Author Topic: Woodward Effect - Thread 2  (Read 194376 times)

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #640 on: 07/28/2022 12:15 am »
Mach effect thruster confirmation?  Space time manipulation for propulsion confirmed it would seem, at least impulse engines. .
If they lower the frequency for the mach effect thrust using said masses does it come close to the prediction of the merging black holes? https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/science/two-black-holes-merged-into-one-that-launched-away-at-5-million-kilometres-per-hour-7888578/

No new physics needed for the Woodward mach effect but it would be new to human engineering, and no you don't need black holes to do it.  Variables that change the effect are frequency, and quality of resonance.  I think inreoduction of magnetic and electric fields will also change the effect.

No, merging two black holes resulting in a high hyperbolic velocity is clearly a translation of the VERY high angular momentum of two spinning black holes conversion from angular to linear momentum. Nothing particularly relativistic about it, though at those gravities, relativity probably had some input on the output.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #641 on: 07/28/2022 12:17 am »
If the drive works under these conditions, then it works.  That the drive "works" seems very on topic to me.
Except for it having nothing to do with any of Woodward's theories, the Mach Effect, or anything other than the many other schemes to exploit General Relativity and black holes for propulsion as convenient mass/energy converters, and thus being off-topic here. The link to the paper was for the record, because pop-sci newspaper reporting based off of university press releases is of little value beyond alerting that a paper has been published.

That black holes can recoil during a merger lends no credence to any sort of 'gravity wave drive'. Or any drive that does not involve merging black holes, because you need to supply many tens of solar masses to slap about at high velocities to generate those waves.

Woodward hasn't postulated a theory, he's applying known General Relativity and the ADM model of the electron to provide a known mathematical basis for a possible ability to manipulate inertial to create propellantless thrust within the laws of conservation. If you had actually read Woodward's book you'd understand this.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline SpaceCadet1980

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • Liked: 91
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #642 on: 07/28/2022 01:09 am »
No, merging two black holes resulting in a high hyperbolic velocity is clearly a translation of the VERY high angular momentum of two spinning black holes conversion from angular to linear momentum. Nothing particularly relativistic about it, though at those gravities, relativity probably had some input on the output.
What you just quoted was ruled off-topic by the mods as it is talking about standard physics, but just FYI: You can't simply convert angular momentum to linear momentum. The only reason black holes can accelerate when merging is because they emit massive amounts of gravitational waves, which carry energy and momentum in the opposite direction. (The angular momentum of the spinning as they merge has an impact on generating the gravitational waves in the first place, but that is different than converting between linear and angular momentum, which literally have different units to begin with.)

If the drive works under these conditions, then it works.  That the drive "works" seems very on topic to me.
Except for it having nothing to do with any of Woodward's theories, the Mach Effect, or anything other than the many other schemes to exploit General Relativity and black holes for propulsion as convenient mass/energy converters, and thus being off-topic here. The link to the paper was for the record, because pop-sci newspaper reporting based off of university press releases is of little value beyond alerting that a paper has been published.

That black holes can recoil during a merger lends no credence to any sort of 'gravity wave drive'. Or any drive that does not involve merging black holes, because you need to supply many tens of solar masses to slap about at high velocities to generate those waves.

Woodward hasn't postulated a theory, he's applying known General Relativity and the ADM model of the electron to provide a known mathematical basis for a possible ability to manipulate inertial to create propellantless thrust within the laws of conservation. If you had actually read Woodward's book you'd understand this.
Completely false. Woodward's theory is inconsistent with standard GR. Mach's Principle as formulated by him is different than the Mach's principle built into GR. This has been covered here more than once.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9995
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1040
  • Likes Given: 599
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #643 on: 08/24/2022 08:30 pm »
Just bumping this thread to see if the experience of no news means that nothing's going on?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 893
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 313
  • Likes Given: 354
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #644 on: 09/01/2022 03:48 pm »
No, merging two black holes resulting in a high hyperbolic velocity is clearly a translation of the VERY high angular momentum of two spinning black holes conversion from angular to linear momentum. Nothing particularly relativistic about it, though at those gravities, relativity probably had some input on the output.
What you just quoted was ruled off-topic by the mods as it is talking about standard physics, but just FYI: You can't simply convert angular momentum to linear momentum. The only reason black holes can accelerate when merging is because they emit massive amounts of gravitational waves, which carry energy and momentum in the opposite direction. (The angular momentum of the spinning as they merge has an impact on generating the gravitational waves in the first place, but that is different than converting between linear and angular momentum, which literally have different units to begin with.)

If the drive works under these conditions, then it works.  That the drive "works" seems very on topic to me.
Except for it having nothing to do with any of Woodward's theories, the Mach Effect, or anything other than the many other schemes to exploit General Relativity and black holes for propulsion as convenient mass/energy converters, and thus being off-topic here. The link to the paper was for the record, because pop-sci newspaper reporting based off of university press releases is of little value beyond alerting that a paper has been published.

That black holes can recoil during a merger lends no credence to any sort of 'gravity wave drive'. Or any drive that does not involve merging black holes, because you need to supply many tens of solar masses to slap about at high velocities to generate those waves.

Woodward hasn't postulated a theory, he's applying known General Relativity and the ADM model of the electron to provide a known mathematical basis for a possible ability to manipulate inertial to create propellantless thrust within the laws of conservation. If you had actually read Woodward's book you'd understand this.
Completely false. Woodward's theory is inconsistent with standard GR. Mach's Principle as formulated by him is different than the Mach's principle built into GR. This has been covered here more than once.


I disagree.
...
Jerk generates gravitational waves peroid.  If you want to manipulate space time you will use it

Quote from: http://www.iiisci.org/journal/PDV/sci/pdfs/HDM219WH.pdf

gravitational waves (GWs) of all frequencies and is based upon the quadrupole equation first derived by Einstein in 1918[14
. ... orbital motion of binary stars or black holes, rotating rods, laboratory HFGW generation, etc. is based upon the jerk or shake of mass (time rate of change of acceleration), such as the change in centrifugal force ...

Note, edited by moderator removing the off-topic comments.
« Last Edit: 09/01/2022 11:55 pm by D_Dom »

Offline D_Dom

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 618
  • Liked: 415
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #645 on: 09/01/2022 07:07 pm »
dustinthewind I edited your post.

 If you desire to discuss my approach to moderation PM me, keep it out of the thread.

 Please comply with this forums guidelines.
« Last Edit: 09/01/2022 11:57 pm by D_Dom »
Space is not merely a matter of life or death, it is considerably more important than that!

Offline SpaceCadet1980

  • Member
  • Posts: 63
  • Liked: 91
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #646 on: 09/02/2022 05:32 am »
No, merging two black holes resulting in a high hyperbolic velocity is clearly a translation of the VERY high angular momentum of two spinning black holes conversion from angular to linear momentum. Nothing particularly relativistic about it, though at those gravities, relativity probably had some input on the output.
What you just quoted was ruled off-topic by the mods as it is talking about standard physics, but just FYI: You can't simply convert angular momentum to linear momentum. The only reason black holes can accelerate when merging is because they emit massive amounts of gravitational waves, which carry energy and momentum in the opposite direction. (The angular momentum of the spinning as they merge has an impact on generating the gravitational waves in the first place, but that is different than converting between linear and angular momentum, which literally have different units to begin with.)

Woodward hasn't postulated a theory, he's applying known General Relativity and the ADM model of the electron to provide a known mathematical basis for a possible ability to manipulate inertial to create propellantless thrust within the laws of conservation. If you had actually read Woodward's book you'd understand this.
Completely false. Woodward's theory is inconsistent with standard GR. Mach's Principle as formulated by him is different than the Mach's principle built into GR. This has been covered here more than once.


I disagree.
...
Jerk generates gravitational waves peroid.  If you want to manipulate space time you will use it

Quote from: http://www.iiisci.org/journal/PDV/sci/pdfs/HDM219WH.pdf

gravitational waves (GWs) of all frequencies and is based upon the quadrupole equation first derived by Einstein in 1918[14
. ... orbital motion of binary stars or black holes, rotating rods, laboratory HFGW generation, etc. is based upon the jerk or shake of mass (time rate of change of acceleration), such as the change in centrifugal force ...

Note, edited by moderator removing the off-topic comments.
Your reference is not a reputable source, he has made numerous inaccurate claims about gravitational waves. There is nothing at the laboratory scale that can generate significant gravitational waves.

While the changes in the quadrupole moment that cause gravitational wave radiation will generally involve jerk, not all instances of jerk necessarily involve gravitational waves. For details, you can see lecture 24 at the link below, but for example spherically symmetric collapse  of a star would not generate gravitational waves, despite clearly involving changing accelerations.
https://www.astro.umd.edu/~miller/teaching/astr498/

But this does not matter, because however you arrange the equations it does not change that Woodward does not claim that gravitational waves are what produces thrust in his system, which is appropriate because the force per power levels he claims are greater than gravitational waves could ever produce. Gravitational waves even if you had a magic way to generate them at high power would still be no better than a laser for the purposes of propulsion. If you want to discuss gravitational waves further, it belongs in a thread that actually has a relation to gravitational waves, probably a new one since I don't think there is an active one.

Offline Uncle Slacky

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • France
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #647 on: 09/15/2022 10:50 am »
For those interested, Jim Woodward will be presenting and taking questions this coming Saturday (17th) at the Alternative Propulsion Engineering Conference:

https://www.altpropulsion.com/events/apec-9-17-uaps-aaro-mach-effect-propulsion/

The recording will be viewable at the same page early next week.

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3183
  • Likes Given: 2705
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #648 on: 09/19/2022 06:02 pm »
For those interested, Jim Woodward will be presenting and taking questions this coming Saturday (17th) at the Alternative Propulsion Engineering Conference:

https://www.altpropulsion.com/events/apec-9-17-uaps-aaro-mach-effect-propulsion/

The recording will be viewable at the same page early next week.
Here is the presentation on Youtube.

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3183
  • Likes Given: 2705
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #649 on: 09/19/2022 07:40 pm »
I need to start off with this segment of a lecture by Professor Richard Feynman. Got to Love the guy.
Credits: Cornell University U.S.A., The Character of Physical Law, Professor Richard Feynman gives the Messenger Lectures
The Great Conservation Principles
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/fml.html#3

This is to let everyone know how important the Center of Mass monitoring is with the advent of the Tracker Software and how it shows the device thrusting on the torsion arm moving and accelerating it without Newton's Third Law obscuring thrust data. (Action/Reaction)

The top red trace is the Philtec sensor at the other end of the torsion arm
The blue is the Center of Mass as calculated by Tracker software
The Green is the device

Shell

Offline bad_astra

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1920
  • Liked: 311
  • Likes Given: 541
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #650 on: 09/20/2022 04:32 pm »
found slide at 1:05:30 particularly interesting, but Woodward and Broyles entire presentation was fascinating.
"Contact Light" -Buzz Aldrin

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3183
  • Likes Given: 2705
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #651 on: 09/20/2022 05:59 pm »
found slide at 1:05:30 particularly interesting, but Woodward and Broyles entire presentation was fascinating.
Thanks for the comment. The slide @ 1:05:30 showing the Center of Mass was a serious point of the Tracker data presentation.

The other was the evaluation of the torsion arm and device together. You can see from this data from test#7(the last pulse shows it clearly), that when there is Newton's third law of conservation the device and torsion arm move towards or apart simultaneously, (https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/forces-newtons-laws/newtons-laws-of-motion/a/what-is-newtons-third-law Newton's third law: "If an object A exerts a force on object B, then object B must exert a force of equal magnitude and opposite direction back on object A." ). When the device accelerates through harmonics hitting high Q of the swept frequency there is no counter-reaction in the torsion arm until it gets pushed by the device's springs. (added: then the torsion arm accelerates in the same direction!)

My Very Best,
Shell (Michelle)

Added: Tracker Targets

Red=Torsion arm assy

Green=Device Brass Reaction Mass Center

Blue= Center of Mass
« Last Edit: 09/21/2022 07:33 pm by SeeShells »

Offline RERT

Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #652 on: 09/23/2022 04:38 pm »
The charts shown at 1:30:00 et seq. eventually show a solid deflection of a torsion beam at will when your MEGA thruster is powered on at a specific frequency. The beam is deflected when power is on, for variable periods of time, and relaxes to a null position when power is off. You said that the deflection calibrates to a force of 80 Micro-Newtons.

Did I get all of that right?

1) Am I deducing correctly from the above that you are asserting that measurements of the movement of the COM of the system precludes this being an artefact of dynamic vibration-induced COM changes, as Monomorphic has described?

2) Naturally, it would be great to hear Monomorphic's comments if that is the case.

3) Is there any possibility of Lorentz force on the assembly via connecting wires while the power is on?


Offline Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1725
  • United States
  • Liked: 4364
  • Likes Given: 1403
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #653 on: 09/23/2022 10:45 pm »
2) Naturally, it would be great to hear Monomorphic's comments if that is the case.

It is good that they now have the ability to monitor more of the moving parts of the device/measurement system using the video camera and laser sensors. This was a recommendation made here some time ago. It is mentioned at 1:03:25 that measurements of many of the moving parts were made, however, only one small chart is shown. It would be nice to see more of these charts with all the parts moving when the device is powered.  In my experiments where I looked at all the moving parts, it showed that one part was pushing opposite the other parts and if we only point the laser sensor at a single part, then it will look like real thrust. 

As for the "calculated center-of-mass" we will need to look into how the software makes that calculation.  Since it is open source, that can be done using my existing hanging pendulum setup. I'm also not exactly sure what the point is. Are we supposed to expect the calculated center-of-mass to not move at all? After all, the false-positive artifact is caused by the pendulum moving because of center-of-mass changes in the device. 

We have also seen previously that a "a solid deflection of a torsion beam at will" is not all that hard to achieve once we know how center-of-mass offsets work with pendulums. Rattling stuff on the end of a stick does weird things, but I'm still sure propulsion is not one of them. 
« Last Edit: 09/24/2022 12:54 am by Monomorphic »

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3183
  • Likes Given: 2705
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #654 on: 09/24/2022 12:59 am »
2) Naturally, it would be great to hear Monomorphic's comments if that is the case.

It is good that they now have the ability to monitor more of the moving parts of the device/measurement system using the video camera and laser sensors. This was a recommendation made here some time ago. It is mentioned at 1:03:25 that measurements of many of the moving parts were made, however, only one small chart is shown. It would be nice to see more of these charts with all the parts moving when the device is powered.  In my experiments where I looked at all the moving parts, it showed that one part was pushing opposite the other parts and if we only point the laser sensor at a single part, then it will look like real thrust. 

As for the "calculated center-of-mass" we will need to look into how the software makes that calculation.  Since it is open source, that can be done using my existing hanging pendulum setup. I'm also not exactly sure what the point is. Are we supposed to expect the calculated center-of-mass to not move at all? After all, the false-positive artifact is caused by the pendulum moving because of center-of-mass changes in the device. 

We have also seen previously that a "a solid deflection of a torsion beam at will" is not all that hard to do once we know how center-of-mass offsets work with pendulums. Rattling stuff on the end of a stick does weird things, but I'm still sure propulsion is not one of them.
Monomorphic and All,

I'm attaching part 1 of the APEC pdf presentation slide set, you can see the tracker software data on each of the 5 data points taken at the end of the torsion arm and the device, and the Fullerton data set taken from the Philtec fiber sensor on the other end of the torsion arm.

Yes you're right rattling and thrashing "stuff" on the end of a stick does weird things and until you account for all the thrashing stuff, it can and will create false positives. There is a link in the APEC presentation for the free Tracker software if you would care to try it on one of your devices you did.

I'll be glad to answer any and all the questions anyone may have.

My Best,
Shell


Offline Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1725
  • United States
  • Liked: 4364
  • Likes Given: 1403
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #655 on: 09/24/2022 01:38 am »
I'll be glad to answer any and all the questions anyone may have.

Thank you SeeShells for posting this new data and answering questions. Would you please also post the original video used in the Tracker software for the "Track Everything that Moves" slide? 

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3183
  • Likes Given: 2705
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #656 on: 09/24/2022 02:18 am »
I'll be glad to answer any and all the questions anyone may have.

Thank you SeeShells for posting this new data and answering questions. Would you please also post the original video used in the Tracker software for the "Track Everything that Moves" slide?
Moinomorphic,

You're very welcome.

Raw file for you.  There is a lot more created by the Tracker software that can be exported in a comma or tab txt file for importing into a spreadsheet, velocity, acceleration, etc.

SeeShells

Offline Bob Woods

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 380
  • Salem, Oregon USA
  • Liked: 515
  • Likes Given: 1563
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #657 on: 09/24/2022 04:17 am »
Thanks for posting Shell.

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3183
  • Likes Given: 2705
Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #658 on: 09/24/2022 12:50 pm »
Thanks for posting Shell.
Bob :)!  Hope all's well.

Thought you would like to see a short gif of a MEGA device on the air-bearing sled (air is off ) carbon fiber support plate that relies on a stick-slip action (like the Bull Drive) propelling itself across a very slick surface. I think Monomorphic did a 3D printing of one driven by a coil. The point is, false positives abound when considering a propellentless drive evaluation. This is why I built a frictionless air-bearing sled, a 2 and 3-wire hanging pendulum, a vertical counterbalanced torsion arm, and then back to a mini air-bearing sled. I've take extreme efforts to follow George Hathaways's paper of rules to determine false positives from air to electrical, to thermals, etc. Why put such effort into something if only to try to fool yourself or others? Still leaves us on this ball of mud.

My Best,
SeeShells

Added: Using Tracker on the airsled when running air and the device to show action/reaction (Newton's 3rd law). Note" the way the top light green trace 4kg air sled and the 160 gram red traces in opposed directions.
« Last Edit: 09/24/2022 02:56 pm by SeeShells »

Offline RERT

Re: Woodward Effect - Thread 2
« Reply #659 on: 09/25/2022 05:10 pm »
Per Monomorphic's comment above, I'm a little befuddled as to what to expect to see in the false-positive case.

I assume that involves a change to the COM of part of the apparatus including the drive.

I thought I heard your say this was a counterbalanced vertical torsion balance. If the COM moves vertically: ? so what ?.
If it moves radially: so what? The only effect I can imagine is if the COM moves azimuthally. That might deflect the arm if the beam was pivoted freely, but it looks to be rigid at the centre.

Help! Can you describe how a false positive might arise?

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1