No boring back and forth "you're wrong" "no you're wrong". No spamming silly messages in every post like "time to come out of the shadows". Mods will trim posts that are not of wrthwhile quality.
Thank you for summarizing. I have some comments here. I am biased the opposite way as you so it is useful to counter balance with yours. First, TT suspected there might not be resonance in Tajmar's cavity, probably because there was no thrust. I think the same kind of suspicion should be cast on the Polish cavity too, because there was also no definite evidence that there was resonance.Second, Monomorphic's experiment I think was a power on test; there was no microwave involved. Third, you said "1. The EMDrive surrounded by a plastic insulator might not be working." This is a strange conclusion, as strange as Shawyer's belief that there must be acceleration for the EmDrive to enter "motor" mode. It is not far from saying that the EMDrive made by people younger than 50 might not be working. After all, this statement has some support because Shawyer, TT, Paul claimed thrust but Tajmar, the California PhD students and monomorphic didn't.« Last Edit: 06/10/2018 01:50 PM by PotomacNeuron »
I base my conclusion on these data points:1. Jamie's drive is likely to be in resonance given the quality of his work.2. The Polish researcher reported about 9 uN with the drive in Null configuration.3. The Polish researcher reported about 27 uN with the drive in a non-Null configuration.4. Jamie reported about 9 uN with the drive in a non-Null configuration.5. Shell seemed to believe an effect was taking place outside the can (but presented no data).6. Noether's theorem would suggest that an EMDrive cannot accelerate without some interaction with the universe outside of the can.7. WarpTech was working on a theory requiring exchange of heat with the outside universe.8. It would seem that insulating the can has stopped the effect, whatever it is, from interacting with the outside universe, turning this into an isolated system and killing the effect as Noether would predict.9. If true this is an important datapoint in figure out what is actually going on here.
So my question to you, how do we falsify the hypothesis that the 9uN being detected is the result of Lorentz forces in the wiring?
A good built without ground loop and untwisted power supply leads should be able to avoid the Lorentz problem. So the hypothesis is only a hypothesis for some of the experiments, such as EW's.Monomorphic's test bed has built-in ability to assess Lorentz force by being built on top of wheels and by not using magnetic damping or step motors. He only needs to rotate his test bed to different angles and plot force against angle to see whether force changes with angle.
Quote from: PotomacNeuron on 06/12/2018 05:35 amA good built without ground loop and untwisted power supply leads should be able to avoid the Lorentz problem. So the hypothesis is only a hypothesis for some of the experiments, such as EW's.Monomorphic's test bed has built-in ability to assess Lorentz force by being built on top of wheels and by not using magnetic damping or step motors. He only needs to rotate his test bed to different angles and plot force against angle to see whether force changes with angle.Every EmDrive builder needs to verify the mode they have excited is the desired mode and not a system resonance.The only real way to do that is to insert an E field probe into the cavity and map out the E field lobes. As far as I know only Roger and I have done that.As example is this VNA scan done by Paul. Don't know if the excited mode was never found as it was not shown on the COMSOL resonance mode analysis.Very unwise to spend all the time and money building an EmDrive and test rig and then assume the VNA scan freq, because it is close to a simulation freq, is the mode you expect to excite. Wish it were so easy.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/12/2018 08:15 amQuote from: PotomacNeuron on 06/12/2018 05:35 amA good built without ground loop and untwisted power supply leads should be able to avoid the Lorentz problem. So the hypothesis is only a hypothesis for some of the experiments, such as EW's.Monomorphic's test bed has built-in ability to assess Lorentz force by being built on top of wheels and by not using magnetic damping or step motors. He only needs to rotate his test bed to different angles and plot force against angle to see whether force changes with angle.Every EmDrive builder needs to verify the mode they have excited is the desired mode and not a system resonance.The only real way to do that is to insert an E field probe into the cavity and map out the E field lobes. As far as I know only Roger and I have done that.As example is this VNA scan done by Paul. Don't know if the excited mode was never found as it was not shown on the COMSOL resonance mode analysis.Very unwise to spend all the time and money building an EmDrive and test rig and then assume the VNA scan freq, because it is close to a simulation freq, is the mode you expect to excite. Wish it were so easy.The idea sounds good at first glance, but in TE0np mode the E-field is theoretically only zero on the central infinitesimal-thin axis of symmetry. However, such a probe has a spatial extension greater than zero (length and diameter) and is conductive.I guess a probe in the cavity will distort the pattern and shift the resonant frequency, as the EM field must satisfy the boundary conditions on the coaxial outer conductor.
Quote from: X_RaY on 06/12/2018 09:02 amQuote from: TheTraveller on 06/12/2018 08:15 amQuote from: PotomacNeuron on 06/12/2018 05:35 amA good built without ground loop and untwisted power supply leads should be able to avoid the Lorentz problem. So the hypothesis is only a hypothesis for some of the experiments, such as EW's.Monomorphic's test bed has built-in ability to assess Lorentz force by being built on top of wheels and by not using magnetic damping or step motors. He only needs to rotate his test bed to different angles and plot force against angle to see whether force changes with angle.Every EmDrive builder needs to verify the mode they have excited is the desired mode and not a system resonance.The only real way to do that is to insert an E field probe into the cavity and map out the E field lobes. As far as I know only Roger and I have done that.As example is this VNA scan done by Paul. Don't know if the excited mode was never found as it was not shown on the COMSOL resonance mode analysis.Very unwise to spend all the time and money building an EmDrive and test rig and then assume the VNA scan freq, because it is close to a simulation freq, is the mode you expect to excite. Wish it were so easy.The idea sounds good at first glance, but in TE0np mode the E-field is theoretically only zero on the central infinitesimal-thin axis of symmetry. However, such a probe has a spatial extension greater than zero (length and diameter) and is conductive.I guess a probe in the cavity will distort the pattern and shift the resonant frequency, as the EM field must satisfy the boundary conditions on the coaxial outer conductor.Need a VNA to gen the Rf to drive the coupler plus another freq scanner that is isolated from the cavity and the other Rf gen. That way the coax shield of the E field probe coax from the freq scanner is not connected to the cavity shell.What you do is to use the E field probe to find the location of the highest E field lobes inside the cavity.Will demo how to do this.
Isolated or not, my argument is that any additional structure within the cavity, especially a conductive one, changes the natural frequencies of the resonator. The second point I do not understand from your contributions is why an additional spectrum analyzer is needed to map the amplitudes of the E field. This could be done with a 2-port VNA in S21 mode. By the way, you can only isolate the DC component, which is irrelevant in this case, but not the AC RF.
...it is not far from saying that the EMDrive made by people younger than 50 might not be working....
Need a VNA to gen the Rf to drive the coupler plus another freq scanner that is isolated from the cavity and the other Rf gen. That way the coax shield of the E field probe coax from the freq scanner is not connected to the cavity shell.What you do is to use the E field probe to find the location of the highest E field lobes inside the cavity.Will demo how to do this.
As to whether Monomorphic's recent experiment involved microwave, we just need him to tell us.Monomorphic's test bed has built-in ability to assess Lorentz force by being built on top of wheels and by not using magnetic damping or step motors. He only needs to rotate his test bed to different angles and plot force against angle to see whether force changes with angle.
The idea sounds good at first glance, but in TE0np mode the E-field is theoretically only zero on the central infinitesimal-thin axis of symmetry. However, such a probe has a spatial extension greater than zero (length and diameter) and is conductive.I guess a probe in the cavity will distort the pattern and shift the resonant frequency, as the EM field must satisfy the boundary conditions on the coaxial outer conductor.
This is exactly what I was thinking. Inserting a coax cable into the cavity will cause the resonant frequency to rise the further in the coax is inserted. Then RF will couple with the coax shielding at varying degrees as the coax is inserted, leaking RF to the outside, which will probably be very non-linear. I would be very surprised if we could make sense of spectrum analyser readings in these conditions.
How many Joules of Work will be done by a P-P drive that can generate 60,000 Newtons of Force, while accelerating a 60,000kg spaceship's mass for 100 seconds that is mid way between the orbits of Earth and Mars?
Quote from: TheTraveller on 06/12/2018 02:32 pmHow many Joules of Work will be done by a P-P drive that can generate 60,000 Newtons of Force, while accelerating a 60,000kg spaceship's mass for 100 seconds that is mid way between the orbits of Earth and Mars?It depends on the reference frame since energy is not conserved if P-P drives work.
It depends on the reference frame regardless of the drive type (i.e. even ignoring the P-P part).