@meberbs>They are stating right there that the results of your experiment are already obvious assuming you know >what you are talking about, and there is no reason to measure both fields since the ratio is known to be >fixed.Everything is known but I repeat that there is no experimental data of simultaneous measurement of E and H in the far zone.I do not want to convince anyone but I want to stick to the experimental data only. If you keep telling me that "it is known" I will continue to repeat that I want to see a confirmation experiment
>The listed applications for the device include many RF transmission applications. If none of the H-field >measurement devices ever measured any RF fields, people would have noticed........>Between the fact that these probes work at all, and the many other experimental results (such as >radiation pressure, the simple existence of RF radiation, and the fields inside a charging capacitor) that >are perfectly described by Maxwell's equations, your denial of basic physics is simply unsupported.you is back in measures in near zone where the fireflies can become lanterns
> There is no alternative theory that can explain any of these results let alone all of them.For me the theories must arrive after the experimental facts AND NOT BEFORE ...
Mr. Meberbs, I'm willing to say that I'm wrong but I want to say it only after an irrefutable experimental event
... I'm not asking for something extraneous to the basic physical principle that you have to bend everything into physics, unless you belong to the faculty of mathematical philosophy. The basic principle in physics is and remains: only what is measurable is real
Jan Bulli Wilkinson contradicted you in the calibration of the Narda probes of which you said without producing bibliography:"The Narda probes are calibrated, which is almost certainly done by running a similar test to what you proposed. You can contact them and ask about their calibration procedures if you want. "
The fact that Jan Bulli Wilkinson says that the vacuum impedance is not part of the calibration of the Narda probes does not give the slightest suspicion about a possible sequence of experimental errors about the measurement of H from Displacement Current.
Even if you presents me with thousands of tests in favor of the magnetic field of the displacement current,
I will always ask myself why for more than a century there is no simple measurement of the vacuum impedance E/H = 377 ohm
and because you are in favor of all tests less than the one in a simultaneous measurement of E and H is made in the far zone which would remove any doubt.
I think it's useless to repeat the same things.
These are the experimental thrust data with the remote controlled and remote-controlled pnn prototype:- Power supply between 250 and 300 watts- Push in about 10 seconds increasing and with final value (at the stop of the amplifier) between 600 milligrams and 1000 milligrams .... In practice it SEEMS about 4 or 5 times more than I saw before with the power supply NOT to batteries ereconfirms as previously mentioned in this topic
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=43756.0 where there is a movie of the same typeof the high non-linearity of the inertia law of the pnn system.
For years now I have been talking about this possible law of inertia and no one has ever commented on it even with minimal mathematical hypotheses.
Read what is written in: http://www.calmagorod.org/inerzia-della-pnn/
The external reference integral with the fixed stars observes this acceleration inside the pnn system at least as a variation of acceleration from / dt(Obviously, temporal variations of order superior to the first are also possible).So the internal force must be equal to less than a constant ka external one since we are talking about the same force seen by two different references.
The balance scale knife tilts on a titanium disc. Kern electronic scales are not designed to be immersed in a radiative pnn bath
@meberbs> Translation error? There is no movie in this thread.I do not understand, there is this link
If you want to hurry up (i.e. public test of the pnn in which external ASPS www.asps.it can do all the experiments on pnn pushing they want with F432) we could say to us where we can buy thrust sensors or an electronic balance of sensitivity equal to at least .01 grams which tolerate at least a maximum load of 3.5 kg and which has the following configuration:
Whether battery powered and controlled from a remote computer, it transmits all data as a function of time to the computer, with only fiber optic connections.
Mr. President Trump said he would like to go to Mars.
@meberbs> If you were generating a real force, the characteristic of the measurements would not be continuously> increasing.I thought the same before ... But if there is violation of the newton III ... the law of inertia is not a uniform linear motion for the pnn but a uniformly accelerated motion with the engines off.Too difficult to accept theoretically .... ... the only way is the experimental finding. There is no amount of words or mathematics to accept such an event ... it must only start from experimental observation.
> Go read through some history on the emDrive thread.I have no time for this
> You want to build a torsion balance. If you need assistance with that you can PMMonomorphic or> Seeshells for advice, they have both been building some very good setups.Well Monomorphic and Seeshells if they want can bring their experimental setup to public pnn tests and they will be welcome.
The engineers who help me have advised me to use only a good electronic scale, a pnn prototype powered by batteries and operated with a remote control.
My detection request with sensors and fiber optics is based on the fact that in 10 seconds of action I have to check various parameters to avoid faults to the amplifier's mosfet and other problems. The thermal dissipation of the pnn is now only passive in order to avoid faults I do not have to operate anything not exceeding the limit of 10 seconds.
If we want to save energy conservation, the only possibility is that the mass of the pnn spaceship will decrease with increasing speed and thrust. A very antirelativistic event and therefore usually we must start from the experimental observation to accept it.In other words, such antirelativistic event is unsustainable even mathematically.
@meberbsIf it transmits at least 5 push data in a second on a computer, I am oriented to choose these types of scaleshttps://www.andweighing.com.au/products-service/scientific-balances/gx-a-balancesbut I have to hear the engineers who are helping me firstQuo fata ferunt
1) I have warmed up on electronic scales and on other weighing scales of different types: dummy load, structures of various types, etc. etc. Result: Nothing at all heat does not determine the effects observed with F432 and cart
2) then there is the speed, the rapidity of variation of the thrust of F432 can not be reached and equaled by any thermal deformation
3) If you then assume that there is some magnetic effect ... it just has to show me if a compass needle moves at 432 MHz or the Earth's magnetic field or other magnetic field can simulate the effects that are observed.
4) I have always offered to anyone (it happened already in 2005) to show that I am wrong for which someone can only propose an experiment where the aforementioned events or others deceive the electronic scale obviously screened.
5) I also offer the possibility to check the validity of my scale shielding
6) I offer to anyone I repeat to engineer a deception of any NEW type with a screened electronic scale.
7) I also offer to anyone to bring their own measurement equipment or replace with my own measuring devices
I set no limits to contrary and experimental demonstrations that can repeat the effects measured
9) I will never convince you, so I have to let it fly ... .. but you will also tell me that there is some hidden helix or mass of outgoing reaction.
10) If with a better and more suitable apparatus I go to Mars and back, you will tell me that it was the Martians
You have never explained what your drive is other than pictures of a foil covered box.