Quote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 04:09 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 04:00 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:54 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 03:50 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?By every method I use, it appears to be copper all around. Shawyer's design is copper. Nasa tested Shawyer's design.Information entropy and casual horizons do apply to emdrive. Since the Casimir effect is confirmed. I don't tend to question Unruh waves. Since an object approaching C gets baked by radiation, I don't tend to question Unruh Radiation.That gray stuff over the large end cap is a cover used for something. I don't know what for.At emdrive.com, Shawyer says it is an enclosed cavity. The nature of it being an enclosed cavity is why it is controversial. So I say we can keep operating as if it is enclosed.Thank you. That's progress.Now to the 2nd question:2) Is it correct to assume that the light/electrons in the EmDrive experience the huge accelerations required for Unruh radiation ?Can we at least "back of the envelope" calculate what are the accelerations involved ? (never mind whether they are large enough)What is accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating? What is the acceleration?No this doesn't apply to electromagnetic radiation itself. It is already going the speed of light.No, you just confused the heck out of me. Radiation doesn't experience Unruh radiation. It is radiation.Quoting Prof. McCulloc: << but for huge accelerations (as I assume for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) the Unruh waves are affected by the copper wall because they are partly em waves and the electrons in the copper move to cancel the field,>>The acceleration is the "a" in the formula you (at least momentarily) posted.Again I ask you:What is accelerating? <<huge accelerations (as Prof. McCulloc assumes for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) >> [http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html ]Where is it accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating?What is the acceleration?
Quote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 04:00 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:54 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 03:50 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?By every method I use, it appears to be copper all around. Shawyer's design is copper. Nasa tested Shawyer's design.Information entropy and casual horizons do apply to emdrive. Since the Casimir effect is confirmed. I don't tend to question Unruh waves. Since an object approaching C gets baked by radiation, I don't tend to question Unruh Radiation.That gray stuff over the large end cap is a cover used for something. I don't know what for.At emdrive.com, Shawyer says it is an enclosed cavity. The nature of it being an enclosed cavity is why it is controversial. So I say we can keep operating as if it is enclosed.Thank you. That's progress.Now to the 2nd question:2) Is it correct to assume that the light/electrons in the EmDrive experience the huge accelerations required for Unruh radiation ?Can we at least "back of the envelope" calculate what are the accelerations involved ? (never mind whether they are large enough)What is accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating? What is the acceleration?No this doesn't apply to electromagnetic radiation itself. It is already going the speed of light.No, you just confused the heck out of me. Radiation doesn't experience Unruh radiation. It is radiation.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:54 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 03:50 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?By every method I use, it appears to be copper all around. Shawyer's design is copper. Nasa tested Shawyer's design.Information entropy and casual horizons do apply to emdrive. Since the Casimir effect is confirmed. I don't tend to question Unruh waves. Since an object approaching C gets baked by radiation, I don't tend to question Unruh Radiation.That gray stuff over the large end cap is a cover used for something. I don't know what for.At emdrive.com, Shawyer says it is an enclosed cavity. The nature of it being an enclosed cavity is why it is controversial. So I say we can keep operating as if it is enclosed.Thank you. That's progress.Now to the 2nd question:2) Is it correct to assume that the light/electrons in the EmDrive experience the huge accelerations required for Unruh radiation ?Can we at least "back of the envelope" calculate what are the accelerations involved ? (never mind whether they are large enough)What is accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating? What is the acceleration?
Quote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 03:50 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?By every method I use, it appears to be copper all around. Shawyer's design is copper. Nasa tested Shawyer's design.Information entropy and casual horizons do apply to emdrive. Since the Casimir effect is confirmed. I don't tend to question Unruh waves. Since an object approaching C gets baked by radiation, I don't tend to question Unruh Radiation.That gray stuff over the large end cap is a cover used for something. I don't know what for.At emdrive.com, Shawyer says it is an enclosed cavity. The nature of it being an enclosed cavity is why it is controversial. So I say we can keep operating as if it is enclosed.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?
...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....
Quote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 04:24 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 04:09 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 04:00 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:54 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 03:50 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?By every method I use, it appears to be copper all around. Shawyer's design is copper. Nasa tested Shawyer's design.Information entropy and casual horizons do apply to emdrive. Since the Casimir effect is confirmed. I don't tend to question Unruh waves. Since an object approaching C gets baked by radiation, I don't tend to question Unruh Radiation.That gray stuff over the large end cap is a cover used for something. I don't know what for.At emdrive.com, Shawyer says it is an enclosed cavity. The nature of it being an enclosed cavity is why it is controversial. So I say we can keep operating as if it is enclosed.Thank you. That's progress.Now to the 2nd question:2) Is it correct to assume that the light/electrons in the EmDrive experience the huge accelerations required for Unruh radiation ?Can we at least "back of the envelope" calculate what are the accelerations involved ? (never mind whether they are large enough)What is accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating? What is the acceleration?No this doesn't apply to electromagnetic radiation itself. It is already going the speed of light.No, you just confused the heck out of me. Radiation doesn't experience Unruh radiation. It is radiation.Quoting Prof. McCulloc: << but for huge accelerations (as I assume for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) the Unruh waves are affected by the copper wall because they are partly em waves and the electrons in the copper move to cancel the field,>>The acceleration is the "a" in the formula you (at least momentarily) posted.Again I ask you:What is accelerating? <<huge accelerations (as Prof. McCulloc assumes for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) >> [http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html ]Where is it accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating?What is the acceleration?The emdrive itself accelerating with respect to the universe or any observer.Inside, the photons with respect to their emitter and the cavity walls.A photon has no mass first, just momentum; secondly, it is already going C. There is no more to accelerate. It doesn't experience Unruh Radiation. It is radiation.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 04:29 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 04:24 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 04:09 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 04:00 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:54 pmQuote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 03:50 pmQuote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 03:39 pm...Hawking radiation is not just where particle pairs are pulled apart. It is also the mechanism for which information is conserved. It isn't a cause of information problems. A black hole slowly evaporates and returns that information back to the universe....Rather than arguing about what Hawking radiation encompasses, and whether there is a Hawking radiation paradox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox (certainly there is no consensus) and such esoteric topics, why don't we concentrate on the EM drive?I propose we should strive to answer the questions I posed, starting by the first simple question: is the NASA Eagleworks drive a closed Faraday cage? are the flat ends indeed made out of copper?By every method I use, it appears to be copper all around. Shawyer's design is copper. Nasa tested Shawyer's design.Information entropy and casual horizons do apply to emdrive. Since the Casimir effect is confirmed. I don't tend to question Unruh waves. Since an object approaching C gets baked by radiation, I don't tend to question Unruh Radiation.That gray stuff over the large end cap is a cover used for something. I don't know what for.At emdrive.com, Shawyer says it is an enclosed cavity. The nature of it being an enclosed cavity is why it is controversial. So I say we can keep operating as if it is enclosed.Thank you. That's progress.Now to the 2nd question:2) Is it correct to assume that the light/electrons in the EmDrive experience the huge accelerations required for Unruh radiation ?Can we at least "back of the envelope" calculate what are the accelerations involved ? (never mind whether they are large enough)What is accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating? What is the acceleration?No this doesn't apply to electromagnetic radiation itself. It is already going the speed of light.No, you just confused the heck out of me. Radiation doesn't experience Unruh radiation. It is radiation.Quoting Prof. McCulloc: << but for huge accelerations (as I assume for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) the Unruh waves are affected by the copper wall because they are partly em waves and the electrons in the copper move to cancel the field,>>The acceleration is the "a" in the formula you (at least momentarily) posted.Again I ask you:What is accelerating? <<huge accelerations (as Prof. McCulloc assumes for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) >> [http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html ]Where is it accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating?What is the acceleration?The emdrive itself accelerating with respect to the universe or any observer.Inside, the photons with respect to their emitter and the cavity walls.A photon has no mass first, just momentum; secondly, it is already going C. There is no more to accelerate. It doesn't experience Unruh Radiation. It is radiation.Please read what Prof. McCulloc wrote in his blog, including <<a metal box will not effect Unruh waves because for typical accelerations (9.8m/s^2) they are light years long, >>The acceleration of the EM drive center of mass is completely and utterly insignificant. What Prof. McCulloc is considering is the acceleration of the photons/electrons.One really needs to understand the following:What is accelerating? <<huge accelerations (as Prof. McCulloc assumes for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) >> [http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html ]Where is it accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating?What is the acceleration?
What is accelerating? <<huge accelerations (as Prof. McCulloc assumes for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) >> [http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html ]Where is it accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating?What is the acceleration?
QuoteWhat is accelerating? <<huge accelerations (as Prof. McCulloc assumes for the light/electrons in the EmDrive) >> [http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.it/2014/10/mihsc-vs-emdrive-data-1.html ]Where is it accelerating? Why is it accelerating? When is it accelerating?What is the acceleration?Why is this a mystery? See my earlier post. The electrons within the cavity walls are accelerating in response to the RF wave. It is an AC acceleration of some amplitude at the frequency of the RF waves. Guess the amplitude of the electron oscillation, which is limited by the cavity dimensions and converted to heat by resistance. With the amplitude, then isn't the acceleration just the second derivative? What amplitude is needed to make the theory hold water?
The field at any location outside the copper cavity includes the field contributed by internal charges. However, it looks as though the copper prevents the field from getting out, because the internal charges “polarize” the copper by shifting the mobile electrons in the metal, and the polarized copper contributes an additional electric field outside the container that is equal in magnitude but opposite in direction to the field contributed by the internal charges. The effect is indeed as though the copper “shielded” the copper cavity.As the electric field contacts the copper, it accelerates the electrons (it accelerates the electrons much more than the protons, due to their very low mass). These accelerated electrons radiate electromagnetic radiation, like any accelerated charges. There are now additional field contributions that were not present in the absence of the electron-containing copper. Consider what happens when the source charges are accelerated continuously, harmonically at a frequency up and down (which involves accelerations as the charges move faster and slower and turn around). Let the sinusoidal acceleration of those source charges continue for a sufficiently long time. Then the sinusoidal radiation has a phase which is shifted. That is, the peaks come at a different time than they did without the copper interaction. The interaction of the electric field with the copper can be (for nonobvious reasons) modeled by the electric field exerting a force on an outer electron in an atom as though the electron were bound to the atom by a spring-like force, with damping.
Quote from: Rodal on 10/11/2014 05:22 pmThe field at any location outside the copper cavity includes the field contributed by internal charges. However, it looks as though the copper prevents the field from getting out, because the internal charges “polarize” the copper by shifting the mobile electrons in the metal, and the polarized copper contributes an additional electric field outside the container that is equal in magnitude but opposite in direction to the field contributed by the internal charges. The effect is indeed as though the copper “shielded” the copper cavity.As the electric field contacts the copper, it accelerates the electrons (it accelerates the electrons much more than the protons, due to their very low mass). These accelerated electrons radiate electromagnetic radiation, like any accelerated charges. There are now additional field contributions that were not present in the absence of the electron-containing copper. Consider what happens when the source charges are accelerated continuously, harmonically at a frequency up and down (which involves accelerations as the charges move faster and slower and turn around). Let the sinusoidal acceleration of those source charges continue for a sufficiently long time. Then the sinusoidal radiation has a phase which is shifted. That is, the peaks come at a different time than they did without the copper interaction. The interaction of the electric field with the copper can be (for nonobvious reasons) modeled by the electric field exerting a force on an outer electron in an atom as though the electron were bound to the atom by a spring-like force, with damping.You are nuking rf cavities. This isn't a particle accelerator. Is that where you are going with this?
...If I wanted to accelerate particles, say electrons, I would put positive thousands of volts on one side and negative volts on the other.This thing has no cathode and no anode. We're on a tangent.
Quote from: Mulletron on 10/11/2014 05:24 pm...If I wanted to accelerate particles, say electrons, I would put positive thousands of volts on one side and negative volts on the other.This thing has no cathode and no anode. We're on a tangent.Do I understand you correctly that you take for granted that the huge accelerations needed for Unruh radiation are present, and you think that calculating them is going on a tangent, but you think that esoteric quantum gravity unification discussion is not a tangent?
Well, make it easier. Assume no dissipation by other effects and consider only the electron motion in synchrony with the RF wave. Then the electron moves one complete cycle from A to B with one complete cycle of the RF wave. The cycle time of the RF wave, 1900 MHz, is 1/f = 5.26E-10 seconds. Limit the electron velocity to the speed of light so ... Ok, brain fart. Where does this go?
Quote from: aero on 10/11/2014 05:45 pmWell, make it easier. Assume no dissipation by other effects and consider only the electron motion in synchrony with the RF wave. Then the electron moves one complete cycle from A to B with one complete cycle of the RF wave. The cycle time of the RF wave, 1900 MHz, is 1/f = 5.26E-10 seconds. Limit the electron velocity to the speed of light so ... Ok, brain fart. Where does this go?Ok so we can't do it that way. Here is the correct way but its beyond my poor abilities today.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drift_velocity#Numerical_example For alternating current, drift velocity is proportional to the square of frequency...
Fnarr Dr Rodal fnarr. (Look up Viz comic (Finbar Saunders) and especially Roger's Profanisaurus.)
What would be the complications on conducting experiments in my garage?I would need a copper frustum and optimised dielectric designed by you guys.RF power source.Suspend the whole thing from a wire and see if it moves.Am I missing anything?