Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 8  (Read 1442295 times)

Offline TheTraveller

Or if this new paper starts enough pressure on the company he works for. We might get new informations sooner. I think Mr. Shawyer said it himself. That outside push can help to release more informations

SPR is was started by Roger. He had NDAs that have timers. Once the times expire, he can release data, as he does.

You need to review his latest peer reviewed paper (at www.emdrive.com) and maybe start to accept that he talks about is real.
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline TheTraveller

Interesting that Roger has now shared the dielectric he used

Siemens dielectric resonator type LN89/52B with a dielectric constant (er) of 38

how he tuned the dielectric position and the full internal dimensions of his 1st Experimental EmDrive.
« Last Edit: 08/28/2016 05:31 pm by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3096
  • Liked: 3373
  • Likes Given: 771
Or if this new paper starts enough pressure on the company he works for. We might get new informations sooner. I think Mr. Shawyer said it himself. That outside push can help to release more informations

SPR is was started by Roger. He had NDAs that have timers. Once the times expire, he can release data, as he does.

You need to review his latest peer reviewed paper (at www.emdrive.com) and maybe start to accept that he talks about is real.
You don't get to say what anyone "needs" to do. I am not sure why you would bother to point someone to the peer review paper anyway (unless you mean the new papers, but since they weren't published in a journal, calling them peer-reviewed would be misleading). From what I remember, it is essentially a "what-if" description stating how interstellar travel would work assuming you had a drive with the properties Shawyer claims. There is only one paragraph I remember stating how the EmDrive supposedly works. Seeing the flaw in that paragraph would have required a different expertise than what most reviewers for that paper would have had.

The person who appears to have reviewed these 2 newly released papers states in one of his conclusions:
Quote
I do not feel qualified to pronounce upon the physical principles exploited by the invention but I understand others have done so.
The others I am aware of who have done so have all found flaws in the theory. Shawyer has claimed otherwise, but again, there is not a single name of someone who knows the relevant physics who thinks there is any merit to Shawyer's theory.

As to the experiment, the same author states in the other paper:

Quote
There is no justification for (a) in the main text, see Section 4.3.
The thermal test results are not quite as clear as implied by (e), see Section 4.4.
The  results  quoted  in  (j)  and  (m) are  not  supported  by  predictions,  see  Section
4.3.  In Section 4.4 I  also  point  out  some  apparent  anomalies  in  the  thrust  measurements which are not explained n the text.
There  is  no  justification  for  (n), which  should  have  its  own  section  in  the  main  text describing a possible flight engine design and its expected performance. There is likely to be significant further development required on a suitable space qualified microwave source.

The numbering doesn't seem to match up with the paper I believe he is reviewing, so it seems a different version of something may have been uploaded. I won't go into details about what I see in Shawyer's papers other than to note that this reviewer, despite admitting to lack in some of the background required for the theory was able to point out multiple potential issues. In addition, I do not recommend that anyone try to replicate Shawyer's spring + scale setup, since that setup fundamentally is prone to all sorts of anomalous results.

It would be nice if before you continued insisting that Shawyer is right about everything you actually tried to understand some of the many critiques that have been posted by me and others finding fundamental flaws in his papers.

Offline TheTraveller

It would be nice if before you continued insisting that Shawyer is right about everything you actually tried to understand some of the many critiques that have been posted by me and others finding fundamental flaws in his papers.

Here is the issue:

The EmDrive works.
You can't explain why.
Roger can.
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline RotoSequence

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2208
  • Liked: 2068
  • Likes Given: 1536
It would be nice if before you continued insisting that Shawyer is right about everything you actually tried to understand some of the many critiques that have been posted by me and others finding fundamental flaws in his papers.

Here is the issue:

The EmDrive works.
You can't explain why.
Roger can.

Caveat emptor, being able to explain why something works is not the same thing as being right about why something works.

Offline Bob Woods

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
  • Salem, Oregon USA
  • Liked: 520
  • Likes Given: 1568
Once we know that we have an agreed upon effect, then everyone can theorize on the why and eventually figure it out. Roger gets the credit for making these experiments happen.


Offline TheTraveller

Once we know that we have an agreed upon effect, then everyone can theorize on the why and eventually figure it out. Roger gets the credit for making these experiments happen.

Roger told me extensive discussion on his theory occured on both sides of the Atlantic and that in the end his theory held up. I suspect those discussions were engaged under NDA and will one day see the light of day.

Here is the kicker, Roger's thrust equation does predict the measured thrust. That equation is based on his theory.
« Last Edit: 08/29/2016 06:58 am by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline Flyby

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 388
  • Belgium
  • Liked: 451
  • Likes Given: 48
Regardless some very impressive DIY builds, we still have to see any conclusive results.
So far we've seen interesting and intriguing results, but none are conclusively confirming the EMdrive effect.

This is not about "believing  or not believing" but gathering hard, irrefutable evidence that the effect is real. And , obviously, we're not there yet...

I suppose we're all eagerly waiting for the "eye opener of 2016 event", that TT promised us many months ago, else... he'll have no other option then to eat his hat... :)
4 months to go...

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3096
  • Liked: 3373
  • Likes Given: 771
Once we know that we have an agreed upon effect, then everyone can theorize on the why and eventually figure it out. Roger gets the credit for making these experiments happen.

Roger told me extensive discussion on his theory occured on both sides of the Atlantic and that in the end his theory held up. I suspect those discussions were engaged under NDA and will one day see the light of day.

Here is the kicker, Roger's thrust equation does predict the measured thrust. That equation is based on his theory.
Discussion with who? he keeps repeating this claim of supporters for his theory, but no one with a relevant physics background has ever stated support for his theory. An NDA would not prevent him from saying "ask this physicist, they found my theory to be fine."

His theory is fundamentally contradictory. Using only the definition of force, I have shown that given Shawyer's assumptions the drive would move the other way. I have also shown using only the definition of conservation of momentum that the device, if it works by the mechanism Shawyer describes would break conservation of momentum, yet Shawyer claims that his device conserves momentum.

If you haven't realized it yet, people on this site are persuaded by evidence and logic, you seem to just be asking for blind faith. This is the wrong place to try that.

Offline Flyby

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 388
  • Belgium
  • Liked: 451
  • Likes Given: 48
.....
If you haven't realized it yet, people on this site are persuaded by evidence and logic, you seem to just be asking for blind faith. This is the wrong place to try that.

Blind faith and scientific methodology are like oil and water.... they don't mix very well... :)

Offline TheTraveller

If you haven't realized it yet, people on this site are persuaded by evidence and logic, you seem to just be asking for blind faith. This is the wrong place to try that.

Yet it works and you can't explain it with your theory while Roger can explain it with his theory.
« Last Edit: 08/29/2016 12:45 pm by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline TheTraveller

Regardless some very impressive DIY builds, we still have to see any conclusive results.
So far we've seen interesting and intriguing results, but none are conclusively confirming the EMdrive effect.

This is not about "believing  or not believing" but gathering hard, irrefutable evidence that the effect is real. And , obviously, we're not there yet...

I suppose we're all eagerly waiting for the "eye opener of 2016 event", that TT promised us many months ago, else... he'll have no other option then to eat his hat... :)
4 months to go...

I could post some data that is confidential as of yet but I will not.
Interesting data from 2006:
http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg
Wonder what else may be released after the 10 year NDA period expires?
Wonder what other DIY EmDrive experiments have also built wireless and battery powered rotary test rigs that have rotation?

For sure there will be no hat eating, at least not on my side.

This is my last post on this subject until the EW paper is available for download.
« Last Edit: 08/29/2016 12:57 pm by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline Tellmeagain

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • maryland
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 34

I could post some data that is confidential as of yet but I will not.
Interesting data from 2006:
http://www.emdrive.com/fullDMtest188.mpg
Wonder what else may be released after the 10 year NDA period expires?
Wonder what other DIY EmDrive experiments have also built wireless and battery powered rotary test rigs that have rotation?

For sure there will be no hat eating, at least not on my side.

This is my last post on this subject until the EW paper is available for download.

It looked to me that this video showed that the rotatory apparatus started from speed 0, accelerated, reached a maximum, then decelerated,  then reached speed 0 again,  then the video was cut. It is attempting to predict that if the video were continued, the apparatus would have rotated backwards, making an oscillation, just like what a big compass would behave. Would you please ask Mr. Shawyer what happened after the video was cut?

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10661
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 692
Here is the issue:

The EmDrive works.
You can't explain why.
Roger can.
But doesn't.

Fixed that for ya.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10661
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1184
  • Likes Given: 692
You don't get to say what anyone "needs" to do.

Yeah I do.  Just chill.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Flyby

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 388
  • Belgium
  • Liked: 451
  • Likes Given: 48
Not wanting to start a controversy here TT , so , my apology if you perceived my previous post as "hostile".

TT,  I would be genuinely happy if anyone could prove the EM drive works. It would have profound implication, especially for future space travel.
So...Don't mistake my skepticism for hand wavering or disapproval... :)

I too really want this to work, really , but... not at the expense of scientific rigor and common sense.

If Roger or you, or anyone else  succeeds in demonstrating the EM effect, with clear evidence and free from background noise, I'll be one of the first to congratulate that person.

As for the video, I'm well aware of the video and several threads ago, I formulate my remarks on it. Main issue i have with it is the gyroscopic effect of the water circulation pump. It should have been turned 90, through the rotating axis of the setup.
SeeShell also formulated the remark of vibrations with air-bearings causing circular movement of the setup.
It can indeed be due to the EM effect that it rotated, I will not deny that, but until all the other possibilities are ruled out, you're simply jumping the gun that it HAS to be the EMdrive. Maybe it is , maybe it is not...

You get to the truth through elimination, not through assumption...
« Last Edit: 08/29/2016 02:05 pm by Flyby »

Offline Elrond Cupboard

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
  • U.K.
  • Liked: 10
  • Likes Given: 0
If you haven't realized it yet, people on this site are persuaded by evidence and logic, you seem to just be asking for blind faith. This is the wrong place to try that.

Yet it works and you can't explain it with your theory while Roger can explain it with his theory.
Of course the caveat to the Feynman quote is that even if your theory agrees with experiment, it's probably wrong.

Offline Monomorphic

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1725
  • United States
  • Liked: 4366
  • Likes Given: 1404
A couple of last minute improvements before I resume regular testing. I've removed all zinc (ferromagnetic) machine screws from the build and replaced with all brass and some stainless steel.

I also added casters to my lab workbench. I can now move the entire build out into the room and 360 degrees with ease. With these casters I can support 800 lbs - far more than I will ever need.
« Last Edit: 08/30/2016 12:44 am by Monomorphic »

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3096
  • Liked: 3373
  • Likes Given: 771
TT,  I would be genuinely happy if anyone could prove the EM drive works. It would have profound implication, especially for future space travel.
So...Don't mistake my skepticism for hand wavering or disapproval... :)
This. Seriously, read this. It applies to me as well. Please keep that in mind we aren't enemies here.

Also, I am not sure if you realize the irony in responding to a post where I point out that Shawyer's theory and experiment disagree with that Feynman quote. I don't have a theory, but others have proposed theories that are at least plausible explanations if the device is shown to work.

Now back to waiting for data.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 895
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 313
  • Likes Given: 354
I was back in thread 2 and found one of Dr. Rodal's old posts that caught my interest, I must have missed it at the time, or it took time for me to realize its significance.  It is this post here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.msg1357720#msg1357720  They are discussing a paper cited by Paul.  Rodal points out this paper: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.6380v5.pdf

I read through it and it appears to me they are suggesting the quantum vacuum is made up of anti-matter and matter?  Some charged and even uncharged.  This one appears to take into account spatial structure and the electro-magnetic properties.  Is it just me or does it suggest a capacitor could cause polarization of the Quantum Vacuum also?  Maybe the energies required would be too much but I wonder if there could be a frequency dependence or resonance of the QV. 
« Last Edit: 08/30/2016 02:15 am by dustinthewind »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1