EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 11

[sghill]

https://www.comsol.ru/model/download/552841/models.rf.circulator.pdf

it seems to me a very similar example on the comsol website, please see the picture on page 6.

Not really similar at all, it is showing a circulator which is a pass-through device. (i.e. the signal comes in one port and leaves through another.) the picture is there to demonstrate the lack of standing waves, and what your pictures show are only standing waves.

Hello dear meberbs!. Today was a good day, I learned a little how to simulate power supply to resonators.
I tried learning a Coaxial to Waveguide Coupling case study. First, I repeated the case study for an open-wall infinite waveguide. I changed the connection point of the RF, violated the rule of a quarter wave. The animation shows that there is a moment when the EM field is very poorly transmitted to the waveguide. I also continued to think that on the walls of the waveguide I see traces of radiation pressure.

Even if there are accuracy issues, these are very nice and informative animations. Thank you for taking the time to create and share them.

[X_RaY]

https://www.comsol.ru/model/download/552841/models.rf.circulator.pdf

it seems to me a very similar example on the comsol website, please see the picture on page 6.

Not really similar at all, it is showing a circulator which is a pass-through device. (i.e. the signal comes in one port and leaves through another.) the picture is there to demonstrate the lack of standing waves, and what your pictures show are only standing waves.

Hello dear meberbs!. Today was a good day, I learned a little how to simulate power supply to resonators.
I tried learning a Coaxial to Waveguide Coupling case study. First, I repeated the case study for an open-wall infinite waveguide. I changed the connection point of the RF, violated the rule of a quarter wave. The animation shows that there is a moment when the EM field is very poorly transmitted to the waveguide. I also continued to think that on the walls of the waveguide I see traces of radiation pressure.

Even if there are accuracy issues, these are very nice and informative animations. Thank you for taking the time to create and share them.

Of course, this kind of visualization helps the mind to think. However, meberbs is right. The framework conditions visible in the FEM can be calculated analytically, at least approximately. This simulation contains nothing special, it has a rather primitive character. But Alex_O is very enthusiastic and maybe he has a crazy idea that will really help in the future, so listen to what he thinks.
At the moment there seems no relevant information, because every simulation is done in a way that is based on Maxwell only. The underlying principles are well understood, which makes these simulations possible. 
This means that the calculated result cannot be a net thrust generated by the resonator, which is calculated based on the equations used and taking CoE/CoM into account.  Because nothing escapes the system that could give it impulse.

Assuming Shawyer's experimental results are not based on experimental artifacts, new physical correlations are needed to explain the thrust signals conclusively. For example some interaction principles on dark matter particles or something like that. The chances of finding an answer only in the field of electromagnetism tend towards zero.

[Alex_O]

I was surprised when, quite by accident, I saw this sharp decline in blue, which is measured in W/ m2, since all the initial data were also given randomly.  I immediately reduced the lattice spacing of the Mex, and the displacement pitch of the antenna.  This is not an artifact or a bug.  This amount is important in that it gives the idea of ​​searching for sharp transition effects in, for example, the difference in radiation pressure on the cavity walls of the emdrive from the Doppler effect for different conditions (geometry, frequency, acceleration, something else_ spot_ sun)

[Alex_O]

The most interesting thing is, I was thinking about the problem of how to get the worst possible result, maximum asymmetry, maximum energy loss and attenuation, etc.  This, in principle, contradicts the tasks of engineers in the development of radio devices to reduce energy losses.  Emdrive to create your rockets you need maximum asymmetry, gradients, sharp peaks and steep slopes on the current-voltage characteristics and something else, maybe even magic dust. 

Look to develop a creative imagination on my silver photon rocket  story.  It's simple, this rocket leaves silvery dust behind the stern, which reflects photons well back onto the rocket’s mirror, many times and the thrust of such a photon rocket can increase by a billion times.  Surprised?  Now try mentally producing this silver mirror dust from .. virtual quantum particles in the synthesis reaction as electron-positron pairs.  Say wow! Since all you need is powerful photons, and the photon rocket already has them.

This is a cool method of creative thinking, we came up with the idea of ​​using silver mirror dust to increase the traction of the photonic rocket, it is cooler than magic powder, and this is not magic.  But if your scientific opponents scold you and try to break you up with the help of magic powder - please recall my story about a silver photonic rocket.

[Alex_O]

"Solar sails work by capturing the energy from light particles as they bounce off a reflective surface, according to the Department of Energy."

Bread Crumbs from Beyond:

Momentum from mass-less particles? No.

Photons are massless (which means they have no rest mass, but they still carry energy).  They have momentum. The possibility for this to exist comes straight from special relativity. The mass of photons has been shown to be 0 to within some extremely small margin of error (many orders of magnitude smaller than the mass of neutrinos.)

Radiation pressure has also been measured many different ways.

I am not sure what you intended the point of your post to be, solar sails have been demonstrated.

Dear meberbs, please see a small presentation? I made it two years ago, I do not see a mistake. This is an animated gif. I also duplicate the 5 slide.

(Yesterday I searched the forum for the term Doppler, I see that it has been discussed for almost 10 years. I'll take a short pause to clarify the model)

How it works. (total 9 slides)

SavePoint1
1. emdrive - 4-dimensional system
..
3. emdrive - contains substance (photons), and this matter is not part of emdrive.

5 slide
1. The photon flew out of the lamp - the lamp remains motionless.
2. After 1 nanosecond, the photon flew to the end sails - the walls.
3. After 1 nanosecond, the photon is reflected a million times between the wall-sails, during 1 nanosecond. At the same time, he could not act on the lamp, "there is no lamp, as it were."
4. The external observer saw that as a result of photon reflections, photon pressure appeared on the side walls, and this pressure is very large.
5. He thought it was a photon rocket that flies due to the large pressure forces on the big sail, and the small sail - it’s like a parachute, like a water brake - it just slows down. But since its size is smaller, it does not interfere with the flight of a photonic rocket.

6. And the other side walls - they simply interfere with the drive. "Cut and discard".

7. There is a flux of photons up and down. Through the "hole in the casing." This photon flux does not interfere with the creation of traction. Because Emdrive is a 4-dimensional being. See physics for 1 nanosecond. At this point in time, the lateral (up and down) photons in total created completely zero, balanced traction for emdrive. And they "did not know, did not see any sails.

This can be seen on slide 1. This is the first nanosecond. All photons flew out of the lamp evenly, and they still do not know, they do not see any side walls, sails, and so on. At this point in time - there is no rocket thrust, all forces and impulses are balanced. On the second nanosecond, something goes wrong. Photons, “suddenly” find their "  alyye parusa " sails and begin to benefit people.

7 slide
8. The hole in the casing can be closed so that the photons cannot create pressure in the projection onto the horizontal axis. Using a set of concentric, cylindrical sails of different sizes. Since the photon has wave properties, you can leave gaps between the sails, or come up with something else. As a result, the harmful role of the side walls can be completely removed from the system.

8-9 slide
9. The conical shape of the emdrive is not ideal, it is a bad idea.

[meberbs]

1. The photon flew out of the lamp - the lamp remains motionless.

False, equal and opposite reactions, lamp moves in opposite direction of photon, unless you say the lamp also emits a photon in the opposite direction at the same time.

2. After 1 nanosecond, the photon flew to the end sails - the walls.
3. After 1 nanosecond, the photon is reflected a million times between the wall-sails, during 1 nanosecond. At the same time, he could not act on the lamp, "there is no lamp, as it were."
4. The external observer saw that as a result of photon reflections, photon pressure appeared on the side walls, and this pressure is very large.
5. He thought it was a photon rocket that flies due to the large pressure forces on the big sail, and the small sail - it’s like a parachute, like a water brake - it just slows down. But since its size is smaller, it does not interfere with the flight of a photonic rocket.

You are assuming a high Q, which means something concentrates the energy reflected off the large end to all reflect off the small end. Without that a large fraction of the energy misses the small end, and the drive works as a poor photon rocket. Most likely some force is applied to the concentration mechanism (sidewalls), so the force on the small end will be smaller than the large end with the sidewalls balancing the difference, but hypothetically, there could be no net force on the side walls with an equal force on the 2 ends.

6. And the other side walls - they simply interfere with the drive. "Cut and discard".

Literally impossible to build a high Q drive without them. (Unless you have a tight laser beam reflecting between large retroreflectors. In that case your argument about the size having any relation to the force is bogus. Both ends would already catch basically all of the energy by definition, so making one end larger would not change anything.)

7. There is a flux of photons up and down. Through the "hole in the casing." This photon flux does not interfere with the creation of traction. Because Emdrive is a 4-dimensional being. See physics for 1 nanosecond. At this point in time, the lateral (up and down) photons in total created completely zero, balanced traction for emdrive. And they "did not know, did not see any sails.

Nothing in this bullet point makes any sense that I can tell.

This can be seen on slide 1. This is the first nanosecond. All photons flew out of the lamp evenly, and they still do not know, they do not see any side walls, sails, and so on. At this point in time - there is no rocket thrust, all forces and impulses are balanced. On the second nanosecond, something goes wrong. Photons, “suddenly” find their "  alyye parusa " sails and begin to benefit people.

Under this assumption all you get is the net force from photons that are allowed to radiate away, and there are more efficient ways to do this, like just taking a laser and pointing it in the opposite direction of where you want to go.

8. The hole in the casing can be closed so that the photons cannot create pressure in the projection onto the horizontal axis. Using a set of concentric, cylindrical sails of different sizes. Since the photon has wave properties, you can leave gaps between the sails, or come up with something else. As a result, the harmful role of the side walls can be completely removed from the system.

Completely untrue. This assertion is equivalent to assuming that you wave a magic wand and turn off conservation of momentum.

[Alex_O]

1. The photon flew out of the lamp - the lamp remains motionless.

False, equal and opposite reactions, lamp moves in opposite direction of photon, unless you say the lamp also emits a photon in the opposite direction at the same time.

Sorry, this is not one photon, many photons.
1st nanosecond. The o_sail_gif.gif showed the movement of photons that flew out of the lamp. Evenly, in all directions.

You are assuming a high Q, which means something concentrates the energy reflected off the large end to all reflect off the small end. Without that a large fraction of the energy misses the small end, and the drive works as a poor photon rocket. Most likely some force is applied to the concentration mechanism (sidewalls), so the force on the small end will be smaller than the large end with the sidewalls balancing the difference, but hypothetically, there could be no net force on the side walls with an equal force on the 2 ends.

I think it can be a simple two-mirror system with parabolic mirrors. In the basic diagram, parabolic mirrors are conventionally shown as straight lines. I already showed an approximate simulation of such a thing.
This can now be stopped and discussed - will there be at least any Q factor >> 1.  See  2_parab_ant.jpeg

7. There is a flux of photons up and down.

Nothing in this bullet point makes any sense that I can tell.

I described the process very poorly. You are right, this text does not make sense. I wanted to discuss the problem of photons (electromagnetic waves) that can be emitted outside of two mirror antennas. I want to prove that these waves do not create any unbalanced forces in the system. Help me prove this statement.

This can be seen on slide 1. This is the first nanosecond.

Under this assumption all you get is the net force from photons that are allowed to radiate away, and there are more efficient ways to do this, like just taking a laser and pointing it in the opposite direction of where you want to go.

The laser is not suitable, since it is necessary to use microwaves with long waves, so that the wavelength is larger than the size of the emitter (antenna, for example, a horn). This will allow microwaves to go around the  obstacle (antenna) and reduce the absorption (harmful effect) of the photon pulse in the cavity. In figure 2_parab_ant.jpeg we see quite long waves.

SavePoint 2.

A simple two-mirror system with parabolic mirrors with a Q factor >> 1. It can be built with a Q factor >> 1
Agreed?

8. The hole in the casing can be closed so that the photons cannot create pressure in the projection onto the horizontal axis. Using a set of concentric, cylindrical sails of different sizes. Since the photon has wave properties, you can leave gaps between the sails, or come up with something else. As a result, the harmful role of the side walls can be completely removed from the system.

Completely untrue. This assertion is equivalent to assuming that you wave a magic wand and turn off conservation of momentum.

In fact, the concept of a rotating waveguide connection is discussed here. Used in radars to rotate the antenna relative to the main waveguide. The NRL group also used this idea in their booth to separate emdrive from the RF source. Remember their drawing? (See  articulations.jpg and articulations_2.jpg and  2017_US_Navy.jpg)

There is simple physics. Quarter wave rule for wave transformer and so on. This is the bottleneck in my construction, since:
1) To create a high quality factor, the side walls of a closed type microwave cavity are needed
2) But these side walls break the whole idea, so create harmful forces that reduce the effect of two mirror systems.
Need a tricky trick. I thought it was possible to use something like a glass mesh on micro-shafts. Or simply, I looked at the Chinese versions of resonators with vertical concentric cylinders, and thought it was suitable. It seems you can come up with a lot of different ideas. Basically, the slide in the main animation (N1_sail_rocket_Q factor.jpg) discusses this, if we assume that microwaves cannot effectively bounce off vertical walls (steps) if their size is less than the wavelength. See N1_sail_rocket_Q factor.jpg

Upd. Add  2017_US_Navy.jpg

[Vladimir_Leonov]

Interesting article....

https://aetux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Non-rocket-non-reactive-quantum-engine.pdf

For what it's worth....

http://leonov-leonovstheories.blogspot.com/

Dear colleagues!
I saw a link to my article on LeonDrive tests in Russian journal in Russian:

Леонов В.С., Бакланов О.Д., Саутин М.В., Костин Г.В., Кубасов А.А., Алтунин С.Е., Кулаковский О.М. Неракетный нереактивный квантовый двигатель: технология, результаты, перспективы. // Воздушно-космическая сфера. 2019. №1. С. 68-75.
DOI: 10.30981/2587-7992-2019-98-1-68-75.
http://www.vesvks.ru/vks/article/neraketnyy-nereaktivnyy-kvantovyy-dvigatel-ideya-t-16397

We have an article published in a Russian journal in English:

Leonov V.S., Baklanov O.D., Sautin M.V., Kostin G.V., Kubasov A.A., Altunin S.E., Kulakovsky O.M.  Non-rocket, non-reactive quantum engine: idea, technology, results, prospects. Наука и образование сегодня, № 8 (43), 2019, pp. 5-11. DOI: 10.24411/2414-5718-2019-10802.
https://publikacija.ru/nashi-avtory/tekhnicjrkheskie-nauki/855-non-rocket.html

I ask you to read these articles and if you have any questions for me then I am ready to answer them.

[meberbs]

You are assuming a high Q, which means something concentrates the energy reflected off the large end to all reflect off the small end. Without that a large fraction of the energy misses the small end, and the drive works as a poor photon rocket. Most likely some force is applied to the concentration mechanism (sidewalls), so the force on the small end will be smaller than the large end with the sidewalls balancing the difference, but hypothetically, there could be no net force on the side walls with an equal force on the 2 ends.

I think it can be a simple two-mirror system with parabolic mirrors. In the basic diagram, parabolic mirrors are conventionally shown as straight lines. I already showed an approximate simulation of such a thing.
This can now be stopped and discussed - will there be at least any Q factor >> 1.  See  2_parab_ant.jpeg

Again, as I just said, either you don't get many reflections because much of the power radiates away, or you do, but the forces are equal and opposite, because you are just concentrating the power more on the small end. As your picture shows, parabolic mirrors would have significant radiation away from the system, and the difference in force between the ends would simply be equal to what is radiated away.

7. There is a flux of photons up and down.

Nothing in this bullet point makes any sense that I can tell.

I described the process very poorly. You are right, this text does not make sense. I wanted to discuss the problem of photons (electromagnetic waves) that can be emitted outside of two mirror antennas. I want to prove that these waves do not create any unbalanced forces in the system. Help me prove this statement.

The force on the system is equal to the rate of momentum carried away by whatever photons are emitted outside. This is a well known fact of electromagnetism proven in any decent textbook.

This can be seen on slide 1. This is the first nanosecond.

Under this assumption all you get is the net force from photons that are allowed to radiate away, and there are more efficient ways to do this, like just taking a laser and pointing it in the opposite direction of where you want to go.

The laser is not suitable, since it is necessary to use microwaves with long waves, so that the wavelength is larger than the size of the emitter (antenna, for example, a horn). This will allow microwaves to go around the  obstacle (antenna) and reduce the absorption (harmful effect) of the photon pulse in the cavity. In figure 2_parab_ant.jpeg we see quite long waves.

You missed the point, this example was just for pointing a laser out the back of a spacecraft (there would be no obstacles or reflections.) This is the best thrust per input power you can ever get by radiating away photons.

For the case I described earlier in my post with a laser going between 2 reflectors, the emission location of the laser does not need to be an obstacle. See the example in the video in this post which shows a recycling photon rocket (the reflector on one end is fixed to the Earth, so effectively the decelerating object is just repeatedly using the photons to push off the Earth, which is why momentum is still conserved.)

A simple two-mirror system with parabolic mirrors with a Q factor >> 1. It can be built with a Q factor >> 1
Agreed?

No, RF simply doesn't allow that, and if you did come up with a situation that allowed something comparable to that, you would get equal and opposite force on the mirrors.

There is simple physics. Quarter wave rule for wave transformer and so on. This is the bottleneck in my construction, since:
1) To create a high quality factor, the side walls of a closed type microwave cavity are needed
2) But these side walls break the whole idea, so create harmful forces that reduce the effect of two mirror systems.
Need a tricky trick.

It is in fact simple physics, which is why there is no "tricky trick." Any and everything you do to try to work around the need for sidewalls will create exactly the same problem of having equivalent force as the sidewalls, or just concentrating the power so that the force is equal between the mirrors. Otherwise, you will just be radiating power away and get a simple photon rocket worth of force at best.

[meberbs]

Interesting article....

https://aetux.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Non-rocket-non-reactive-quantum-engine.pdf

For what it's worth....

http://leonov-leonovstheories.blogspot.com/

Dear colleagues!
I saw a link to my article on LeonDrive tests in Russian journal in Russian:

Леонов В.С., Бакланов О.Д., Саутин М.В., Костин Г.В., Кубасов А.А., Алтунин С.Е., Кулаковский О.М. Неракетный нереактивный квантовый двигатель: технология, результаты, перспективы. // Воздушно-космическая сфера. 2019. №1. С. 68-75.
DOI: 10.30981/2587-7992-2019-98-1-68-75.
http://www.vesvks.ru/vks/article/neraketnyy-nereaktivnyy-kvantovyy-dvigatel-ideya-t-16397

We have an article published in a Russian journal in English:

Leonov V.S., Baklanov O.D., Sautin M.V., Kostin G.V., Kubasov A.A., Altunin S.E., Kulakovsky O.M.  Non-rocket, non-reactive quantum engine: idea, technology, results, prospects. Наука и образование сегодня, № 8 (43), 2019, pp. 5-11. DOI: 10.24411/2414-5718-2019-10802.
https://publikacija.ru/nashi-avtory/tekhnicjrkheskie-nauki/855-non-rocket.html

I ask you to read these articles and if you have any questions for me then I am ready to answer them.

The next post after the one you quoted describes apparent problems with your setup.

[Alex_O]

You are assuming a high Q, which means something concentrates the energy reflected off the large end to all reflect off the small end. Without that a large fraction of the energy misses the small end, and the drive works as a poor photon rocket. Most likely some force is applied to the concentration mechanism (sidewalls), so the force on the small end will be smaller than the large end with the sidewalls balancing the difference, but hypothetically, there could be no net force on the side walls with an equal force on the 2 ends.

....

Thank you, I understood all your comments very well, and I want to show tomorrow a new argument, which seems to me to be important. I’m also studying the possibility of calculating the Q-factor graph in my simulation (there are still difficulties that are not clear to me, I can clearly see this in closed resonators, in the first attempt I saw a value of about 240)

(about lasers and a mirror at the spaceport - I am familiar with these works, where they saw a thrust of the order of 3 mN)

So far I want to note one point - it seems to me I need an ideal, spherical source of microwaves, which is located in the center of two mirrors (not like in emdrive). I don’t know what it is yet.

[Alex_O]

You are assuming a high Q, which means something concentrates the energy reflected off the large end to all reflect off the small end. Without that a large fraction of the energy misses the small end, and the drive works as a poor photon rocket. Most likely some force is applied to the concentration mechanism (sidewalls), so the force on the small end will be smaller than the large end with the sidewalls balancing the difference, but hypothetically, there could be no net force on the side walls with an equal force on the 2 ends.

I think it can be a simple two-mirror system with parabolic mirrors. In the basic diagram, parabolic mirrors are conventionally shown as straight lines.

I was inspired by this article, which discusses mirrors for microwaves with a high quality factor, but I don’t know the details and the possibility of constructing an asymmetric resonator with mirrors of different diameters, to create a non-zero axial force in the system, due to the pressure of microwave photons and I don’t understand how  In this case, the photon momentum between the mirrors is summed, can we expect a value greater than zero.?

Ultrahigh finesse Fabry-Pérot superconducting resonator
S. Kuhr, S. Gleyzes, C. Guerlin, J. Bernu, U. B. Hoff et al.
Citation: Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 164101 (2007); doi: 10.1063/1.2724816

https://elementy.ru/images/news/nobel2012_fig2_cavity_600.jpg

[meberbs]

I was inspired by this article, which discusses mirrors for microwaves with a high quality factor, but I don’t know the details and the possibility of constructing an asymmetric resonator with mirrors of different diameters, to create a non-zero axial force in the system, due to the pressure of microwave photons and I don’t understand how  In this case, the photon momentum between the mirrors is summed, can we expect a value greater than zero.?

Ultrahigh finesse Fabry-Pérot superconducting resonator
S. Kuhr, S. Gleyzes, C. Guerlin, J. Bernu, U. B. Hoff et al.
Citation: Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 164101 (2007); doi: 10.1063/1.2724816

https://elementy.ru/images/news/nobel2012_fig2_cavity_600.jpg

The answer is the same as always, there is either no additional force by making a mirror larger because the mirrors are both already catching essentially all of the energy, or there is asymmetric force at most equal only to the radiation that is escaping. These are generic rules, that

In this case specifically, their primary loss mechanism from the radiator is "diffraction" which refers to the energy that escapes past the mirrors, because you can't perfectly contain RF energy at these scales without sidewalls (though they do an impressively good job.) You would get only a tiny amount of additional force that is based on the photons that were already radiating away and escaping now going more in one direction than the other. There is actually a chance that one reflector being larger than the other increases the rate of loss (due to some of the less intuitive properties of EM waves), but that just lowers the Q value, and you still only get force to the extent that the photons that escape preferentially go in one direction.

[Alex_O]

I was inspired by this article, which discusses mirrors for microwaves with a high quality factor, but I don’t know the details and the possibility of constructing an asymmetric resonator with mirrors of different diameters, to create a non-zero axial force in the system, due to the pressure of microwave photons and I don’t understand how  In this case, the photon momentum between the mirrors is summed, can we expect a value greater than zero.?

Ultrahigh finesse Fabry-Pérot superconducting resonator
S. Kuhr, S. Gleyzes, C. Guerlin, J. Bernu, U. B. Hoff et al.
Citation: Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 164101 (2007); doi: 10.1063/1.2724816

https://elementy.ru/images/news/nobel2012_fig2_cavity_600.jpg

The answer is the same as always, there is either no additional force by making a mirror larger because the mirrors are both already catching essentially all of the energy, or there is asymmetric force at most equal only to the radiation that is escaping. These are generic rules, that

In this case specifically, their primary loss mechanism from the radiator is "diffraction" which refers to the energy that escapes past the mirrors, because you can't perfectly contain RF energy at these scales without sidewalls (though they do an impressively good job.) You would get only a tiny amount of additional force that is based on the photons that were already radiating away and escaping now going more in one direction than the other. There is actually a chance that one reflector being larger than the other increases the rate of loss (due to some of the less intuitive properties of EM waves), but that just lowers the Q value, and you still only get force to the extent that the photons that escape preferentially go in one direction.

Thank you dear meberbs, I understand physics in general, and with your help I began to better understand what my simulation could mean.

1. an example of my understanding of basic physics

In Resonant Modes of a Conical Cavity http://www.gregegan.net/SCIENCE/Cavity/Cavity.html#REF10
Greg Egan leads Proof of zero force for any shape of cavity

If the cavity contains a standing wave, then the fields will have a harmonic time dependence of the form sin (ωt) or cos (ωt), and over one complete cycle of the mode, a period of 2π / ω, all the fields will return to their origin values.
∫cycle (∂Si / ∂t) dt = Si (t0 + 2π / ω) - Si (t0) = 0

So, averaged over a complete cycle in the same way, each component of the net force on the wall will sum to zero.

This means that there is no flow of energy in a standing wave. A periodic change in the sign of the Poynting vector shows that the direction of energy movement periodically changes. Energy oscillates between the antinodes of the electric and the antinodes of the magnetic field.

2 example of my understanding of additional physics is based on studies "SRF cavity resonator" of a number of works in Russian, and today I accidentally found a good example in English, I just want to show

https://lss.fnal.gov/archive/2018/pub/fermilab-pub-18-120-td.pdf

Abstract: The Lorentz Force Detuning (LFD) and the pressure sensitivity are two critical concerns
during the design of a Superconducting Radio Frequency (SRF) cavity resonator. The mechanical
deformation of the bare Niobium cavity walls, due to the electromagnetic fields and fluctuation of
the external pressure in the Helium bath, can dynamically and statically detune the frequency of the
cavity and can cause beam phase errors. The frequency shift can be compensated by additional RF
power, that is required to maintain the accelerating gradient, or by sophisticated tuning mechanisms
and control-compensation algorithms. Passive stiffening is one of the simplest and most effective
tools that can be used during the early design phase, capable of satisfying the Radio Frequency (RF)
requisites. This approach requires several multiphysics simulations as well as a deep mechanical
and RF knowledge of the phenomena involved. In this paper, is presented a new numerical model
for a pillbox cavity that can predict the frequency shifts caused by the LFD and external pressure.
This method allows to greatly reduce the computational effort, which is necessary to meet the
RF requirements and to keep track of the frequency shifts without using the time consuming
multiphysics simulations

[rfmwguy]

"Solar sails work by capturing the energy from light particles as they bounce off a reflective surface, according to the Department of Energy."

Bread Crumbs from Beyond:

Momentum from mass-less particles? No.

Photons are massless (which means they have no rest mass, but they still carry energy).  They have momentum. The possibility for this to exist comes straight from special relativity. The mass of photons has been shown to be 0 to within some extremely small margin of error (many orders of magnitude smaller than the mass of neutrinos.)

Radiation pressure has also been measured many different ways.

I am not sure what you intended the point of your post to be, solar sails have been demonstrated.

Definition of momentum
A property of a moving body that the body has by virtue of its mass and motion and that is equal to the product of the body's mass and velocity

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/momentum

Special Relativity is incomplete (in the public sector).

[meberbs]

"Solar sails work by capturing the energy from light particles as they bounce off a reflective surface, according to the Department of Energy."

Bread Crumbs from Beyond:

Momentum from mass-less particles? No.

Photons are massless (which means they have no rest mass, but they still carry energy).  They have momentum. The possibility for this to exist comes straight from special relativity. The mass of photons has been shown to be 0 to within some extremely small margin of error (many orders of magnitude smaller than the mass of neutrinos.)

Radiation pressure has also been measured many different ways.

I am not sure what you intended the point of your post to be, solar sails have been demonstrated.

Definition of momentum
A property of a moving body that the body has by virtue of its mass and motion and that is equal to the product of the body's mass and velocity

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/momentum

Special Relativity is incomplete (in the public sector).

Looking at a non-relativistic definition of momentum cannot be used to determine whether relativity is complete.

The relativistic definition of momentum adds in a factor of gamma. Gamma goes towards infinity as velocity approaches c, so that definition is only the one for particles with non-zero rest mass. As I said in my previous post, photons have zero rest mass, but they still have energy, and you can calculate a relativistic mass through mass-energy equivalence (E = m*c^2) if you use relativistic mass in the formula stated in the definition you provided, you get the right answer. Same for massive particles, since relativistic mass is just gamma*m_0, consistent with the initial relativistic definition I started with.

Understanding of the difference between rest mass and relativistic mass, and when each applies is important. (In general, relativistic mass is what actually fits common use, but rest mass is the relativistic invariant that is needed when talking about fundamental properties of a particle or object.

[Alex_O]

I understood how to set up simulations to demonstrate the forces of pressure relief, it will take a little time. While I was tuning, I had the idea to discuss the operation of a simple jet engine. Why does a jet engine create rocket thrust? Because there is a gradient in the vessel, the pressure drop at the ends. The reactive movement of the vessel / rocket is completely dependent on the pressure drop across its end walls.

I did a thought experiment on the nanosecond time scale. This is a set of points that can be criticized. I wrote down theses in the order of experiment, brainstorming. I know that some theses look very unusual, but it is very important for brainstorming. Please look, OK? .

1. Take a vessel with thick walls and pump gas under high pressure into the vessel.
2. Place the vessel horizontally on the trolley.
3. Mentally see how the gas molecules make a Brownian motion and create gas pressure on the walls of the vessel. The vessel is in a state without movement, since the pressure in the vessel is evenly distributed along its walls. .
4. Make a small hole in the vessel (in the wall on the right). We see how several gas molecules flew out of the vessel, which are close to the hole. But the vessel still remains in a state without movement, during the first nanoseconds.

5. Why? Because other gas molecules did not have time to "react", and make their Brownian motion along the old trajectories.

6. After 1 nanosecond, the molecules “understood this,” and at the left end of the vessel the pressure of the gas molecules became greater than on the right.

7. As soon as there is a difference in the pressure of the molecules on the end walls on the walls of the vessel, the vessel immediately begins to move.

8. Since there are no rigid bonds between gas molecules, and there are a lot of molecules, several molecules cannot “know” that there is a hole in the vessel and that several molecules have already escaped from the vessel. The pressure on the end walls just changed. For example, the yellow washer (in the picture below) for several nanosecond seconds may not know for sure that there is already a nozzle hole and gas is coming out of it. So (pay attention to the term), the information about the nozzle-hole has not yet arrived, "fly" before the yellow washer.

9. Conclusion. The reactive movement of the vessel / rocket is completely dependent on the pressure drop across its end walls.

10. The fact that there is a nozzle hole in the bottom and reactive gases flow out through this hole is not important. It is important that there is a gradient, the pressure drop at the ends of the vessel. A vessel does not move because reactive gases flow from it. And because in the vessel there is a differential pressure of gas specially created by the captain of the rocket.

11. It is thought that you can call a demon, which will change the distribution of molecules in the vessel asymmetrically and unevenly. This will immediately create a movement of the vessel, even if there is no opening for the outflow of gas. The demon can be made artificially using technical tools.

12. The fact that the outflow of the molecule from the vessel is not a prerequisite for creating reactive motion at small time intervals.

13. For example, a rocket captain can effectively and remotely change the geometric shape of gas molecules so quickly that the trajectory of the molecules, when they collide, will already differ from a completely random Brownian motion in a short time interval.

For example, molecules can be polyhedron figures, if the captain can flexibly control the shape of polyhedral bodies - molecules, everything becomes simple. The conditions for the collision of molecules in a Brownian motion will depend on the strength of the captain’s thought and its adaptation to program the shape of the molecules. (Do you understand? Mentally install special muscles on each molecule and control the shape of each molecule according to an arbitrary algorithm, and do it very quickly.)

14. The coordinates of the center of gravity in the system. You can come up with a simple setup when it does not depend on the distribution of mobile molecules in the vessel.

15. Thus, if in a closed vessel, using tools for remote control of the form of molecules (which will provide special conditions for the collision of molecules), you can create an effect that completely coincides with the jet movement, but without the release of a jet stream.

16. The closest analogy is the motion of EM fields in a microwave cavity, where EM fields have different “densities”. If at the same time, the EM fields themselves are created by short pulses, then this is very useful. The effect will be more powerful, since the rocket's captan can more effectively control the EM field in a pulsed mode.

All of the above can be explained with an example of simulation, where the rocket captain controlled the distribution of standing waves in the cavity in a pulsed mode using different settings of the frequency of the microwave generator. Something like this, please discuss. See the gif file, please.

[meberbs]

4. Make a small hole in the vessel (in the wall on the right). We see how several gas molecules flew out of the vessel, which are close to the hole. But the vessel still remains in a state without movement, during the first nanoseconds.

5. Why? Because other gas molecules did not have time to "react", and make their Brownian motion along the old trajectories.

False, in the pressure (force per area) remains the same on all surfaces inside the box, but as soon as you cut the hole in one side of the box, the box starts moving because there is less force on that wall because the area of the wall decreased by this size of the hole while the pressure remained the same.

The rest of your points after this are backwards and inside out because of your false assertion here.

Everything after the conclusion in point 9 is even worse, because you appear to have entirely abandoned logic, and none of those statements would be true, even if your "conclusion" was not wrong.

You start assuming complete nonsense, such as that individual molecules can change their own velocity just by changing their shape. This is not true, and completely breaks conservation of momentum. I have no idea what your attached gif is supposed to be showing, but you have a variety of assumptions equivalent to "magically apply reactionless forces to molecules so that they all tend to move in one direction. If you assume that conservation of momentum is broken, then it is unsurprising when you get nonsensical results that break conservation of momentum.

[Alex_O]

4. Make a small hole in the vessel (in the wall on the right). We see how several gas molecules flew out of the vessel, which are close to the hole. But the vessel still remains in a state without movement, during the first nanoseconds.

5. Why? Because other gas molecules did not have time to "react", and make their Brownian motion along the old trajectories.

False, in the pressure (force per area) remains the same on all surfaces inside the box, but as soon as you cut the hole in one side of the box, the box starts moving because there is less force on that wall because the area of the wall decreased by this size of the hole while the pressure remained the same.

The rest of your points after this are backwards and inside out because of your false assertion here.

Everything after the conclusion in point 9 is even worse, because you appear to have entirely abandoned logic, and none of those statements would be true, even if your "conclusion" was not wrong.

You start assuming complete nonsense, such as that individual molecules can change their own velocity just by changing their shape. This is not true, and completely breaks conservation of momentum. I have no idea what your attached gif is supposed to be showing, but you have a variety of assumptions equivalent to "magically apply reactionless forces to molecules so that they all tend to move in one direction. If you assume that conservation of momentum is broken, then it is unsurprising when you get nonsensical results that break conservation of momentum.

My idea in brainstorming mode has no limits . Look at the yellow washer. Let's flexibly change its shape using the remote control (without supplying energy from outside, the washer has a built-in battery). It is clear that her tactorium may already be completely different, for example, the puck can, like a ballerina on the stage, create a beautiful dance of movement in this Brownian stream of other molecules.

2. Why should I break the law of conservation of momentum? there are 10 ^ 26 molecules in 1 mole of gas, please enjoy the law of conservation of momentum between them 10 ^ 26 times.

3. What is gas pressure? This is the number of molecular hits on the walls of the vessel. Using the demon with remote control, you can easily change the distribution law of the number of hits of molecules on the walls. The animation shows that at every moment of time, on the walls of the vessel there are special points where the molecules do not hit the walls of the vessel. For example, I can create holes at these points using quick algorithms, and at the same time, the total gas pressure on the walls will not change.

4. Mentally, we will make the molecules multifaceted, and we will install electromagnets with remote control in each face. This will open up amazing opportunities to create entire flows of certain molecules in a vessel, so that the number of their hits of all other molecules against the walls does not change.

There seems to be a new term here. The propagation speed of control signals, information in the system. Imagine that each molecule has a built-in computer, with a pre-recorded program and a neural network. This method allows you to very well control the frequency and number of molecular hits on the walls of the vessel. Permissible? A new element has appeared in the momentum calculation formula - program code, information, firmware in ROM .. At the time of Newton, it seems that such opportunities simply did not exist?

[Alex_O]

Вы начинаете предполагать полную чепуху, например, что отдельные молекулы могут изменять свою собственную скорость, просто изменяя свою форму. Это неправда и полностью нарушает сохранение импульса.

It seems here you can say that you can simply create a vortex, the center of the vessel (since changing the shape of the molecules we will effectively control the trajectory of the molecules after their collisions). Remember the video where the foam balls danced in a standing sound wave that was created in a closed vessel by a sound speaker?