Author Topic: Propellantless propulsion (Read 34091 times)

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #40 on:** 08/27/2023 06:08 am »

https://quantumdynamicsinc.com/cid-theory

Magnets like springs.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #41 on:** 08/27/2023 06:12 am »

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

Please see the video rotor magnet is never pushed all the way back in. It stays in equilibrium between the opposing magnet force and centrifugal force, never slamming back in.

H.P.

chazemz · « **Reply #42 on:** 08/27/2023 07:40 am »

You have a patent pending. Has it been published yet? If so could you provide the application number so that people can view it. If not maybe you could scan and upload some of the documents as you will have tried to explain how it works in your application. You have spent a lot of time and effort on this, people will be rightly sceptical on just a video.

chazemz · « **Reply #43 on:** 08/27/2023 09:05 am »

At the moment you have rotation not thrust. A good idea would be to place a second device on the other end of your balance beam then see what happens? Make certain they rotate in the same direction.

chazemz · « **Reply #44 on:** 08/27/2023 05:48 pm »

Thank you for sharing your patent application it is an interesting read. To establish whether your device is producing thrust you are using the wrong experiment. Get yourself a square or oblong sheet of wood ( you are using magnets ) and suspend it from the ceiling by four lengths of string ( one in each corner ) making sure it is level. You now have a make shift level pendulum. Attach your device to the wooden platform in the center and turn it on using a wireless switch. If you achieve a sustained deflection ( not an oscillation ) you really do have something. I am going to bow out of this thread for now but may I wish you every success with your endeavours.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #45 on:** 08/27/2023 09:06 pm »

That would be the pendulum test yes we did that. It deflected to one side and sort of oscillated but stayed on one side. You can see the laser is pointing at string. CID is turned on it stays on one side of the string never oscillating back and forth.

H.P.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #46 on:** 08/27/2023 09:11 pm »

Here are some pictures of me building CID 1.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #47 on:** 08/27/2023 09:13 pm »

More pictures building CID 1

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #48 on:** 08/27/2023 09:15 pm »

CID 1

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #49 on:** 08/27/2023 09:22 pm »

More pictures of CID #1

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #50 on:** 08/27/2023 09:26 pm »

OLD CID first attempt.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #51 on:** 08/27/2023 09:28 pm »

OLD CID photos.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #52 on:** 08/27/2023 09:51 pm »

Should I keep posting pictures?

H.P.

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #53 on:** 08/28/2023 01:02 am »

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 08/27/2023 06:12 am

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

Please see the video rotor magnet is never pushed all the way back in. It stays in equilibrium between the opposing magnet force and centrifugal force, never slamming back in.

H.P.

pushed slowly or slamming is the same thing, just spread out over time.

Your rotating frame just makes this thing confusing and hard to analyze

Why not just a spring with a weight on the end, a plate to impact upon, where the spring is slowly re-wound and then released using a cam and an electric motor? What's the difference?

or, someone standing on skateboard using their left arm to hit their right arm.

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #54 on:** 08/28/2023 01:04 am »

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 08/27/2023 09:51 pm

Should I keep posting pictures?

H.P.

No, you should answer the specific questions / problems posed, using quoting so we know what you are answering.

The only added picture needed is a photo in the water bath showing all 4 sides while in operation, to see what the standing waves in the water look like. Everything else is pretty clear from the pictures you have posted.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #55 on:** 08/28/2023 05:42 pm »

Thank you for your post I will try this test you have suggested. But I don't think the results will be any different from the pendulum tests that showed CID stayed on one side of the line and never oscillated back and forth.

H.P.

CoolScience · « **Reply #56 on:** 08/28/2023 08:50 pm »

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 08/28/2023 05:42 pm

Thank you for your post I will try this test you have suggested. But I don't think the results will be any different from the pendulum tests that showed CID stayed on one side of the line and never oscillated back and forth.

H.P.

I don't know what test you are referring to, as far as I can tell you were not asked by anyone here to do some specific test, but to address the basic problems of your description of the device and similar questions you have not acknowledged.

The number of ways for the tests you have described so far to produce a false positive is too long to list. People on this forum have previously demonstrated how both linear vibrations and static mass shifts can invalidate torsion pendulum results by producing false positives. Something spinning has so many ways that it would cause problems that there is simply no reasonable way that you can have a valid test.

Quote from: Quantum Spider 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 with only one ring and we could not attain a thrust vector. So went back and spent 6 months building a new double ring to stop counter rotation and tested it on the water table at GA tech with complete success. Professor Mitchell Walker stands behind the report.

You are making a really strong assertion about this professor here. Looking at information online, he clearly has a lab that he may have rented to you, but there is a giant gap between renting out lab equipment and actually standing behind claims that simply do not make sense, are contrary to all known physics, and lack any evidence of reasonable quality to support the strong assertions you keep making. Unless you can provide some actual evidence of his support of your ideas, this is at the level that could be considered slander, smearing his name. All of the research I can find from him is about real propulsion systems and related concepts that don't ignore conservation of energy and momentum.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #57 on:** 08/29/2023 12:29 am »

Quote from: CoolScience on 08/28/2023 08:50 pm

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 08/28/2023 05:42 pm
Thank you for your post I will try this test you have suggested. But I don't think the results will be any different from the pendulum tests that showed CID stayed on one side of the line and never oscillated back and forth.

H.P.
I don't know what test you are referring to, as far as I can tell you were not asked by anyone here to do some specific test, but to address the basic problems of your description of the device and similar questions you have not acknowledged.

The number of ways for the tests you have described so far to produce a false positive is too long to list. People on this forum have previously demonstrated how both linear vibrations and static mass shifts can invalidate torsion pendulum results by producing false positives. Something spinning has so many ways that it would cause problems that there is simply no reasonable way that you can have a valid test.

Quote from: Quantum Spider 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 with only one ring and we could not attain a thrust vector. So went back and spent 6 months building a new double ring to stop counter rotation and tested it on the water table at GA tech with complete success. Professor Mitchell Walker stands behind the report.
You are making a really strong assertion about this professor here. Looking at information online, he clearly has a lab that he may have rented to you, but there is a giant gap between renting out lab equipment and actually standing behind claims that simply do not make sense, are contrary to all known physics, and lack any evidence of reasonable quality to support the strong assertions you keep making. Unless you can provide some actual evidence of his support of your ideas, this is at the level that could be considered slander, smearing his name. All of the research I can find from him is about real propulsion systems and related concepts that don't ignore conservation of energy and momentum.

You have not viewed all the testing and information and yet you have some comment. Please review all information before posting.

Have you visited the website? Did you see the report from GA tech and the videos on the water table?
www.quantumdynamicsinc.com

And we didn't just RENT the space, Dean. walker's undergraduates performed the test. It's not like we went there and tested it ourselves. We never touched it! We just stood around and watched.
We paid The Daniel Guggenheim School of Aerospace Engineering at Ga Tech to test it for us. We wanted an independent non-biased test.

Smearing his name. His quote to me "I stand behind my report" his undergraduates made. I have been working with Dean. Walker for over 7 years.
H.P.

Quantum Spider · « **Reply #58 on:** 08/29/2023 12:35 am »

InterestedEngineer · « **Reply #59 on:** 08/29/2023 12:35 am »

Quote from: Quantum Spider on 08/28/2023 05:42 pm

Thank you for your post I will try this test you have suggested. But I don't think the results will be any different from the pendulum tests that showed CID stayed on one side of the line and never oscillated back and forth.

H.P.

which post.