Quote from: Hanelyp on 08/09/2014 08:52 pmThe forces inside a resonant chamber should be balanced, except for the feed point. The transmission cable connecting the resonant chamber to the microwave generator is carrying momentum along with the energy. If there's a poor match between feed line and resonator, photons bouncing back and forth may carry momentum far in excess of a single transfer of the energy. This can be a problem for experimental integrity if the microwave generator is not on the force balance.The null test should have also had similar error?
The forces inside a resonant chamber should be balanced, except for the feed point. The transmission cable connecting the resonant chamber to the microwave generator is carrying momentum along with the energy. If there's a poor match between feed line and resonator, photons bouncing back and forth may carry momentum far in excess of a single transfer of the energy. This can be a problem for experimental integrity if the microwave generator is not on the force balance.
Not if the dummy load presented a greatly different impedance than the active resonator.
Reading around in various places there seems to be quite a bit of growing support for thinking the Mach effect is at work here and at the same time Dr White's explanation seems to be under be a good deal of scrutiny of close scrutiny.
Quote from: Star One on 08/12/2014 07:42 pmReading around in various places there seems to be quite a bit of growing support for thinking the Mach effect is at work here and at the same time Dr White's explanation seems to be under be a good deal of scrutiny of close scrutiny.links to these discussions would be welcome
Can anyone shed some light on the Chinese research done a couple of years ago, finding a greater effect, and flaws in that?
I would literally cut my arm off if doing so would make these results valid. But chances are, it's just a false positive. From a Bayesian perspective, because conservation of momentum and energy are so well established (and ways to keep conservation with these results equally unlikely), even a positive, "statistically significant" result (p<0.05) WITHOUT systematic error would almost certainly still be a false positive, by an enormous margin.
Perhaps a different view is that on that forum there is a member loudly promoting his/her long held favorite theory. As he has been for a long time, loudly and often. He has won over a few converts.I've no opinion about ME theory or the Woodward effect but I wouldn't promote it as "One size fits all." Neither would I say that there is no chance of it fitting as no one really knows.
well if the ME idea turns out to be valid there might be an Ansible in it for free. of course accepting the ME idea there are several proposed mechanisms by which it could work. but if the ME is valid and it turns out to involve Freeman's advanced and retarded wave explanation then because inertia would be a result of communication with distal parts of the universe then you should be able to modulate an ME device output and send encoded information.
Another example of this type of possibility would be a never-before-observed directional coupling mechanism between the vacuum chamber and the feed lines... Some experiment failures are interesting in their own right.
Quote from: aero on 08/13/2014 12:29 amPerhaps a different view is that on that forum there is a member loudly promoting his/her long held favorite theory. As he has been for a long time, loudly and often. He has won over a few converts.I've no opinion about ME theory or the Woodward effect but I wouldn't promote it as "One size fits all." Neither would I say that there is no chance of it fitting as no one really knows.Thanks that's probably not a bad way of putting it on second thoughts. I don't know this person's history but it certainly seems a rather dominant poster on there.
Quote from: Star One on 08/13/2014 06:28 amQuote from: aero on 08/13/2014 12:29 amPerhaps a different view is that on that forum there is a member loudly promoting his/her long held favorite theory. As he has been for a long time, loudly and often. He has won over a few converts.I've no opinion about ME theory or the Woodward effect but I wouldn't promote it as "One size fits all." Neither would I say that there is no chance of it fitting as no one really knows.Thanks that's probably not a bad way of putting it on second thoughts. I don't know this person's history but it certainly seems a rather dominant poster on there.he is not a dominant poster, and he fought with many forumers there. BUT we should not judge his ideas by his personality.plenty of forumers there ARE on Woodwards emailing list.Also bear in mind there is a long long Mach Effect thread on that forum, where Paul March (who works with Dr White) and is known here on NSF as Stardrive) had many posts and long discussions.93143 can talk about the situation too, since he is also a long time poster at Talk Polywell and here at NSF.
Quote from: Stormbringer on 08/13/2014 07:25 amwell if the ME idea turns out to be valid there might be an Ansible in it for free. of course accepting the ME idea there are several proposed mechanisms by which it could work. but if the ME is valid and it turns out to involve Freeman's advanced and retarded wave explanation then because inertia would be a result of communication with distal parts of the universe then you should be able to modulate an ME device output and send encoded information.I am not sure that's a very good idea to send out info to who knows what & where.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8642558.stm