Quote from: WarpTech on 07/31/2015 03:58 pmQuote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 03:45 pmQuote from: wallofwolfstreet on 07/31/2015 02:29 pmQuote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 01:36 pmFor conservation of E & M folks, Dark Matter disappearing from theory is like saying Newton was a fraud, imo. The balancing force to gravity is labeled dark matter to explain the imbalance of forces.I'm not sure how that follows. Maybe you meant dark energy there, because it is "repulsive" while familiar mass-energy is attractive? Dark matter behaves just like regular matter gravitationally. What imbalance of forces are you referring to specifically here? There is no imbalance of forces in gravity from a Newton's 3rd law perspective.Sloppily saying gravity is the only know force without a repulsive condition, thus an imbalance in the big scheme of things.Haven't you heard of Exotic Matter? It represents repulsive gravity and causes inflation. The ZPF is the driving force, setting the scale of protons and sub-atomic particles which are in equilibrium with it. Where the ZPF power is decreasing, we have gravity and gravitational length contraction and time dilation as matter deflates. Where the ZPF is increasing (think, going up-hill) the opposite is true. The ZPF is gaining power and matter is inflated in the process of lifting it. (The opposite of length contraction and time dilation.)Exotic Matter, is simply normal matter immersed in a more powerful ZPF. The ZPF increases the energy stored but it also inflates the volume of that matter, such that the equilibrium energy density is lower than it would be in a less powerful ZPF, or in a gravity well. It is the ZPF that is responsible for gravity, it doesn't gravitate, it inflates.ToddYep, exotic/dark matter and other theories. When it is eventually proven, so leads the way to GUT...at least thats my guess.
Quote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 03:45 pmQuote from: wallofwolfstreet on 07/31/2015 02:29 pmQuote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 01:36 pmFor conservation of E & M folks, Dark Matter disappearing from theory is like saying Newton was a fraud, imo. The balancing force to gravity is labeled dark matter to explain the imbalance of forces.I'm not sure how that follows. Maybe you meant dark energy there, because it is "repulsive" while familiar mass-energy is attractive? Dark matter behaves just like regular matter gravitationally. What imbalance of forces are you referring to specifically here? There is no imbalance of forces in gravity from a Newton's 3rd law perspective.Sloppily saying gravity is the only know force without a repulsive condition, thus an imbalance in the big scheme of things.Haven't you heard of Exotic Matter? It represents repulsive gravity and causes inflation. The ZPF is the driving force, setting the scale of protons and sub-atomic particles which are in equilibrium with it. Where the ZPF power is decreasing, we have gravity and gravitational length contraction and time dilation as matter deflates. Where the ZPF is increasing (think, going up-hill) the opposite is true. The ZPF is gaining power and matter is inflated in the process of lifting it. (The opposite of length contraction and time dilation.)Exotic Matter, is simply normal matter immersed in a more powerful ZPF. The ZPF increases the energy stored but it also inflates the volume of that matter, such that the equilibrium energy density is lower than it would be in a less powerful ZPF, or in a gravity well. It is the ZPF that is responsible for gravity, it doesn't gravitate, it inflates.Todd
Quote from: wallofwolfstreet on 07/31/2015 02:29 pmQuote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 01:36 pmFor conservation of E & M folks, Dark Matter disappearing from theory is like saying Newton was a fraud, imo. The balancing force to gravity is labeled dark matter to explain the imbalance of forces.I'm not sure how that follows. Maybe you meant dark energy there, because it is "repulsive" while familiar mass-energy is attractive? Dark matter behaves just like regular matter gravitationally. What imbalance of forces are you referring to specifically here? There is no imbalance of forces in gravity from a Newton's 3rd law perspective.Sloppily saying gravity is the only know force without a repulsive condition, thus an imbalance in the big scheme of things.
Quote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 01:36 pmFor conservation of E & M folks, Dark Matter disappearing from theory is like saying Newton was a fraud, imo. The balancing force to gravity is labeled dark matter to explain the imbalance of forces.I'm not sure how that follows. Maybe you meant dark energy there, because it is "repulsive" while familiar mass-energy is attractive? Dark matter behaves just like regular matter gravitationally. What imbalance of forces are you referring to specifically here? There is no imbalance of forces in gravity from a Newton's 3rd law perspective.
For conservation of E & M folks, Dark Matter disappearing from theory is like saying Newton was a fraud, imo. The balancing force to gravity is labeled dark matter to explain the imbalance of forces.
Besides, as mentioned multiple times by WarpTech and TheTraveller, the waveguide canNOT attach to the cavity with the 68.6 mm height !Wish that when the wrong dimensions were pointed out to Tajmar he would have asked people at this lab to do a thorough job at double checking ALL numbers and not just the radii ...Sigh ...
It was the internal height – but our two surfaces were curved (like in Shawyer’s patent). We also modified it a bit during the tuning process – do the real actual height may be a bit different. My student went on holiday and I’m also on holiday starting next week.
Quote from: Rodal on 07/31/2015 03:16 pmBesides, as mentioned multiple times by WarpTech and TheTraveller, the waveguide canNOT attach to the cavity with the 68.6 mm height !Wish that when the wrong dimensions were pointed out to Tajmar he would have asked people at this lab to do a thorough job at double checking ALL numbers and not just the radii ...Sigh ...I'm sorry for not being able to keep up with the incredible speed of the thread during the past few days.Martin Tajmar just confirmed the internal end plates of his EmDrive are curved (spherical ends) and not flat! He can't confirm the real height because the guy who made the real cavity measurements is currently in holiday so we'd have to wait for the return from the summer holidays to ask this very important question on the real length.Quote from: Martin TajmarIt was the internal height – but our two surfaces were curved (like in Shawyer’s patent). We also modified it a bit during the tuning process – do the real actual height may be a bit different. My student went on holiday and I’m also on holiday starting next week.I answered the cavity provided cannot neither physically hold the large WR340 waveguide (there isn't the minimum space for it) nor achieve any resonance and told him I will come back later after the summer for that important question to ask to his student.
@TT:There's a video of Shawyer's device slowly rotating (you've posted it many times; you know the one). There's also a graph of power and thrust over time (you've also posted many times).Are you sure that they go together?Reason I ask is that the speed looks about constant - there is little discernable acceleration at all.
I seem to be operating in Blurt Mode today. Here's another blurt:If they can take an espresso machine to ISS, why not an EmDrive for microgee testing?
Quote from: SeeShells on 07/31/2015 04:00 pmDr. Rodal,I'm reviewing all my collected data this morning sorting and categorizing. I can't locate the data sets for the cavity dimensions on the Rodal-complete ez data set we ran on June 23?https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1XizxEfB23tfjVmb1RiZXpaajd6WGpGQmpSWDkxRlV3cG10TEJmWVVEbTd2U0t4MC1aa1E&usp=sharingThanks,ShellHi Shell,there is no folder with that name in my Google Drive. I cannot find what the root folder for that folder is from that link. I would need to see what the root folders are to make sense of what this folder contains.We need aero to interpret what this folder is. I found a different folder titled Dr.Rodal.... etc. but contains different files.
Dr. Rodal,I'm reviewing all my collected data this morning sorting and categorizing. I can't locate the data sets for the cavity dimensions on the Rodal-complete ez data set we ran on June 23?https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1XizxEfB23tfjVmb1RiZXpaajd6WGpGQmpSWDkxRlV3cG10TEJmWVVEbTd2U0t4MC1aa1E&usp=sharingThanks,Shell
@zellerium: the "cardboard-like square part" is a thin piece made of mica which covers the end of the waveguide in a microwave oven. Mica (as well as white Teflon) is indeed transparent to microwaves. It lets the EM waves pass through it but protects the food from being impregnated by some undesirable substance that may be emitted from the magnetron cavity, like oil or metallic particles.This is a thought to EmDrive DIYers: maybe it is a good idea to insert a Teflon or Mica sheet in the waveguide to protect the interior of the cavity from those substances, in the same manner as food is protected in the oven.
Think of it as horsepower in the cavity world. The bigger the better, right? Over the top pronouncements get attention. When anyone claims super high Qs, its all relative to they test methodology they are using in the real world.
Quote from: wallofwolfstreet on 07/31/2015 02:32 pmQuote from: Flyby on 07/31/2015 02:20 pmIt is deceptive to use the efficiency parameter (N/kW) when you see on Yang's graph's that when you increase power you end up with a way lower efficiency (720mN/2.5kW).What this shows that the thermal impact has a far bigger impact then you assume and that with and increased Q you're massing up gigantic power intensities in the resonance patterns.With needed Q's in the order of 10^10 i really doubt if cooled nitrogen will be able to keep the frustum walls cooled...IIRC, Shawyer talked about 17MW of stored energy in the cavity, by only using "700W to 1kW-ish" microwave generators and with a Q of barely 50k....Agreed, i'm no specialist in the matter, but it looks to me a near impossible engineering challenge, to pack all that in a minimal configuration, with a low enough weight to power ratio, so it can fly...IF the EMdrive ever turns out to be something (no hard evidence till today), it will be usable for orbit positioning, interplanetary travel and maybe interstellar probes...but terrestrial liftoff vehicles ? nah...The thermal degeneration on the Q is only going to grow the more power you put into it...at certain point, even supercooled liquids wont be enough to handle the thermal issues....Just adding on to this, does anyone have any idea (@rfmqguy in particular) what the highest Q ever obtained by an electromagnetic resonator (whether a cavity or circuit) is? Ie. in the actual physical world, what is the best Q ever obtained? Good question wolfy, air cavities can exceed 10,000 with silver and gold plating and tight tolerances. But this is measuring Q in the classic center resonance/3dB bandwidth and NOT return loss; i.e. forward power. IOW a 2 port measurement.These frustums are being tested with a single port, like an antenna, and they are calculating 3dB below either zero insertion, relative 3dB (to insertion loss) or in the case of China, 3dB above center return loss notch (that of course gives ridiculous Q).So, guess I'll stick with around 10K in a classic 2 port configuration. All else is a foreign language to my way of testing.
Quote from: Flyby on 07/31/2015 02:20 pmIt is deceptive to use the efficiency parameter (N/kW) when you see on Yang's graph's that when you increase power you end up with a way lower efficiency (720mN/2.5kW).What this shows that the thermal impact has a far bigger impact then you assume and that with and increased Q you're massing up gigantic power intensities in the resonance patterns.With needed Q's in the order of 10^10 i really doubt if cooled nitrogen will be able to keep the frustum walls cooled...IIRC, Shawyer talked about 17MW of stored energy in the cavity, by only using "700W to 1kW-ish" microwave generators and with a Q of barely 50k....Agreed, i'm no specialist in the matter, but it looks to me a near impossible engineering challenge, to pack all that in a minimal configuration, with a low enough weight to power ratio, so it can fly...IF the EMdrive ever turns out to be something (no hard evidence till today), it will be usable for orbit positioning, interplanetary travel and maybe interstellar probes...but terrestrial liftoff vehicles ? nah...The thermal degeneration on the Q is only going to grow the more power you put into it...at certain point, even supercooled liquids wont be enough to handle the thermal issues....Just adding on to this, does anyone have any idea (@rfmqguy in particular) what the highest Q ever obtained by an electromagnetic resonator (whether a cavity or circuit) is? Ie. in the actual physical world, what is the best Q ever obtained?
It is deceptive to use the efficiency parameter (N/kW) when you see on Yang's graph's that when you increase power you end up with a way lower efficiency (720mN/2.5kW).What this shows that the thermal impact has a far bigger impact then you assume and that with and increased Q you're massing up gigantic power intensities in the resonance patterns.With needed Q's in the order of 10^10 i really doubt if cooled nitrogen will be able to keep the frustum walls cooled...IIRC, Shawyer talked about 17MW of stored energy in the cavity, by only using "700W to 1kW-ish" microwave generators and with a Q of barely 50k....Agreed, i'm no specialist in the matter, but it looks to me a near impossible engineering challenge, to pack all that in a minimal configuration, with a low enough weight to power ratio, so it can fly...IF the EMdrive ever turns out to be something (no hard evidence till today), it will be usable for orbit positioning, interplanetary travel and maybe interstellar probes...but terrestrial liftoff vehicles ? nah...The thermal degeneration on the Q is only going to grow the more power you put into it...at certain point, even supercooled liquids wont be enough to handle the thermal issues....
Electropolishing required to eliminate multipaction:
I asked Martin Tajmar directly by email about cavity dimensions that would be off by a factor 2, and he replied confirming the numbers were indeed internal radii instead of diameters.He added he already uploaded a revised manuscript altogether with some other typo corrections and some additional clarifications at the AIAA website, but revisions from the conference will appear only after 21st of August.For now, the updated paper is online on the UD-Dresden website.In the updated paper the height is still confirmed to be 68.6 mm:Quote from: Martin TajmarOur final tapered cavity design had an internal top radius of 38.5 mm, a bottom radius of 54.1 mm and a height of 68.6 mmSo:- internal big diameter = 0.1082 m- internal small diameter = 0.077 m- height = 0.00686 mTo @Rodal, @TheTraveller and others: can you try to find resonances and modes with your COMSOL and spreadsheets programs with those dimensions?
Our final tapered cavity design had an internal top radius of 38.5 mm, a bottom radius of 54.1 mm and a height of 68.6 mm
Quote from: rfmwguy on 07/31/2015 03:54 pmThink of it as horsepower in the cavity world. The bigger the better, right? Over the top pronouncements get attention. When anyone claims super high Qs, its all relative to they test methodology they are using in the real world. I thought we had settled how Q was measured.To be very clear, the Chinese, EW, Shawyer and myself are taking unloaded 1 port S11 -3db off the peak return loss dB bandwidths. That is the way the Q is measured for these cavities. It may not be how you would measure the loaded Q but it is the way Q is measured in EMDrives. Shawyers Force equation uses S11 1 port return loss dB driven unloaded Q.Attached is an example of a 1 port S11 return loss Q measurement Paul March posted on NSF. The cavity did not have a dielectric. Clearly Qs of 50k are possible with a plain hand made copper frustum with flat end plates. Curve the end plates and the Q will go higher. Machine the cavity to 0.05mm accuracy and the Q will go higher. Highly polish all the interior surfaces and the Q will go higher.
Quote from: Rodal on 07/31/2015 04:43 pmQuote from: SeeShells on 07/31/2015 04:00 pmDr. Rodal,I'm reviewing all my collected data this morning sorting and categorizing. I can't locate the data sets for the cavity dimensions on the Rodal-complete ez data set we ran on June 23?https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B1XizxEfB23tfjVmb1RiZXpaajd6WGpGQmpSWDkxRlV3cG10TEJmWVVEbTd2U0t4MC1aa1E&usp=sharingThanks,ShellHi Shell,there is no folder with that name in my Google Drive. I cannot find what the root folder for that folder is from that link. I would need to see what the root folders are to make sense of what this folder contains.We need aero to interpret what this folder is. I found a different folder titled Dr.Rodal.... etc. but contains different files.Ok, we were just starting to get things organized about that time, no surprise. We'll wait to see if sero has some info.Thanks,Shell
Quote from: flux_capacitor on 07/31/2015 02:54 pmI asked Martin Tajmar directly by email about cavity dimensions that would be off by a factor 2, and he replied confirming the numbers were indeed internal radii instead of diameters.He added he already uploaded a revised manuscript altogether with some other typo corrections and some additional clarifications at the AIAA website, but revisions from the conference will appear only after 21st of August.For now, the updated paper is online on the UD-Dresden website.In the updated paper the height is still confirmed to be 68.6 mm:Quote from: Martin TajmarOur final tapered cavity design had an internal top radius of 38.5 mm, a bottom radius of 54.1 mm and a height of 68.6 mmSo:- internal big diameter = 0.1082 m- internal small diameter = 0.077 m- height = 0.00686 mTo @Rodal, @TheTraveller and others: can you try to find resonances and modes with your COMSOL and spreadsheets programs with those dimensions?No resonance found using those revised numbers.
So TT is deluding himself when he quotes 6-figure Q values from Yang because they are unrealistic (and wrong).