Author Topic: Propellantless propulsion (Read 34044 times)

Bob Shaw · « **Reply #20 on:** 10/21/2016 11:38 pm »

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 10/21/2016 11:33 pm

The snapshots clearly show what happening.

Harry

See above.

Bob Shaw · « **Reply #21 on:** 10/22/2016 12:00 am »

I'm not going to be snarky, I'm not going to be sarcastic, I'm going to be kind: you're making a terrible mistake. I'm sure you're well-meaning, but past experience suggests that you're wrong. I agree that spinning things behave strangely, but they don't, ever, give you something for nothing.

Here's a suggestion: make your pitch to a billionaire. Sell your idea in secret, and send 'I told you so' messages back from Alpha Centauri B when you get there. Failing that, send them when you get to somewhere in South America with a suitcase filled with cash. It worked for Gerald Bull, until it didn't.

In the meantime... ...please think of your career-destroying posts. If you hope for any form of traditional employment then your Google CV has just had an item appended which is about in the league of the benefits to the US military which may be found by staring at goats.

Really, please stop - for your own sake.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #22 on:** 08/26/2023 01:18 am »

Quantum Dynamics Enterprises, Inc. is proud to present C.I.D. centrifugal impulse drive. Patent pending.

Inventor: Harry Paul sprain.

BREAKING NEWS:
The device is at Georgia Institute of Technology College of Engineering. Under the management of Prof. Mitchell Walker.

Here is a video that shows the torsion balance apparatus. The device is on one end a counterweight is on the other. It's hanging from a nylon rope from the ceiling connected to the center of a 2 x 4.
https://quantumdynamicsinc.com/complete-testing-videos
It is allowed to hang overnight until it is completely stationary no potential energy in the string to cause it to move left or right.

The machine is started it begins to move slowly gaining momentum and accelerating as it revolves around the room until the tension in the rope becomes so great it can no longer rotate. The power is turned off the balance is stabilized and it slowly unwinds oscillating back and forth over the zero mark but eventually settling down and stopping right where it began.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #23 on:** 08/26/2023 01:58 am »

This was tested at the Daniel Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering by Prof Mitchell Walker's team. It shows positive proof of propulsion. It uses 17 watts and produces 710 Mn of thrust without expelling mass. It was tested on the water table with sensors to measure the tiniest movement. It has been tested in every way it can torsion balance, water table, it works.
https://quantumdynamicsinc.com/test-results-from-ga-tech

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #24 on:** 08/26/2023 02:01 am »

Yes, that's my old post. we have come a long way since then.

We first tested it at Ga tech in 2019 with only one ring and we could not attain a thrust vector. So went back and built a new double ring to stop counter rotation it was tested by undergraduates on the water table at GA tech with complete success. Tests showed 710 mN of thrust using 17 watts. Test 4.

Professor Mitchell Walker stands behind the report of the work his undergraduates preformed.

gongora · « **Reply #25 on:** 08/26/2023 02:16 am »

Probably because you posted it three times in different forum sections and it was the exact text of a post you made 7 years ago.

chazemz · « **Reply #26 on:** 08/26/2023 02:43 pm »

I feel slighted and yet somehow pleased at the same time. I posted my patent application expecting some criticism and was met with a wall of silence. Come on guys someone must be able to find a hole or two in the application. On this particular device, it does seem a very complicated way to achieve what is shown in the video, but they will learn a lot from the experiments. The information is a little vague and I can understand the scepticism ( I am kind of with meberbs on this one). Time will tell, "from little acorns do giant oak trees grow". Dean would not demonstrate his device in public and was different to this device.

chazemz · « **Reply #27 on:** 08/26/2023 07:07 pm »

I would like to add a couple of things. Why did you not use a wireless switch for the power on and off? This would avoid any contact with the device. The back swing when the power is switched off just does not look right. Why the horseshoe shaped outer feature to the rotating magnet?

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #28 on:** 08/26/2023 09:49 pm »

Hello everyone latest news. WE have built a double CID design that elevates the counter rotation.
https://quantumdynamicsinc.com/

Harry Sprain

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #29 on:** 08/26/2023 10:05 pm »

And a special thank you to the moderators for unlocking this post. Cheers!

H.P.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #30 on:** 08/27/2023 12:52 am »

In this test, we have removed the rotor magnets completely. We ran CID at a very high RPM and there is still no gyroscopic precession.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #31 on:** 08/27/2023 12:57 am »

We thought maybe the weight of the rotor was needed for gyroscopic precession. So we put the rotor magnets back on. But we tapped the rotor arms in so they could not fly out. Now it's the same weight as normal. Let us see what happens.

Absolutely no movement! So we can rule out gyroscopic precession. Do we all agree?

H.P.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #32 on:** 08/27/2023 01:05 am »

The last tests at Ga tech 2019 could not find a thrust vector.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/4mo89poj37gazmeof887z/GaTech-CID-water-table-report.-2019.pdf?rlkey=0mo6io1rosrurgn1yma2bkkw0&dl=0

So we moved on and built this with what we had learned in 2019. We then took CID 2 back to Ga tech and retested on the water table.

Adding another ring canceled counter rotation.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #33 on:** 08/27/2023 01:11 am »

Here is a test where we pointed the force strait up. No rotation.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #34 on:** 08/27/2023 01:23 am »

This is the final test we performed in-house before bringing it to Ga Tech. CID 2 on torsion balance, remote start.
Interestingly it moves about the same distance as when on the water table. If we sat and waited CID would return to the start position.

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #35 on:** 08/27/2023 02:38 am »

Did you try 4 different orientations 90 degrees apart to preclude interactions with Earth's magnetic fields?

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #36 on:** 08/27/2023 02:41 am »

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 08/27/2023 01:23 am

This is the final test we performed in-house before bringing it to Ga Tech. CID 2 on torsion balance, remote start.
Interestingly it moves about the same distance as when on the water table. If we sat and waited CID would return to the start position.

Is this the proof of function video?

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #37 on:** 08/27/2023 03:00 am »

https://quantumdynamicsinc.com/complete-testing-videos

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #38 on:** 08/27/2023 03:15 am »

You've got what might be a major problem with the water bath, and ironically it's what another propellantless drive theory uses to justify its mechanism!

Note the boat mechanism is repeatable pretty easily, the Rindler part hasn't been replicated yet.

https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2018/03/
https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2017/01/
https://www.wtamu.edu/~dcraig/PHYS4310/2008/Casimir_Maritime_1996.pdf

In the case of your water experiment, you have a boat with waves.

The apparatus necessarily induces vibrations in the liquid due to the asymmetric nature of the oscillation. Those vibrations will hit a harmonic with a nearby wall and cause pressure from the water to build up on one side and not another.

You can see this in one of the videos, but alas only two corners of the mechanism box. One side has standing waves in the water and the 90 degree side to that first side to it does not. Need a video of the opposite side of the harmonic waves (aka one that shows all 4 sides during the experiment). Harmonic waves on one side are a tell-tale sign of this happening. It's an interaction between the vibrations, the device under test, and the walls of the water table.

You could potentially control for that by doing the test in the same orientation but at all 4 corners of the water table. You'd need videos of all 4 sides of the mechanism while doing so.

It's possible that is also happening in air, or with the overall mechanism itself, in your air tests, but it won't be visible (and the vibrations would go right through the saran wrap or the box).

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #39 on:** 08/27/2023 03:22 am »

In you analysis of the mechanism, it would appear you neglected the momentum it takes to push the magnet back to its original position.

Granted this momentum is acting in a different xy orientation and on a different time frame (slower) than the initial high speed change of momentum. Would have to dive into some gnarly equations or numerically simulate the mechanism to show whether this counteracts the initial quick change in momentum. I think it probably does if you do the center of gravity parts of the calculation correctly.

Regardless, I didn't see the math that accounts for the return momentum. If your theory is correct it's less than the initial quick change of momentum and in a different axis, but the theory can't be correct if you didn't account for it all.

I may have completely missed that calculation. If you could point to the time in the video where you go over that I'd appreciate it.