Quote from: Rodal on 09/13/2017 03:12 pmNotice: not proportional to the square of the inverse -like Newtonian gravitational forces-, but proportional to the inverse. Thus the decay with distance is much smaller than the decay of Newtonian gravitational forces. On the other hand the dimensionless strain amplitude is proportional to the second derivative of the mass distribution of the source and inversely proportional to the distance from the source. Slightly irrelevant question. Is this the amplitude of the wave that decreases inversely with distance? (i.e. physical length change as measured by a gravitational wave detector)In waves such as electromagnetic waves, energy and momentum density are proportional to the square of the field strength. This means that while the energy per unit area (power per area if you are talking continuous and not short burst) in the wave decreases with the square of the distance, the field strength would only decrease linearly. I'd expect similar statements to be true for gravitational waves.
Notice: not proportional to the square of the inverse -like Newtonian gravitational forces-, but proportional to the inverse. Thus the decay with distance is much smaller than the decay of Newtonian gravitational forces. On the other hand the dimensionless strain amplitude is proportional to the second derivative of the mass distribution of the source and inversely proportional to the distance from the source.
The relative length change of two points resulting from gravitational wave is expressed asMax stretching & shrinking = hL,where L is a distance between two points and h is the dimensionless strain amplitude which is proportional to the second derivative of the mass distribution of the source and inversely proportional to the distance from the source.
Furthermore, the radiation energy is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the associated gravitational wave
Thanks. This is what I thought you meant, but I wanted to be sure. That site also confirms that the energy proportional to square of amplitude applies to gravitational waves just as it does to EM waves.QuoteFurthermore, the radiation energy is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the associated gravitational wave
Quote from: meberbs on 09/13/2017 04:25 pmThanks. This is what I thought you meant, but I wanted to be sure. That site also confirms that the energy proportional to square of amplitude applies to gravitational waves just as it does to EM waves.QuoteFurthermore, the radiation energy is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the associated gravitational waveAlso of interest:The luminosity (the total amount of energy emitted by the astronomical objects per unit time) of the gravitational wave from a binary is approximately proportional to mass to the third power M3 and inversely proportional to orbital separation -between the binary objects- as R5see page 2 ofhttps://www.astro.umd.edu/~miller/teaching/astr498/lecture25.pdfand the total energy of a circular binary of radius R is proportional to the mass and inversely proportional to the orbital separation RWhen it comes to gravitational waves, mass matters ! [pun intended]
...Dr. Rodal et al Thanks for an excellent discussion of this topic - gravitational waves- you together with meberbs, and S. Paulissen and of course further reading of Mssrs. Thorne, Damour, and Blanchet made this much clearer - I've been thinking over this since about 1976. The concept of spacetime being quite stiff is a excellent example. Is this in any way a gravitational radiation analog to the so-called electromagnetic characteristic impedance of free space i.e. square root of ratio of permeability of free space to permittivity of free space; which has a numerical value of about 376.6 ohms? In the past I have heard older RF engineers refer to this as how stiff space was WRT RF propagation.Thanks, e Herman
Guys,This experimental data from Jamie, Monomorphic, clearly shows the "stop accelerating or stop moving then stop generating force" operational characterists of EmDrives.Here the start of acceleration is delayed as Jamie manually adjust his freq gen to obtain resonant lock. Grey area is when Rf was applied to the EmDrive. Any Lorentz force would have been measured during the entire Rf power on time, yet there is no such force measured.Then once freq lock was obtained, his EmDrive started to generate an accelerative force and it moved forward. Yes it initially needed some very small vibratory external accelerative force to be applied to initiate the EmDrive self sustained and generated internal accelerative force generation.Finally it stopped accelerating, moving forward, when the continually increasing stored back torque in the torsion wire finally equalled the Emdrive generated forward torque.When it stopped accelerating, the EmDrive dropped out of what Roger calls Motor mode and stopped producing accelerative force.Then the back torque stored in the torsion wire drove the EmDrive back to it's pre acceleration start position, even though Rf was still applied.Phil
Quote from: TheTraveller on 09/13/2017 08:44 pmGuys,This experimental data from Jamie, Monomorphic, clearly shows the "stop accelerating or stop moving then stop generating force" operational characterists of EmDrives.Here the start of acceleration is delayed as Jamie manually adjust his freq gen to obtain resonant lock. Grey area is when Rf was applied to the EmDrive. Any Lorentz force would have been measured during the entire Rf power on time, yet there is no such force measured.Then once freq lock was obtained, his EmDrive started to generate an accelerative force and it moved forward. Yes it initially needed some very small vibratory external accelerative force to be applied to initiate the EmDrive self sustained and generated internal accelerative force generation.Finally it stopped accelerating, moving forward, when the continually increasing stored back torque in the torsion wire finally equalled the Emdrive generated forward torque.When it stopped accelerating, the EmDrive dropped out of what Roger calls Motor mode and stopped producing accelerative force.Then the back torque stored in the torsion wire drove the EmDrive back to it's pre acceleration start position, even though Rf was still applied.PhilI've made no secret of my distress over the unsubstantiated claims of thrust to power ratios, but this is one of the ideas that I think is actually credible; it's one of the most consistent anomalies across EM drive experiments.
clearly shows the "stop accelerating
Quote from: RotoSequence on 09/13/2017 09:46 pmI've made no secret of my distress over the unsubstantiated claims of thrust to power ratios, but this is one of the ideas that I think is actually credible; it's one of the most consistent anomalies across EM drive experiments.Which can also be explained by a number of experimental artifacts that include significant time delays: thermal diffusion through the materials involved (an effect which would also be present in vacuum, governed by the density and thermal conductivity of the materials involved) and thermal convection (not present in high vacuum, and governed by the gas density and thermal conductivity as well as any latent heat of vaporization of liquid, for example humid air) being notorious among them.So the clarity of Quote clearly shows the "stop accelerating is in the eye of the beholder unless this is verified by other independent means.
I've made no secret of my distress over the unsubstantiated claims of thrust to power ratios, but this is one of the ideas that I think is actually credible; it's one of the most consistent anomalies across EM drive experiments.
Quote from: RotoSequence on 09/13/2017 09:46 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 09/13/2017 08:44 pmGuys,This experimental data from Jamie, Monomorphic, clearly shows the "stop accelerating or stop moving then stop generating force" operational characterists of EmDrives.Here the start of acceleration is delayed as Jamie manually adjust his freq gen to obtain resonant lock. Grey area is when Rf was applied to the EmDrive. Any Lorentz force would have been measured during the entire Rf power on time, yet there is no such force measured.Then once freq lock was obtained, his EmDrive started to generate an accelerative force and it moved forward. Yes it initially needed some very small vibratory external accelerative force to be applied to initiate the EmDrive self sustained and generated internal accelerative force generation.Finally it stopped accelerating, moving forward, when the continually increasing stored back torque in the torsion wire finally equalled the Emdrive generated forward torque.When it stopped accelerating, the EmDrive dropped out of what Roger calls Motor mode and stopped producing accelerative force.Then the back torque stored in the torsion wire drove the EmDrive back to it's pre acceleration start position, even though Rf was still applied.PhilI've made no secret of my distress over the unsubstantiated claims of thrust to power ratios, but this is one of the ideas that I think is actually credible; it's one of the most consistent anomalies across EM drive experiments.Which can also be explained by a number of experimental artifacts that include significant time delays: thermal diffusion through the materials involved (an effect which would also be present in vacuum, governed by the density and thermal conductivity of the materials involved) and thermal convection (not present in high vacuum, and governed by the gas density and thermal conductivity as well as any latent heat of vaporization of liquid, for example humid air) being notorious among them. It has also been discussed that the EM Drive may just be a multipactor artifact, and if so time delays due to random secondary emission velocities and other effects may be involved.So the clarity of Quote clearly shows the "stop accelerating is in the eye of the beholder and willingness to look for other explanations, unless this is verified by other independent means.
...Need to also answer why, with constant Rf power, the positive displace force apparently completely stopped, disappeared,...
Quote from: TheTraveller on 09/13/2017 10:16 pm...Need to also answer why, with constant Rf power, the positive displace force apparently completely stopped, disappeared,...it depends on what is going, for example it could be an artifact of multipactor saturation due to debunching. The EM Drive as described in Shawyer's reports has been a black box with no reported measurements of what is going on inside it . In your message you write "2 watts" (for Jamie) but the power in Shawyer's experiments is way over that....(*) SeeShells had proposed internal measurements to understand what is going on...
Quote from: Rodal on 09/13/2017 09:54 pmQuote from: RotoSequence on 09/13/2017 09:46 pmI've made no secret of my distress over the unsubstantiated claims of thrust to power ratios, but this is one of the ideas that I think is actually credible; it's one of the most consistent anomalies across EM drive experiments.Which can also be explained by a number of experimental artifacts that include significant time delays: thermal diffusion through the materials involved (an effect which would also be present in vacuum, governed by the density and thermal conductivity of the materials involved) and thermal convection (not present in high vacuum, and governed by the gas density and thermal conductivity as well as any latent heat of vaporization of liquid, for example humid air) being notorious among them.So the clarity of Quote clearly shows the "stop accelerating is in the eye of the beholder unless this is verified by other independent means.It's far from proven, for sure. The better word to use would have been plausible, rather than credible. My bad!
Jamie and I did discuss this data with Roger. He commented it was representative of what he would expect from Jamie's test rig.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 09/13/2017 11:32 pmJamie and I did discuss this data with Roger. He commented it was representative of what he would expect from Jamie's test rig. But it is not representative of what would happen if the force generation stopped when the acceleration stopped. In that case, the drive would return straight back to the null position from the first peak (and oscillate around it) rather than oscillating around the forward position.As for what could be causing the displacement, you have to remember that while it is only 2W of power, it is also only equivalent to a couple of microNewtons of force. The end of the generation of the apparent force does not correspond to the drive reaching 0 acceleration or to the end of the RF power. This is not an encouraging piece of data for the emDrive working.
However, oscillating around the forward position cannot be used to solely exclude "emDrive working" from the possible explanations.
Does a gravity wave/space-time ripple transfer momentum?
(...)Meberbs,Why do you feel that it is your job to take down TT? What's in it for you? All you have to do is state you assertions (which you already have done), then patiently wait for proof of a working/not working EMDrive. Then you can triumphantly come out and claim vindication. You don't have to take over over the thread and you don't have to play the role of physics Messiah. The truth will reveal itself on its own.Having such strong assertions regarding our current understanding of physics will only serve to make for an even harder fall if EMDrive does in fact work. If EMDrive works, then we will be able to safely assume that you (as well as all of us) do not know as much as we think we do. We could be at a point in physics comparable to our knowledge of physics pre-Albert Einstein.Bottom line is, Let it go. This debate will not be settled with words, it will be settled with hardware.