Quote from: SeeShells on 07/16/2015 12:35 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 07/16/2015 08:43 amQuote from: SeeShells on 07/16/2015 05:59 amHere is power! 9 tubes at 20MW each.ShellOnly need 2MWs of microwave energy, fed to 20 x 100N/100kW EMDrives. Total Force is then 2,000N. Apply that to a 90t crewed ship and it will accelerate at 0.0023g.That ship can enter Pluto's orbit (40AU avg distance) in 12.4 months.Can do Mars at avg distance 225mkm in 73 days or at close approach, 60mkm, in 38 days.So no need for massive levels of Rf power. 2MWs of Rf (100kW of Rf per EMDrive) is more than enough to explore and colonise the whole solar system.We need to get it out of the dirt first. ShellThat is the plan and why I'll be building a commercial quality EMDrive full system from the start.Is always important to understand where you are going and what are the end goals, before you finalise the design and start the build. What I call integrated product development.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 07/16/2015 08:43 amQuote from: SeeShells on 07/16/2015 05:59 amHere is power! 9 tubes at 20MW each.ShellOnly need 2MWs of microwave energy, fed to 20 x 100N/100kW EMDrives. Total Force is then 2,000N. Apply that to a 90t crewed ship and it will accelerate at 0.0023g.That ship can enter Pluto's orbit (40AU avg distance) in 12.4 months.Can do Mars at avg distance 225mkm in 73 days or at close approach, 60mkm, in 38 days.So no need for massive levels of Rf power. 2MWs of Rf (100kW of Rf per EMDrive) is more than enough to explore and colonise the whole solar system.We need to get it out of the dirt first. Shell
Quote from: SeeShells on 07/16/2015 05:59 amHere is power! 9 tubes at 20MW each.ShellOnly need 2MWs of microwave energy, fed to 20 x 100N/100kW EMDrives. Total Force is then 2,000N. Apply that to a 90t crewed ship and it will accelerate at 0.0023g.That ship can enter Pluto's orbit (40AU avg distance) in 12.4 months.Can do Mars at avg distance 225mkm in 73 days or at close approach, 60mkm, in 38 days.So no need for massive levels of Rf power. 2MWs of Rf (100kW of Rf per EMDrive) is more than enough to explore and colonise the whole solar system.
Here is power! 9 tubes at 20MW each.Shell
Neither your simulations nor tests which yield µN or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a populistic way.What else did you expect?!
Quote from: graybeardsyseng on 07/16/2015 04:09 amVery interesting line of thought. Since in this concept "The EM Drive mimics gravity over a narrow bandwidth of the EM spectrum, near the cut-off modes of the cavity" then it would be interesting to see how the overall effect varies with the cut-off mode and frequency of the cavity (i.e. 1.2 Ghz, 2.4 Ghz. 5.8 etc). You mention "as small as possible" which would seem to imply as high a freq as possible but how does it vary (linear, exponential, ). Cost to generate clean RF goes up much faster than linear as frequency increases into the millimeter range so this will be a cost driver - hence the need to find the "sweet spot" for N/kg AND N/$. Its late and I may not be expressing this very well.HermanNot exactly the same as Todd's but...http://emdrive.wiki/@notsosureofit_Hypothesis
Very interesting line of thought. Since in this concept "The EM Drive mimics gravity over a narrow bandwidth of the EM spectrum, near the cut-off modes of the cavity" then it would be interesting to see how the overall effect varies with the cut-off mode and frequency of the cavity (i.e. 1.2 Ghz, 2.4 Ghz. 5.8 etc). You mention "as small as possible" which would seem to imply as high a freq as possible but how does it vary (linear, exponential, ). Cost to generate clean RF goes up much faster than linear as frequency increases into the millimeter range so this will be a cost driver - hence the need to find the "sweet spot" for N/kg AND N/$. Its late and I may not be expressing this very well.Herman
The horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.
Quote from: SeeShells on 07/15/2015 05:46 pmQuote from: DaCunha on 07/15/2015 05:37 pmI have a question:What is the most powerful microwave source that is available to private persons?And what is the maximum intensity that, say, copper can withstand without melting, exploding or whatever?Could we just buy a 1 MW+ microwave source build a frustrum resonator and see what happens?After seeking cover of course.Let us find a bored millionaire.This can't be too expensive. We don't have to optimize the system, which would become expensive at long term of course.Just apply the maximum power to a frustrum and check what will happen.Ask the Myth Busters. They like blowing things up. Sea! You are ingenious!That is the idea!It could be the solution to our problem!:NASA EW doesn't have the funds to check the behaviour of frustrum at 1 MW input and we are not allowed to fund their work.BUT: Tax payer is not as interested in professional research as he is in entertainment!!That is why TV has millions and of dollars while NASA EW does not even have 100000 $.Let us use this circumstance for our purpose!!Mythbusters could demonstrate the Shawyer effect for 1 MW input power. (Of course without all the optimization that has to be done as a result of long and serious science) But a demonstration of an unoptimized system just fed with a lot of power to compensate for this unoptimized state is all we need to raise awareness of NASA and the rest of the community!I have found out that you can actually send e-Mails with proposals for "Myths" to the producers!Let us work together and send E-Mails: Send an email to [email protected] with the title of your myth in the subject heading. This email goes directly to the team that makes the show.You can read about it here: http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/about-this-show/mythbusters-submit-a-myth/I already sent them an E-Mail but I think we need a lot more people to raise their awareness. I received an automatic answer, that they can not answer to individual mails but will "eventually" read it.
Quote from: DaCunha on 07/15/2015 05:37 pmI have a question:What is the most powerful microwave source that is available to private persons?And what is the maximum intensity that, say, copper can withstand without melting, exploding or whatever?Could we just buy a 1 MW+ microwave source build a frustrum resonator and see what happens?After seeking cover of course.Let us find a bored millionaire.This can't be too expensive. We don't have to optimize the system, which would become expensive at long term of course.Just apply the maximum power to a frustrum and check what will happen.Ask the Myth Busters. They like blowing things up.
I have a question:What is the most powerful microwave source that is available to private persons?And what is the maximum intensity that, say, copper can withstand without melting, exploding or whatever?Could we just buy a 1 MW+ microwave source build a frustrum resonator and see what happens?After seeking cover of course.Let us find a bored millionaire.This can't be too expensive. We don't have to optimize the system, which would become expensive at long term of course.Just apply the maximum power to a frustrum and check what will happen.
Quote from: deltaMass on 07/16/2015 01:47 pmThe horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.Unfortunately, the "complete and utter disappointment" will belong to those honest people who sincerely believe the extravagant predictions of an anonymous prophet. The prophet, being anonymous, suffers no loss of prestige, since such prophesies were posted anonymously and not using a real name.
Quote from: Rodal on 07/16/2015 01:51 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 07/16/2015 01:47 pmThe horizontal rotational acceleration test would be quite convincing so long as decent speeds could be attained. I think TT has the right idea there. But be prepared for complete and utter disappointment.Unfortunately, the "complete and utter disappointment" will belong to those honest people who sincerely believe the extravagant predictions of an anonymous prophet. The prophet, being anonymous, suffers no loss of prestige, since such prophesies were posted anonymously and not using a real name. This is what I don't get: The measurements are so small and inconsistent, and the originator of this propulsion concept has been shown to not understand the physics of his own device. Why are people proclaiming we are on the verge of some grand new era of spaceflight when the foundations of all this are so dodgy? It just seems like wishful thinking.
Quote from: DaCunha on 07/16/2015 12:51 pmNeither your simulations nor tests which yield µN or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a populistic way.What else did you expect?!So a totally self contained cordless rotary test rig, setup in any inside wind free location, accelerating from stop to say 120 rpm or 2 rps, then stopping and doing it again 10 times will not convince you?
That may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.
QuoteThat may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.
Quote from: WBY1984 on 07/16/2015 02:24 pmQuoteThat may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.Thus the genesis of these threads and independent builders. If it were taken for granted, there would be no need to be here.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 07/16/2015 02:08 pmQuote from: DaCunha on 07/16/2015 12:51 pmNeither your simulations nor tests which yield µN or mN of thrust will get the EMDrive out of the dirt.The possibility of measurement errors will always be used as an argument against you. And that is completely right!We need a cavity that is lifting off in front of our own eyes. Nothing else will convince people.You may call this populistic.. maybe so. And maybe you don't like this. If an invention is among the most important discoveries of mankind it tends to be communicated in a populistic way.What else did you expect?!So a totally self contained cordless rotary test rig, setup in any inside wind free location, accelerating from stop to say 120 rpm or 2 rps, then stopping and doing it again 10 times will not convince you?You will have to convince people that there are no EM interaction between the currents flowing in the wirings of your test rig and the surrounding medium, or that interaction averages out to zero on each turn.
Quote from: deltaMass on 07/16/2015 02:48 amQuote from: Notsosureofit on 07/16/2015 02:26 amQuote from: rfmwguy on 07/16/2015 02:15 am Its the missing link of GUT...giving away some working theories of mine, if thrust appears, I predict it will differ towards and away from a gravitational source. Interested? Hope so...its a hot potato subject you know.I would have to agree, the gravitational dispersion would add or subtract with the direction of the cavity.I am curious as to where you intend to get a "good supply" of gravity (or of its gradient or indeed of the curl of its potential ) when navigating in deep space?Here is where it may fall apart...perhaps the effect is only noticeable in an intense gravity field. Lots of testing needs to be completed...onwards and upwards.
Quote from: Notsosureofit on 07/16/2015 02:26 amQuote from: rfmwguy on 07/16/2015 02:15 am Its the missing link of GUT...giving away some working theories of mine, if thrust appears, I predict it will differ towards and away from a gravitational source. Interested? Hope so...its a hot potato subject you know.I would have to agree, the gravitational dispersion would add or subtract with the direction of the cavity.I am curious as to where you intend to get a "good supply" of gravity (or of its gradient or indeed of the curl of its potential ) when navigating in deep space?
Quote from: rfmwguy on 07/16/2015 02:15 am Its the missing link of GUT...giving away some working theories of mine, if thrust appears, I predict it will differ towards and away from a gravitational source. Interested? Hope so...its a hot potato subject you know.I would have to agree, the gravitational dispersion would add or subtract with the direction of the cavity.
Its the missing link of GUT...giving away some working theories of mine, if thrust appears, I predict it will differ towards and away from a gravitational source. Interested? Hope so...its a hot potato subject you know.
Quote from: rfmwguy on 07/16/2015 02:35 pmQuote from: WBY1984 on 07/16/2015 02:24 pmQuoteThat may be true of the Eagleworks tests using a known low Force dielectric inside the frustum but it is not true of SPR's 2nd and 3rd EMDrive tests nor of Prof Yang's tests that rejected using lossey dielectrics.How much do you trust SPR, since Shawer has, as I've said before, made a number of physics blunders (just going on what others have said on other pages in the threads) and has made outlandish and even silly statements in the press. Doesn't sound very trustworthy to me.Thus the genesis of these threads and independent builders. If it were taken for granted, there would be no need to be here.Indeed, I'm just put off by what seems to be a lot of 'jumping the gun' before enough independent verification has taken place.