Quote from: Rodal on 09/29/2014 11:58 pmRejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven...Yeah sure. That's what they told Osama Bin Laden:When OBL died, George Washington met him at the Pearly Gates. He slapped him across the face and yelled, "How dare you try to destroy the Nation I helped conceive?"Patrick Henry approached, punched him in the nose and shouted, "You wanted to end our liberties but you failed."James Madison followed, kicked him in the groin and said, "This is why I allowed our government to provide for the common defense!"Thomas Jefferson was next, beat Osama with a long cane and snarled, "It was evil men like you who inspired me to write the Declaration of Independence. "The beatings and thrashings continued as George Mason, James Monroe and 66 other early Americans unleashed their anger on the radical, socialist, leader.As Osama lay bleeding and in pain, an Angel appeared. Osama wept and Said, "This is not what you promised me." The Angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 VIRGINIANS waiting for you in Heaven. What did you think I said?"
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven...
Raketa, read back in the thread a ways, this is not a good idea. Current thrust level for both what Eagleworks and Woodward have studied are too low, and more importantly too inconsistent& not sustained, to provide sufficient impulse to see some an unquestioned effect in orbit, especially in high-drag environment like ISS altitude.
Quote from: cuddihy on 09/30/2014 11:21 amRaketa, read back in the thread a ways, this is not a good idea. Current thrust level for both what Eagleworks and Woodward have studied are too low, and more importantly too inconsistent& not sustained, to provide sufficient impulse to see some an unquestioned effect in orbit, especially in high-drag environment like ISS altitude.Ion engine thrust 20-250mNDragon solar panels could deliver 2kW power.Chinese claim 720mN with 2.5 kWNASA 91uN with just 0.017kWAre you it will be not possible indicate slowing of decay Dragon trunk?
Quote from: raketa on 09/30/2014 08:37 pmQuote from: cuddihy on 09/30/2014 11:21 amRaketa, read back in the thread a ways, this is not a good idea. Current thrust level for both what Eagleworks and Woodward have studied are too low, and more importantly too inconsistent& not sustained, to provide sufficient impulse to see some an unquestioned effect in orbit, especially in high-drag environment like ISS altitude.Ion engine thrust 20-250mNDragon solar panels could deliver 2kW power.Chinese claim 720mN with 2.5 kWNASA 91uN with just 0.017kWAre you it will be not possible indicate slowing of decay Dragon trunk?I think the problem with choosing to fund them now is the present absence of delineation between interactions with the torsion pendulum and actual thrust. Satellite power is not a problem.
Quote from: RotoSequence on 09/30/2014 08:41 pmQuote from: raketa on 09/30/2014 08:37 pmQuote from: cuddihy on 09/30/2014 11:21 amRaketa, read back in the thread a ways, this is not a good idea. Current thrust level for both what Eagleworks and Woodward have studied are too low, and more importantly too inconsistent& not sustained, to provide sufficient impulse to see some an unquestioned effect in orbit, especially in high-drag environment like ISS altitude.Ion engine thrust 20-250mNDragon solar panels could deliver 2kW power.Chinese claim 720mN with 2.5 kWNASA 91uN with just 0.017kWAre you it will be not possible indicate slowing of decay Dragon trunk?I think the problem with choosing to fund them now is the present absence of delineation between interactions with the torsion pendulum and actual thrust. Satellite power is not a problem.AndNASA Tapered Cavity THRUST force =5*10^(-5) N to 9*10^(-5) N demonstrated for less than 40 seconds pulse duration
Another interesting paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.5676.pdf
OK, here's the Bose-Einstein paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0901.1106v4.pdf
Quote from: Notsosureofit on 09/30/2014 11:24 pmOK, here's the Bose-Einstein paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0901.1106v4.pdfIs there an estimate of what would be the effective density (mass over occupied volume) of the Bose-Einstein condensate of axion Cold Dark Matter?
Quote from: RonM on 09/19/2014 05:06 pmQuote from: aero on 09/19/2014 04:58 pmHere is a paper written to describe the Casimir energy between a metallic plate and a dielectric plate within a cavity. The configuration is somewhat similar to the Tapered Cavity tested at EagleWorks. http://math.scichina.com:8081/sciAe/EN/abstract/abstract377962.shtml#I wonder if someone can help interpret this paper. To me, it does not seem consistent with what has been published elsewhere, in particular I see an unfamiliar term Quotewhere -pi/(24a^2) is the Casimir force between two ideal conducting plates separated by a.But also this paper is developed in a reference system where c=1, h-bar=1. That is a common system but how does one convert the results into standard units of measure. I forgot, if I ever knew how.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_lighthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constantWell yes I know that, but the author uses "1" in the equations derivation for each of these terms so where do I substitute the real values back into the end result to get real measurable values? Am I forced to carefully follow the derivation through to the end then know where the c's and h-bars go? (numerator, denominator, power, etc.)
Quote from: aero on 09/19/2014 04:58 pmHere is a paper written to describe the Casimir energy between a metallic plate and a dielectric plate within a cavity. The configuration is somewhat similar to the Tapered Cavity tested at EagleWorks. http://math.scichina.com:8081/sciAe/EN/abstract/abstract377962.shtml#I wonder if someone can help interpret this paper. To me, it does not seem consistent with what has been published elsewhere, in particular I see an unfamiliar term Quotewhere -pi/(24a^2) is the Casimir force between two ideal conducting plates separated by a.But also this paper is developed in a reference system where c=1, h-bar=1. That is a common system but how does one convert the results into standard units of measure. I forgot, if I ever knew how.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_lighthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant
Here is a paper written to describe the Casimir energy between a metallic plate and a dielectric plate within a cavity. The configuration is somewhat similar to the Tapered Cavity tested at EagleWorks. http://math.scichina.com:8081/sciAe/EN/abstract/abstract377962.shtml#I wonder if someone can help interpret this paper. To me, it does not seem consistent with what has been published elsewhere, in particular I see an unfamiliar term Quotewhere -pi/(24a^2) is the Casimir force between two ideal conducting plates separated by a.But also this paper is developed in a reference system where c=1, h-bar=1. That is a common system but how does one convert the results into standard units of measure. I forgot, if I ever knew how.
where -pi/(24a^2) is the Casimir force between two ideal conducting plates separated by a.
Quote from: Notsosureofit on 09/30/2014 11:24 pmOK, here's the Bose-Einstein paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/0901.1106v4.pdfSo, as I see this it would work like Dr. White's momentum-transfer model within a "sea of weakly-interacting particles surrounding the outside and the inside of the spacecraft" with the following big changes (Cold Dark Matter instead of Quantum Vacuum virtual particles):Quantum Vacuum Plasma--> Bose-Einstein Condensate of Axions (but both acting as a "compressible fluid" in Dr. White's conceptual model)electron-positron virtual particle pair --> Axions (Cold Dark Matter)Unresolved issues: A) Four experiments consistently point towards an axion mass of 110*10^(-6) eV. This mass implies a microwave frequency for ADMX experiment of ~30GHZ or about 15 times higher than the frequency at which NASA Eagleworks run the Truncated Cone Cavity (1.94 GHz).B) The NASA Eagleworks experiments are missing the ~3 T magnetic field surrounding the microwave cavity. The only magnetic field in the Eagleworks experiments is the one produced by the three neodymium (NdFeB Grade N42) block magnets, which are there only by chance ( to dampen the swinging and torsional oscillations of the inverted pendulum). The magnetic damper is located about a foot away from the tested microwave device (Cannae or Frustum). The magnetic field intensity at the surface of a neodymium magnet is 1.25 T Still, it makes much more sense than the "exotic" theories: a real particle (axions) from the exterior exchanging real momentum with the photons and not interacting with the metal walls of the cavity:<<2. A Bose-Einstein condensate would certainly take care of the mass coupling problem.3. The coupling constant is the same in both directions: axion->photons, photons->axion.>>It doesn't present the much greater difficulties associated with Woodward's theory and the Quantum Vacuum theory.
I was suggesting first to proof/disproof in space, because lot of people thinking this is good idea, why we didn't try to make it happen.I am putting my money where my mouth is ready to pledge initial $1000 for this project. 1/Could we contact professor Dr Woodward if he will be interesting to participate and build his apparatus for space environment.2/We have to find who will do crowdsourcing for us. Does anybody have experience or could recommend it somebody who has good reputation. . .
Found the below link while researching Unruh. I've been reading about this guy's theory of modified inertia called MiHsC. Here are his comments on emdrive:http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/09/emdrives-mihsc.html
Can anybody provide a link to information from Roger Shawyer showing the dielectric material Shawyer uses, the dielectric shape and dimensions and the dielectric location ?
...Woodward is working on some crowdsourcing at present, but note that he is only concerned with proof of science, not proof of technology as this above. He's not looking at a TRL7 demo while we're planning around one. ..
...But I don't think he uses that approach any more:"The first thruster built by SPR Ltd and tested in 2003 also used a dielectric section, but to obtain our subsequent high thrust levels, we abandoned the dielectric and concentrated on our present cavity design."