Quote from: Mulletron on 04/30/2015 08:05 pmIt is clear that we are operating under other than usual symmetry conditions and that Maxwell's equations as we were trained to use them do not apply.In conclusion, this whole affair appears to be the work of someone who has convinced himself his theory is right and is on a fishing expedition for evidence that supports it. The experimental design is poor (camera pictures of LabView windows? unable to find an RF amplifier to deliver more than 100W of power? inability to measure forces that would be measurable in the 1800's?), the past 100+ years of physical experiments contradict the experiments, and there is no coherent underlying theory.This is not science, it is cargo cult science.
It is clear that we are operating under other than usual symmetry conditions and that Maxwell's equations as we were trained to use them do not apply.
Quote from: squid on 04/30/2015 10:14 pmIf you have a new physical theory which predicts some phenomenon, it should reduce to previously known physical theories, and be able to explain existing experiments and observations. If I believe that the EM drive is actually providing some nonclassical, unexplained thrust, I must throw out 100+ years of physics experiment and theory. I choose not to do that, which is why I do not believe further experimentation is warranted. Others may choose differently, but then they should ask themselves why they are so eager to disregard such a large body of established science.Forget all these new theories for the moment. Concentrate on the experiment.If all there is to these experiments is experimental error, then we can forget the whole thing.If there is anomalous thrust from these experiments, then theorists can try to figure out how it works.Some very intelligent and highly trained people here have been trying to show these results are experimental error. They are still talking about it because they can't explain away the results yet.
If you have a new physical theory which predicts some phenomenon, it should reduce to previously known physical theories, and be able to explain existing experiments and observations. If I believe that the EM drive is actually providing some nonclassical, unexplained thrust, I must throw out 100+ years of physics experiment and theory. I choose not to do that, which is why I do not believe further experimentation is warranted. Others may choose differently, but then they should ask themselves why they are so eager to disregard such a large body of established science.
Quote from: squid on 04/30/2015 08:55 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 04/30/2015 08:05 pmIt is clear that we are operating under other than usual symmetry conditions and that Maxwell's equations as we were trained to use them do not apply.In conclusion, this whole affair appears to be the work of someone who has convinced himself his theory is right and is on a fishing expedition for evidence that supports it. The experimental design is poor (camera pictures of LabView windows? unable to find an RF amplifier to deliver more than 100W of power? inability to measure forces that would be measurable in the 1800's?), the past 100+ years of physical experiments contradict the experiments, and there is no coherent underlying theory.This is not science, it is cargo cult science.Calling it cargo cult science is a bit too harsh. I reserve that description for individuals who have Bizarro World concepts of science, physics, etc. This is not the case here. What is missing are controlled experiments that would validate any conventional explanations for the anomalous thrust. These researchers are over-reaching. They are too eager to show just positive results. I am 99% certain there is nothing here. To explain the 1%: There remains a possibility that Shawyer has discovered something and the Eagleworks team are just not able to replicate what he has done. To their credit the Eagleworks team have provided a lot of experimental results in the last year. Shawyer has not done this. What I have seen in both the Eaglework's thrust graphs and the few of Shawyer's that I have seen is a lack of consistency in the step response of these devices. The calibration force (a capacitor on the Eagleworks setup) produces a driving function that can be considered to be two step functions. Anything else that drives this torque pendulum with a step function should cause the same system response. That is fundamental physics any mechanical or electrical engineer would agree with. But we don't see this happening when the RF is switched on. We also see an effect that looks like there is stored momentum. How is this happening? There is something else causing the "anomalous thrust". Until the effects of that other cause are nulled out any actual warp-drive or em-drive thrust has not been observed because a priori it must have the same system response as the calibration drive.
Quote from: zen-in on 04/30/2015 10:55 pmQuote from: squid on 04/30/2015 08:55 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 04/30/2015 08:05 pmIt is clear that we are operating under other than usual symmetry conditions and that Maxwell's equations as we were trained to use them do not apply.In conclusion, this whole affair appears to be the work of someone who has convinced himself his theory is right and is on a fishing expedition for evidence that supports it. The experimental design is poor (camera pictures of LabView windows? unable to find an RF amplifier to deliver more than 100W of power? inability to measure forces that would be measurable in the 1800's?), the past 100+ years of physical experiments contradict the experiments, and there is no coherent underlying theory.This is not science, it is cargo cult science.Calling it cargo cult science is a bit too harsh. I reserve that description for individuals who have Bizarro World concepts of science, physics, etc. This is not the case here. What is missing are controlled experiments that would validate any conventional explanations for the anomalous thrust. These researchers are over-reaching. They are too eager to show just positive results. I am 99% certain there is nothing here. To explain the 1%: There remains a possibility that Shawyer has discovered something and the Eagleworks team are just not able to replicate what he has done. To their credit the Eagleworks team have provided a lot of experimental results in the last year. Shawyer has not done this. What I have seen in both the Eaglework's thrust graphs and the few of Shawyer's that I have seen is a lack of consistency in the step response of these devices. The calibration force (a capacitor on the Eagleworks setup) produces a driving function that can be considered to be two step functions. Anything else that drives this torque pendulum with a step function should cause the same system response. That is fundamental physics any mechanical or electrical engineer would agree with. But we don't see this happening when the RF is switched on. We also see an effect that looks like there is stored momentum. How is this happening? There is something else causing the "anomalous thrust". Until the effects of that other cause are nulled out any actual warp-drive or em-drive thrust has not been observed because a priori it must have the same system response as the calibration drive.Well then let's hear your suggestions for how these concerns can be dealt with then? After all that's what this thread is all about.
Why don't we see any interaction in these vastly larger fields, or any "spacetime bending"?
Well then let's hear your suggestions for how these concerns can be dealt with then? After all that's what this thread is all about.
A lot of the skepticism of the results thus far has been centered around the support setups of the drive. Seems like a lot of time and energy could be saved if someone could convince Mr. Musk to tote one up into orbit and turn it on.
Quote from: lasoi on 05/01/2015 12:33 amA lot of the skepticism of the results thus far has been centered around the support setups of the drive. Seems like a lot of time and energy could be saved if someone could convince Mr. Musk to tote one up into orbit and turn it on.I suspect that that all be one of the next experiments. I also suspect that performance may be far better than expected the further it is from Earth.
The "Edison Effect" predates the discovery of the electron by 15 years. Manipulating something that you didn't know existed or wasn't fully understood would appear to be doable. Does Eagleworks have a motto? If not may I suggest something Robert Heinlein once wrote:"Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it."
It doesn't have anything to do with quantum mechanics, it has to do with relativity. So refutations based on quantum mechanics are irrelevant.Read the paper. The paper shows that there will be a force. Yes, the content of the paper is hard to keep in your head, but it's in there. http://www.emdrive.com/theorypaper9-4.pdfAs I understand it, the speed of light, being constant no matter what, essentially creates a separate reference frame from what is going on inside the cavity. The propulsive force is generated because of differences between the two reference frames. Going out on a metaphoric limb, it's like the EM waves in the cavity get squeezed against the speed of light, and it doesn't budge, so the cavity has to.But it doesn't matter how it is put into words. The reality is not in the narrative metaphors. The reality is in the physics equations, the math. The paper uses well-established equations from physics, and provides sources.
Furthermore, I think there has been some confusion from where I am coming from. I am merely trying to point out that new experiments must be consistent with past experiments when they overlap. No one has addressed my main concern:Why have we not seen this effect before?Please try to understand: IF the EM drive is workingTHEN the EM drive must be coupling electromagnetic energy to somethingThen why has this coupling never been observed before? This is not a small effect. There are many many test cavities that operate in particle accelerators, as antenna feedhorns, as resonators in oscillators... if this effect were real, it would affect all of these. Why has this not been the case? We are not working in a realm of physics that is out there... not subatomic particles, not astronomical observations of dark matter/dark energy, not trying to build a fusion device or a quantum computer. This is the kind of physics we need to know 100% to be able to design microwave antennas for cell phone towers.