Well, the frequency is only a little different but the drive power is also a lot different. So is the energy within the cavity a lot different. If the energy is coupling with some unknown particle couldn't it be quite sensitive to the rate of change of wave amplitude (frequency and power) within the cavity? So what would the mass of the particle need to be in order for it couple with more strongly in one case than the other? Just throwing it out there.
Quote from: aero on 10/05/2014 11:52 pmWell, the frequency is only a little different but the drive power is also a lot different. So is the energy within the cavity a lot different. If the energy is coupling with some unknown particle couldn't it be quite sensitive to the rate of change of wave amplitude (frequency and power) within the cavity? So what would the mass of the particle need to be in order for it couple with more strongly in one case than the other? Just throwing it out there.Please help me with more info. I see the input power to be the same 17 watts (see attached table, first two rows). Where is the info that the drive power is a lot different?
Ok I can't sleep so I hopped to polywell to lurk and read this:http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2949&start=240#p116102If this really is Woodward's assumption We can put it to bed. We just discussed this.I find it hard to believe he has confused mass energy within the atom with energies of covalent bonds.
Also (too lazy to search) it was made mention to AC...
Now with a very very scarce medium, the amount of mass/s that can be swallowed by the thruster is so weak that it takes very high ejection speeds to get a thrust level of any significance. When the scarcity of the medium implies relativistic ejection velocities to get interesting thrust, then the fact need [my edit?] to use a medium mass at all becomes irrelevant because you put more energy as kinetic energy than the energy equivalence of harvested mass : if you have that much onboard energy to spend on kinetic energy of the jet, then just creating the rest mass (from energy) of what you are ejecting becomes a negligible term. You are almost as good with a photon rocket and ignoring the medium.
All the rectifiers I'm familiar with use diodes. You can do it old school with tubes.
At what Hertz frequency does your head hertz ? Or should I ask what does the mode shape look like?
Ok I can't sleep so I hopped to polywell to lurk and read this:http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2949&start=240#p116102If this really is Woodward's assumption. We can put it to bed. We just discussed this. I find it hard to believe he has confused mass energy within the atom with energies of covalent bonds. ...
Using Specific Force (Force/InputPower) is negated by the experimental data. Force/InputPower according to the data is not a linear parameter of the system.
QuoteUsing Specific Force (Force/InputPower) is negated by the experimental data. Force/InputPower according to the data is not a linear parameter of the system.That's right. In fact the only linear thing I see in the data is case number verses number of test runs It is even a challenge to identify single valued relationships that might have meaning.
Lurker and former engineer here making first post. ..
An SF author, Mike Brotherton, beat you to it in 2008. His 'dark drive,' a sort of 'dark matter bussard ramjet,' was the drive for his starships in 'Spider Star.' Worth noting: before writing SF, he had a PHD in Astronomy, held a research position at 'Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory' (whatever that is:) ) and Kitt Peak National Observatory. Seems to be a bit of an X-Ray expert. However, the description of his 'dark drive' was superficial.
Quote from: ThinkerX link=topic=29276.msg1266791#msg128_An SF author, Mike Brotherton, beat you to it in 2008. His 'dark drive,' a sort of 'dark matter bussard ramjet,' was the drive for his starships in 'Spider Star.' Worth noting: before writing SF, he had a PHD in Astronomy, held a research position at 'Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory' (whatever that is:) ) and Kitt Peak National Observatory. Seems to be a bit of an X-Ray expert. However, the description of his 'dark drive' was superficial.Haha, i almost posted about Mike Brothertons drive from his other book Star Dragon, where they are able to form a singularity and split it in black and a white hole, and somehow (i forgot how) the ship moves along. (John Fornaro had mentioned something about black hole drives)Btw, dr Brotherton is an astro physicist.
I find it hard to believe he has confused mass energy within the atom with energies of covalent bonds.
Lurker and former engineer here making first post. I'm intrigued by the theoretical outlays here, but wondering how many among us are potential DIY experimentalists? I believe that sufficient information is now accessible to the public to independently replicate and confirm this technology widely. I envision something along the lines of the DIY drone developers and their enthusiasm for advancing that field, with a rapid feedback loop and dispersion of information.For starters, here is the latest published patent application:http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20130206&CC=GB&NR=2493361A&KC=AYBCO superconducting film to line the inner cavity:http://www.mtixtl.com/YBCO100nm-film-SrTiO3-101005.aspx3GHz+ signal generators:http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR5.TRC1.A0.H0.X3ghz+signal+generator&_nkw=3ghz+signal+generator&_sacat=0Microwave power amplifiers:http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=microwave+signal+amplifier&_from=R40|R40|R40&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xmicrowave+power+amplifier&_nkw=microwave+power+amplifier&_sacat=0The architectural design, materials, and concepts are described in a fairly straight-forward manner in the patent publication. YBCO film is superconducting above liquid nitrogen boiling point. I estimate that an experiment could be put together for less than $2000 of parts. Of course, the requisite time and knowledge for carrying it out would need to be conducted, probably with no compensation. Who among us are willing and able? Is there a Steve Jobs of propellentless devices among these ranks? My thought is that to advance this tech quickly, technically capable and independent people, not beholden too much to dogma or larger institutions, are going to have to run with it and spread it as far and wide as possible.
Quote.../...Would be dark matter powered dark matter jet rocket. Call that a "dark matter ramjet". Unless anyone can point me to previous publication or grant, I hereby take precedence on that concept An SF author, Mike Brotherton, beat you to it in 2008. His 'dark drive,' a sort of 'dark matter bussard ramjet,' was the drive for his starships in 'Spider Star.' Worth noting: before writing SF, he had a PHD in Astronomy, held a research position at 'Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory' (whatever that is:) ) and Kitt Peak National Observatory. Seems to be a bit of an X-Ray expert. However, the description of his 'dark drive' was superficial.
.../...Would be dark matter powered dark matter jet rocket. Call that a "dark matter ramjet". Unless anyone can point me to previous publication or grant, I hereby take precedence on that concept