Quote from: Mulletron on 10/06/2014 07:24 amGiven Woodward's assertions about exciting an oscillation in a dielectric and then pushing on it at an opportune time to move forward clearly does violate conservation of momentum.If I'm not gravely mistaken, Woodward's theory is supposed to involve excitation of mass fluctuations much larger than the E/cē you'd calculate from the local electromagnetics, via gravitational interaction with distant matter. It's supposed to conserve momentum via that same interaction.
Given Woodward's assertions about exciting an oscillation in a dielectric and then pushing on it at an opportune time to move forward clearly does violate conservation of momentum.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/06/2014 12:34 pmQuote from: 93143 on 10/06/2014 07:06 amThey're the same thing. They both gravitate and have inertia. The scale is wildly different, but that's immaterial.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordtvedt_effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principleAlso note that the Nordtvedt effect has not been observed, despite multiple attempts.
Quote from: 93143 on 10/06/2014 07:06 amThey're the same thing. They both gravitate and have inertia. The scale is wildly different, but that's immaterial.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordtvedt_effect
They're the same thing. They both gravitate and have inertia. The scale is wildly different, but that's immaterial.
They are not the same thing in our universe...
Remember that mass is constrained over space and energy is constrained over time!
Perhaps you should rephrase this, because right now it makes no sense.
I'm also assuming it is safe to say that Gravitational Mass can never be separated from Rest Mass, that they are invariant. I think it is safe to say that indeed gravitational self energy does indeed contribute to inertial mass, and that may not be the only thing or the only way which in which mechanisms contributes to inertial mass, in our universe, either way gravitational self energy DOES. Verified by experiment.
What exactly do you mean by "verified by experiment"?
And what do you mean by "safe"?
The MCL amplifier used is a Class AB amp. The output, unless it has a DC blocking cap inside the amp, will have a DC offset = Vdd/2. My guess is the amp does not have a DC blocking cap because that would affect the bandwidth and MCL likes to advertise their amplifiers as being broadband.
the theory of this device has something to do with its cone shape. But as an RF device it is a cavity filter. It is also a Faraday cage because the inside is all Cu.
...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...
Quote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:32 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/07/2014 01:20 pmThe Woodward effect is trying to connect electromechanical self energy with inertial mass and gravitational self energy.No offense, but you really should not write these fantastically long posts devoted to critiquing a theory you haven't read. You have no way to know whether what you're criticizing is actual theory. I can tell you, all of your comments about conservation are completely wrong, and you would know this if you had read the book. You should not be arguing that Woodward is supposedly trying to do this or that, when you have not read his work.I find it is best to try and break people's theories and find better ones. Then try to break those too. Not to fall in love with an idea that might not work, and hinder progress.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/07/2014 01:20 pmThe Woodward effect is trying to connect electromechanical self energy with inertial mass and gravitational self energy.No offense, but you really should not write these fantastically long posts devoted to critiquing a theory you haven't read. You have no way to know whether what you're criticizing is actual theory. I can tell you, all of your comments about conservation are completely wrong, and you would know this if you had read the book. You should not be arguing that Woodward is supposedly trying to do this or that, when you have not read his work.
The Woodward effect is trying to connect electromechanical self energy with inertial mass and gravitational self energy.
So lets define clear terms and differences between them:...Do gluons need an environment in order to have mass? kinda but no, no because of precise language (Bill Clinton method)...
Do objects undergoing NO acceleration have inertial mass? NO
So we have to create a whole new universe within our real universe with slightly modified rules so we can get some work done by modifying inertia. This is what the shape of the emdrive does. It doesn't shield gravity and make the gravitational effects of inertia and more of less strong within the cavity. It gives the small percentage left, the .0000? left a boost. So when we fire photons through the thing from small to large end, they gain inertial mass across the length of the cavity. Normally this would be equaled out and canceled in our universe because spacetime is symmetrical. But in the tubes universe, spacetime is not symmetrical. There is a bias.
Quote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:07 pm...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...Very good question. Since Dr. White or his staff are not involved in this thread, let me try an answer for him: they would probably state that the dielectric resonator functions as a resonator for millimeter-wavelength radio waves. At the resonant frequencies, the microwaves form standing waves in the resonator, oscillating with large amplitudes. The resonant frequency is determined by the overall physical dimensions of the resonator and the dielectric constant of the material.So, he would state that the dielectric resonator functions similarly to the cavity resonator, except that the radio waves are reflected by the large change in permittivity rather than by the conductivity of metal. At millimeter wave frequencies, metal surfaces become lossy reflectors, so dielectric resonators are used at these [shorter wavelength] frequencies. So, effectively Dr.White would state that the dielectric resonator replaces the cavity at these smaller wavelengths. The cavity's purpose is for resonance at the longer wavelengths, and the dielectric resonator is resonance at the millimeter wavelengths.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/07/2014 02:50 pmQuote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:07 pm...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...Very good question. Since Dr. White or his staff are not involved in this thread, let me try an answer for him: they would probably state that the dielectric resonator functions as a resonator for millimeter-wavelength radio waves. At the resonant frequencies, the microwaves form standing waves in the resonator, oscillating with large amplitudes. The resonant frequency is determined by the overall physical dimensions of the resonator and the dielectric constant of the material.So, he would state that the dielectric resonator functions similarly to the cavity resonator, except that the radio waves are reflected by the large change in permittivity rather than by the conductivity of metal. At millimeter wave frequencies, metal surfaces become lossy reflectors, so dielectric resonators are used at these [shorter wavelength] frequencies. So, effectively Dr.White would state that the dielectric resonator replaces the cavity at these smaller wavelengths. The cavity's purpose is for resonance at the longer wavelengths, and the dielectric resonator is resonance at the millimeter wavelengths.I'm lost. They're powering with <2Ghz. How are they getting millimeter waves (30-300Ghz) and if that's what they wanted, why would they not just use a millimeter wave amp? I've sent Paul links to dozens of them over the years.To I would note that very few materials have ionic responses in the millimeter wave range. So there wouldn't be much if any bulk acceleration at these frequencies.
Quote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:07 pm...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...Very good question. Since Dr. White or his staff are not involved in this thread, let me try an answer for him: they would probably state that the dielectric resonator functions as a resonator for millimeter-wavelength radio waves. At the resonant frequencies, the microwaves form standing waves in the resonator, oscillating with large amplitudes. The resonant frequency is determined by the overall physical dimensions of the resonator and the dielectric constant of the material.So, he would state that the dielectric resonator functions similarly to the cavity resonator, except that the radio waves are reflected by the large change in permittivity rather than by the conductivity of metal. At millimeter wave frequencies, metal surfaces become lossy reflectors, so dielectric resonators are used at these [shorter wavelength] frequencies. So, effectively Dr.White would state that the dielectric resonator replaces the cavity at these smaller wavelengths. The cavity's purpose is for resonance at the longer wavelengths, and the dielectric resonator is resonance at the millimeter wavelengths. Since he is using both a cavity and the dielectric resonator, he must have been unsure as to which wavelength was the important one to resonate. Similarly in the detection for axions in the ADMX experiment it was not clear at what wavelength they will find axions. They started the ADMX experiment at longer wavelengths and now they are exploring shorter wavelengths.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/07/2014 02:50 pmQuote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:07 pm...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...Very good question. Since Dr. White or his staff are not involved in this thread, let me try an answer for him: they would probably state that the dielectric resonator functions as a resonator for millimeter-wavelength radio waves. At the resonant frequencies, the microwaves form standing waves in the resonator, oscillating with large amplitudes. The resonant frequency is determined by the overall physical dimensions of the resonator and the dielectric constant of the material.So, he would state that the dielectric resonator functions similarly to the cavity resonator, except that the radio waves are reflected by the large change in permittivity rather than by the conductivity of metal. At millimeter wave frequencies, metal surfaces become lossy reflectors, so dielectric resonators are used at these [shorter wavelength] frequencies. So, effectively Dr.White would state that the dielectric resonator replaces the cavity at these smaller wavelengths. The cavity's purpose is for resonance at the longer wavelengths, and the dielectric resonator is resonance at the millimeter wavelengths. Since he is using both a cavity and the dielectric resonator, he must have been unsure as to which wavelength was the important one to resonate. Similarly in the detection for axions in the ADMX experiment it was not clear at what wavelength they will find axions. They started the ADMX experiment at longer wavelengths and now they are exploring shorter wavelengths.Are you thinking 30GHz ?
Question - Is there any way to know the shapes of the standing waves within the cavity, with and without the resonator?
Quote from: Notsosureofit on 10/07/2014 03:29 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/07/2014 02:50 pmQuote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:07 pm...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...Very good question. Since Dr. White or his staff are not involved in this thread, let me try an answer for him: they would probably state that the dielectric resonator functions as a resonator for millimeter-wavelength radio waves. At the resonant frequencies, the microwaves form standing waves in the resonator, oscillating with large amplitudes. The resonant frequency is determined by the overall physical dimensions of the resonator and the dielectric constant of the material.So, he would state that the dielectric resonator functions similarly to the cavity resonator, except that the radio waves are reflected by the large change in permittivity rather than by the conductivity of metal. At millimeter wave frequencies, metal surfaces become lossy reflectors, so dielectric resonators are used at these [shorter wavelength] frequencies. So, effectively Dr.White would state that the dielectric resonator replaces the cavity at these smaller wavelengths. The cavity's purpose is for resonance at the longer wavelengths, and the dielectric resonator is resonance at the millimeter wavelengths. Since he is using both a cavity and the dielectric resonator, he must have been unsure as to which wavelength was the important one to resonate. Similarly in the detection for axions in the ADMX experiment it was not clear at what wavelength they will find axions. They started the ADMX experiment at longer wavelengths and now they are exploring shorter wavelengths.Are you thinking 30GHz ?Yes, not clear what was in their mind. Just like they wrote a lengthy report with lots of pictures of a vacuum chamber, description of a vacuum chamber and in the end they did not conduct the experiments in the vacuum chamber [and their explanation is because of the electrolytic capacitors?]. If the purpose was just to test at room pressure operating conditions they would have been much better off using an oil-damped Cavendish type of balance, yet they started a program with a magnetically damped inverted pendulum that could fit inside their small vacuum chamber. But in the end they did not use their vacuum chamber. Maybe eventually they were planning to go over 30 GHz using a different amplifier ? They tried removing the dielectric resonator and perhaps they were surprised (?) to find out they measured no thrust whatsoever. They offer no theoretical explanation for this. It is though, an experimental fact we have to understand and explain: the paramount role of the dielectric resonator at ~2 GHz
Quote from: Rodal on 10/07/2014 03:36 pmQuote from: Notsosureofit on 10/07/2014 03:29 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/07/2014 02:50 pmQuote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 02:07 pm...White and his misunderstanding of vacuum fluctuations require nothing inside these resonators. So why are they putting the [dielectric] stuff in?...Very good question. Since Dr. White or his staff are not involved in this thread, let me try an answer for him: they would probably state that the dielectric resonator functions as a resonator for millimeter-wavelength radio waves. At the resonant frequencies, the microwaves form standing waves in the resonator, oscillating with large amplitudes. The resonant frequency is determined by the overall physical dimensions of the resonator and the dielectric constant of the material.So, he would state that the dielectric resonator functions similarly to the cavity resonator, except that the radio waves are reflected by the large change in permittivity rather than by the conductivity of metal. At millimeter wave frequencies, metal surfaces become lossy reflectors, so dielectric resonators are used at these [shorter wavelength] frequencies. So, effectively Dr.White would state that the dielectric resonator replaces the cavity at these smaller wavelengths. The cavity's purpose is for resonance at the longer wavelengths, and the dielectric resonator is resonance at the millimeter wavelengths. Since he is using both a cavity and the dielectric resonator, he must have been unsure as to which wavelength was the important one to resonate. Similarly in the detection for axions in the ADMX experiment it was not clear at what wavelength they will find axions. They started the ADMX experiment at longer wavelengths and now they are exploring shorter wavelengths.Are you thinking 30GHz ?Yes, not clear what was in their mind. Just like they wrote a lengthy report with lots of pictures of a vacuum chamber, description of a vacuum chamber and in the end they did not conduct the experiments in the vacuum chamber [and their explanation is because of the electrolytic capacitors?]. If the purpose was just to test at room pressure operating conditions they would have been much better off using an oil-damped Cavendish type of balance, yet they started a program with a magnetically damped inverted pendulum that could fit inside their small vacuum chamber. But in the end they did not use their vacuum chamber. Maybe eventually they were planning to go over 30 GHz using a different amplifier ? They tried removing the dielectric resonator and perhaps they were surprised (?) to find out they measured no thrust whatsoever. They offer no theoretical explanation for this. It is though, an experimental fact we have to understand and explain: the paramount role of the dielectric resonator at ~2 GHzDielectrics can have very interesting (weird) responses vs frequency which are caused by individual dipole elements passing through resonance. These are all material related, but in general, the dielectric constants decrease w/ frequency except at these resonance points. Artificial resonators are used to construct metamaterials of engineered characteristics.Oh, and they aren't necessarily linear.
..Dielectrics can have very interesting (weird) responses vs frequency which are caused by individual dipole elements passing through resonance. These are all material related, but in general, the dielectric constants decrease w/ frequency except at these resonance points. Artificial resonators are used to construct metamaterials of engineered characteristics.Oh, and they aren't necessarily linear.
I think that's unlikely. Paul has been looking at teflon for along time and probably because he is of the opinion that Woodward's and White's models form different sides of the same coin. Paul believes both Woodward and White are correct. Even though i can't agree, I would note that one logical response to this belief is to stick dielectric into a resonator to test Jim's theory. Sonny would never do this--test Woodward's work--unless he had convinced himself he was testing his own model at the same time. Teflon has a very poor k~2, but it is good up into microwave territory. Most ceramics the k drops off way before. In fact I only know of one that maintains it's high k to about 1 Ghz, and that is single crystal. They are certainly not using that.Probably just a teflon sheet, though if its there to check Woodward's theory, then it is installed with one side against one of the ends of the resonator chamber and would act in 1/4 wave fashion.
Quote from: aero on 10/07/2014 03:56 pmQuestion - Is there any way to know the shapes of the standing waves within the cavity, with and without the resonator?See here for a curved truncated cone: http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/SCIENCE/Cavity/Cavity.htmlfor the cavity itself (not the dielectric resonator)Observe that the ends, however are not flat in this solution for 1/r not equal to zero. Shawyer's and NASA truncated cone have flat ends with 1/r = 0 (r-> Infinity at ends)
Quote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 04:29 pmI think that's unlikely. Paul has been looking at teflon for along time and probably because he is of the opinion that Woodward's and White's models form different sides of the same coin. Paul believes both Woodward and White are correct. Even though i can't agree, I would note that one logical response to this belief is to stick dielectric into a resonator to test Jim's theory. Sonny would never do this--test Woodward's work--unless he had convinced himself he was testing his own model at the same time. Teflon has a very poor k~2, but it is good up into microwave territory. Most ceramics the k drops off way before. In fact I only know of one that maintains it's high k to about 1 Ghz, and that is single crystal. They are certainly not using that.Probably just a teflon sheet, though if its there to check Woodward's theory, then it is installed with one side against one of the ends of the resonator chamber and would act in 1/4 wave fashion.Thanks, Ron as your post should motivate further reflection on what dielectric material NASA used for the truncated cone. Teflon was an initial assumption (just based on the fact that Teflon was the only dielectric material mentioned in the report, albeit for the Cannae drive). We didn't have your additional arguments.Let me add another argument: I expect a more nonlinear response from Teflon (PTFE) than from a ceramic, particularly with Teflon exposed to an electric field ~ 45000 Volt/meter [Note this is based on back of the envelope calculations: not too different a field than from the maximum for the Cannae drive, NASA did not give the COMSOL numbers for the truncated cone electric field, particularly at the dielectric resonator]Interested on what others think about Ron's reasoning above for Teflon instead of a ceramic as the dielectric for NASA's truncated cone.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/07/2014 04:34 pmQuote from: Ron Stahl on 10/07/2014 04:29 pmI think that's unlikely. Paul has been looking at teflon for along time and probably because he is of the opinion that Woodward's and White's models form different sides of the same coin. Paul believes both Woodward and White are correct. Even though i can't agree, I would note that one logical response to this belief is to stick dielectric into a resonator to test Jim's theory. Sonny would never do this--test Woodward's work--unless he had convinced himself he was testing his own model at the same time. Teflon has a very poor k~2, but it is good up into microwave territory. Most ceramics the k drops off way before. In fact I only know of one that maintains it's high k to about 1 Ghz, and that is single crystal. They are certainly not using that.Probably just a teflon sheet, though if its there to check Woodward's theory, then it is installed with one side against one of the ends of the resonator chamber and would act in 1/4 wave fashion.Thanks, Ron as your post should motivate further reflection on what dielectric material NASA used for the truncated cone. Teflon was an initial assumption (just based on the fact that Teflon was the only dielectric material mentioned in the report, albeit for the Cannae drive). We didn't have your additional arguments.Let me add another argument: I expect a more nonlinear response from Teflon (PTFE) than from a ceramic, particularly with Teflon exposed to an electric field ~ 45000 Volt/meter [Note this is based on back of the envelope calculations: not too different a field than from the maximum for the Cannae drive, NASA did not give the COMSOL numbers for the truncated cone electric field, particularly at the dielectric resonator]Interested on what others think about Ron's reasoning above for Teflon instead of a ceramic as the dielectric for NASA's truncated cone.http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700003017.pdf