, my Mathematica analysis of the coupled nonlinear differential equations of the inverted pendulum is showing that the NASA Eagleworks results may be due to real thrust. However without knowing the actual magnitude of the magnetic damping I am unclear at this point whether and how much is the distortion from the test and how much is real.The big unknown I have is the magnitude of the magnetic damping. Unfortunately Paul March has stopped communication some time ago. If he could provide the C value for the magnetic damping, it would be very helpful. I would even perhaps be able to confirm that the NASA Eaglewoks results are real.
Quote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 11:44 amPropeller/slow wind : power of the device is used to accelerate DM particles. I would like to read more about this approach.
Propeller/slow wind : power of the device is used to accelerate DM particles.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:03 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 01:55 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 01:43 pmFigure 22 on page 18 worries me. That upward slope over 30 seconds while the rf was on and a slow fade after rf was off says heat was the cause. 70uN thrust/60uN heat.Bingo!Yes, that's the coupling between the magnetic damping and the field from the power cable I have been writing about. Notice that the coupling is HUGE. By their own admission the "null" signal is 25% of the good signal !!!!!And they subtract the coupling "null" signal as if the problem would be linear. They do not take into account any nonlinearities. There is no finite element (No COMSOL) analysis of the magnetic coupling problemYeah all the modes show some heat or something else too.Yes, but it looks like there is something real exciting the system. The only argument I see now for an artifact would be that the magnetic damping is interacting with the power cable AND the dielectric effect. Because they measure no thrust without the dielectric. And because flipping the orientation of the dielectric flips the direction of the thrust. So if it is an artifact one would have to explain it as a result of the magnetic fields (from the damping and the power cable) interacting with the dielectric.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 01:55 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 01:43 pmFigure 22 on page 18 worries me. That upward slope over 30 seconds while the rf was on and a slow fade after rf was off says heat was the cause. 70uN thrust/60uN heat.Bingo!Yes, that's the coupling between the magnetic damping and the field from the power cable I have been writing about. Notice that the coupling is HUGE. By their own admission the "null" signal is 25% of the good signal !!!!!And they subtract the coupling "null" signal as if the problem would be linear. They do not take into account any nonlinearities. There is no finite element (No COMSOL) analysis of the magnetic coupling problemYeah all the modes show some heat or something else too.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 01:43 pmFigure 22 on page 18 worries me. That upward slope over 30 seconds while the rf was on and a slow fade after rf was off says heat was the cause. 70uN thrust/60uN heat.Bingo!Yes, that's the coupling between the magnetic damping and the field from the power cable I have been writing about. Notice that the coupling is HUGE. By their own admission the "null" signal is 25% of the good signal !!!!!And they subtract the coupling "null" signal as if the problem would be linear. They do not take into account any nonlinearities. There is no finite element (No COMSOL) analysis of the magnetic coupling problem
Figure 22 on page 18 worries me. That upward slope over 30 seconds while the rf was on and a slow fade after rf was off says heat was the cause. 70uN thrust/60uN heat.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 02:13 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:03 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 01:55 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 01:43 pmFigure 22 on page 18 worries me. That upward slope over 30 seconds while the rf was on and a slow fade after rf was off says heat was the cause. 70uN thrust/60uN heat.Bingo!Yes, that's the coupling between the magnetic damping and the field from the power cable I have been writing about. Notice that the coupling is HUGE. By their own admission the "null" signal is 25% of the good signal !!!!!And they subtract the coupling "null" signal as if the problem would be linear. They do not take into account any nonlinearities. There is no finite element (No COMSOL) analysis of the magnetic coupling problemYeah all the modes show some heat or something else too.Yes, but it looks like there is something real exciting the system. The only argument I see now for an artifact would be that the magnetic damping is interacting with the power cable AND the dielectric effect. Because they measure no thrust without the dielectric. And because flipping the orientation of the dielectric flips the direction of the thrust. So if it is an artifact one would have to explain it as a result of the magnetic fields (from the damping and the power cable) interacting with the dielectric.Are you speaking precisely when you say flipping the orientation of the dielectric flips direction of thrust? I know they flipped the whole thing but this is different. If there is any chirality to PTFE, it makes a difference.
So that basically means that, given the scarcity of DM, it is worthless as a reaction mass. But it is better from its energy equivalent content. Harvesting this mass for its energy, and using this energy to power a photon drive,..
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:38 pm.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...Sorry to skip the rest but, about that, do you know of any possible rectifier effect in dielectrics, that is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term ?QuoteAnd I want a hovercar.Yeah. So do I. But you know reality doesn't much care about making achievable all what we want ?
Quote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 03:20 pmSo that basically means that, given the scarcity of DM, it is worthless as a reaction mass. But it is better from its energy equivalent content. Harvesting this mass for its energy, and using this energy to power a photon drive,..But the photons need to escape the EM Drive to get propulsion. How are the photons getting out of the drive? Do you see the downstream surface to be porous to photons traveling through it?
But the photons need to escape the EM Drive to get propulsion. How are the photons getting out of the drive? Do you see the downstream surface to be porous to photons traveling through it?
Quote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 02:54 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:38 pm.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...Sorry to skip the rest but, about that, do you know of any possible rectifier effect in dielectrics, that is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term ?QuoteAnd I want a hovercar.Yeah. So do I. But you know reality doesn't much care about making achievable all what we want ?All the rectifiers I'm familiar with use diodes. You can do it old school with tubes.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 03:33 pmBut the photons need to escape the EM Drive to get propulsion. How are the photons getting out of the drive? Do you see the downstream surface to be porous to photons traveling through it?Earlier I had mentioned that no mass was being expelled. I incorrectly mentioned electrons, and someone pointed out that photons were being produced, AIUI. Still, nothing comes out of the other end.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 10/05/2014 01:26 pmQuote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 11:44 amPropeller/slow wind : power of the device is used to accelerate DM particles. I would like to read more about this approach.Basically, pushing on a slow moving medium (relative to ship) is a good way to get high thrust/power ratio. In a dense medium, the ejection speed to get a given level of thrust (relative to the size of thruster) is low. For instance in air a propeller does a pretty decent thrust with ejection speeds around 100m/s (give or take). The higher the ejection speed, the higher the thrust but also lower efficiency. But still much better than photon rocket (ignoring medium and pushing on "pure energy" from the onboard generator).Now with a very very scarce medium, the amount of mass/s that can be swallowed by the thruster is so weak that it takes very high ejection speeds to get a thrust level of any significance. When the scarcity of the medium implies relativistic ejection velocities to get interesting thrust, then the fact to use a medium mass at all becomes irrelevant because you put more energy as kinetic energy than the energy equivalence of harvested mass : if you have that much onboard energy to spend on kinetic energy of the jet, then just creating the rest mass (from energy) of what you are ejecting becomes a negligible term. You are almost as good with a photon rocket and ignoring the medium.So that basically means that, given the scarcity of DM, it is worthless as a reaction mass. But it is better from its energy equivalent content. Harvesting this mass for its energy, and using this energy to power a photon drive, is the better achievable possible use of naturally occurring DM. This is not unlike a Bussard ramjet : treating the medium not as a passive reserve of mass to push on with onboard generator power, but converting a significant part of mass to energy and using this energy to power a fast jet.And it falls short of explaining the results, unless you took all the most extremely favorable values together, sounds very unlikely to me. So the propeller/slow wind approach, being much worse, 3 orders of magnitude below, is clearly discarded.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 03:33 pmQuote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 03:20 pmSo that basically means that, given the scarcity of DM, it is worthless as a reaction mass. But it is better from its energy equivalent content. Harvesting this mass for its energy, and using this energy to power a photon drive,..But the photons need to escape the EM Drive to get propulsion. How are the photons getting out of the drive? Do you see the downstream surface to be porous to photons traveling through it?Well, for the argument, that could also be a neutrino jet, or any light particle with more kinetic energy than rest mass. The photon with a 0 rest mass is just a limit case. Also this is getting convoluted : have to take incoming DM <500km/s, and convert mass content to kinetic energy of collimated ejected relativistic particles that are light enough (otherwise they are less relativistic, and thrust is worse) and wall crossing (neutrinos, X rays). Mmm, you could even do the following : take incoming DM <500km/s, convert mass to energy, and with the energy of 1 million DM particles, accelerate 1 DM particle at relativistic speed. Would be dark matter powered dark matter jet rocket. Call that a "dark matter ramjet". Unless anyone can point me to previous publication or grant, I hereby take precedence on that concept All those numbers above that could hypothetically reach the thrust levels of experiments assume the possibility of not only harvesting a huge ratio of DM but also of "burning" DM mass to release energy. Dark matter fusion now, is it advanced enough concept ?
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 10/05/2014 01:26 pmQuote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 11:44 amPropeller/slow wind : power of the device is used to accelerate DM particles. I would like to read more about this approach.Basically, pushing on a slow moving medium (relative to ship) is a good way to get high thrust/power ratio. In a dense medium, the ejection speed to get a given level of thrust (relative to the size of thruster) is low. For instance in air a propeller does a pretty decent thrust with ejection speeds around 100m/s (give or take). The higher the ejection speed, the higher the thrust but also lower efficiency. ...
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 03:55 pmQuote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 02:54 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:38 pm.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...Sorry to skip the rest but, about that, do you know of any possible rectifier effect in dielectrics, that is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term ?QuoteAnd I want a hovercar.Yeah. So do I. But you know reality doesn't much care about making achievable all what we want ?All the rectifiers I'm familiar with use diodes. You can do it old school with tubes.Do you agree "dielectric, is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term" ?
Quote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 03:58 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 03:55 pmQuote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 02:54 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:38 pm.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...Sorry to skip the rest but, about that, do you know of any possible rectifier effect in dielectrics, that is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term ?QuoteAnd I want a hovercar.Yeah. So do I. But you know reality doesn't much care about making achievable all what we want ?All the rectifiers I'm familiar with use diodes. You can do it old school with tubes.Do you agree "dielectric, is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term" ?It's the same problem as axion detection in reverse. You need the right combination of field, phase and photons.
Quote from: Notsosureofit on 10/05/2014 04:04 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/05/2014 03:58 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 03:55 pmQuote from: frobnicat on 10/05/2014 02:54 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/05/2014 02:38 pm.../...In my job I mostly deal with electronic engineering. I know a lot about radars, communications (satellite mostly), and navigation equipment like gyros. Hence why I have a clue about waveguides ....../...Sorry to skip the rest but, about that, do you know of any possible rectifier effect in dielectrics, that is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term ?QuoteAnd I want a hovercar.Yeah. So do I. But you know reality doesn't much care about making achievable all what we want ?All the rectifiers I'm familiar with use diodes. You can do it old school with tubes.Do you agree "dielectric, is acting like a fast switching diode to convert (a fraction of) AC RF energy to a significant DC current term" ?It's the same problem as axion detection in reverse. You need the right combination of field, phase and photons.Ok you can use a RC network as a filter (which is done after you go through a half or full wave rectifier normally) to filter out all but the "tops" of the ac sine wave. You would end up with a dc with a LOT of ripple.