....This may seem dumb, but why not set up a Kickstarter for this? ..
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 04/29/2015 02:29 pm....This may seem dumb, but why not set up a Kickstarter for this? ..See this great post: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1364627#msg1364627by the present President (as well as a Trustee) of the renowned Space Studies Institute (www.ssi.org) which was originally founded by G.K. O'Neill
Quote from: Rodal on 04/29/2015 02:46 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 04/29/2015 02:29 pm....This may seem dumb, but why not set up a Kickstarter for this? ..See this great post: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1364627#msg1364627by the present President (as well as a Trustee) of the renowned Space Studies Institute (www.ssi.org) which was originally founded by G.K. O'NeillSo if I'm reading this correctly, what we need to do is set up a Kickstarter to donate money to ISS's exotic propulsion funds, which can then in turn be given to Eagleworks
Speaking of NASA, I wonder why they have just archived all previous articles about hypothetical advanced propulsion systems on their official site ...
Quote from: cfs on 04/29/2015 03:58 pmQuote from: Rodal on 04/29/2015 02:46 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 04/29/2015 02:29 pm....This may seem dumb, but why not set up a Kickstarter for this? ..See this great post: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1364627#msg1364627by the present President (as well as a Trustee) of the renowned Space Studies Institute (www.ssi.org) which was originally founded by G.K. O'NeillSo if I'm reading this correctly, what we need to do is set up a Kickstarter to donate money to ISS's exotic propulsion funds, which can then in turn be given to Eagleworks I am not sure, but I guess that they would not be able to accept donations/kickstarters to a particular project. I guess they can accept money but the distribution of the total sum is decided by them?which would maybe somehow prevent the exact thing that makes NASA not accept donations/kickstarters.
we established a fund to support "Exotic Propulsion" which is named (appropriately but uninspiringly*) the "Exotic Propulsion Initiative. It is possible to donate to the fund at our website. SSI is a 501(c)3 non-profit and thus contributions are tax-deductiable. Targeted contributions go almost 100% to the named projects since we have very modest overhead costs (we don't pay salaries to our volunteer staff, for example).
Quote from: Jared on 04/29/2015 05:13 pmSpeaking of NASA, I wonder why they have just archived all previous articles about hypothetical advanced propulsion systems on their official site ...I believe that's just the warp drive related articles.
Dr. Rodal, The 0.65Hz frequency shift of light with the new experiment is very interesting, but it was pointed out to me that air has a refraction index of 1. I take it the refraction ndex of the air involved was taken into account for this interferometer test, or that it was conducted in a vacume?
Over 27,000 cycles of data (each 1.5 sec cycle energizing the system for 0.75 sec and de-energizing it for 0.75 sec) were averaged to obtain a power spectrum that revealed a signal frequency of 0.65 Hz with amplitude clearly above system noise. Four additional tests were successfully conducted that demonstrated repeatability.One possible explanation for the optical path length change is that it is due to refraction of the air. The NASA team examined this possibility and concluded that it is not likely that the measured change is due to transient air heating because the experiment’s visibility threshold is forty times larger than the calculated effect from air considering atmospheric heating.
Encouraged by these results, NASA Eagleworks plans to next conduct these interferometer tests in a vacuum.
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 04/29/2015 09:02 pmDr. Rodal, The 0.65Hz frequency shift of light with the new experiment is very interesting, but it was pointed out to me that air has a refraction index of 1. I take it the refraction ndex of the air involved was taken into account for this interferometer test, or that it was conducted in a vacume?1) Air does not have a refractive index of 1. The refractive index of air is approximately 1.000293. As you know air is composed of several gases:Pure Gas Name Symbol Mole fractionNitrogen N2 0.78084Oxygen O2 0.209476Argon Ar 0.00934Carbon Dioxide CO2 0.000314Neon Ne 0.00001818Methane CH4 0.000002Helium He 0.00000524Krypton Kr 0.00000114Hydrogen H2 0.0000005Xenon Xe 0.000000087The issue involving air refraction is dealt was raised in this paper by Lee and Cleaver from Baylor University:http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1407/1407.7772.pdfSee the above paper for background. 2) The 0.65 Hz frequency you are referring to is not a "frequency shift of light". Period of energizing/de-energizing: T=0.75s+0.75s=1.5s, f=1/T=0.66 Hz ~ 0.65Hz3) Quoting from the article:QuoteOver 27,000 cycles of data (each 1.5 sec cycle energizing the system for 0.75 sec and de-energizing it for 0.75 sec) were averaged to obtain a power spectrum that revealed a signal frequency of 0.65 Hz with amplitude clearly above system noise. Four additional tests were successfully conducted that demonstrated repeatability.One possible explanation for the optical path length change is that it is due to refraction of the air. The NASA team examined this possibility and concluded that it is not likely that the measured change is due to transient air heating because the experiment’s visibility threshold is forty times larger than the calculated effect from air considering atmospheric heating.4) Concerning this experiment please refer to previous posts by Star-Drive, myself, @zen-in and others
... No insult was intended or directed, as I said, this waas a point made by someone else to me, and I pretty much figured that this had been taken into account, otherwise it would not have been above backgroound "noise". Again, congratulations on what appears to be a most auspicious achievement!
All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better.
I am somewhat curious as to why AM modulation would increase the drives output. Is it possible that the modulation scheme is increasing the average power output, or is something else in play.I'm wondering what it would do with pulsed RF at a high rep rate?
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 04/29/2015 09:22 pm... No insult was intended or directed, as I said, this waas a point made by someone else to me, and I pretty much figured that this had been taken into account, otherwise it would not have been above backgroound "noise". Again, congratulations on what appears to be a most auspicious achievement!No insult was taken . If it appears that way, due to my cold, abrupt, way to answer the question, with references and quotations, it is due to the fact that I feel compelled to address this technically, carefully, and factually, because several other people are reading this as well, and it is important to avoid misinterpretations. Particularly in view of the shocking "news" that have been posted in fringe sites referring to this thread, talking about NASA finding by accident how to warp space and secretly working on a Star-Trek Enterprise. Actually, I thank you for your question, as it gives me the opportunity to clarify these matters.Concerning whether a signal is or is not above "noise", that is not a trivial assessment, as randomness is ultimately undefinable. What appears random to one observer may not appear random to another. An encrypted message is a good example of this fact.More, finer, experiments are needed.Quote from: Ralph Waldo EmersonAll life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better.
Quote from: Rodal on 04/29/2015 09:27 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 04/29/2015 09:22 pm... No insult was intended or directed, as I said, this waas a point made by someone else to me, and I pretty much figured that this had been taken into account, otherwise it would not have been above backgroound "noise". Again, congratulations on what appears to be a most auspicious achievement!No insult was taken . If it appears that way, due to my cold, abrupt, way to answer the question, with references and quotations, it is due to the fact that I feel compelled to address this technically, carefully, and factually, because several other people are reading this as well, and it is important to avoid misinterpretations. Particularly in view of the shocking "news" that have been posted in fringe sites referring to this thread, talking about NASA finding by accident how to warp space and secretly working on a Star-Trek Enterprise. Actually, I thank you for your question, as it gives me the opportunity to clarify these matters.Concerning whether a signal is or is not above "noise", that is not a trivial assessment, as randomness is ultimately undefinable. What appears random to one observer may not appear random to another. An encrypted message is a good example of this fact.More, finer, experiments are needed.Quote from: Ralph Waldo EmersonAll life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better.Thanks, I was hoping I hadn't stepped beyond the bounds of propriety.Out of curiosity, what is the approximate ratio of watts to newtons, or millinewtons as the case may be, that you've been able to produce on the average?