I don't post or read here much lately, but the last few pages have given me the urge to make a public service announcement for those interested in emdrive discussions: Don't become an SJW:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Science%20Justice%20WarriorI'll see myself out now...
Quote from: deltaV on 11/26/2016 04:44 pmIn Figure 7:When the calibration pulse is turned on there's an impulsive shift in the displacement that takes around 5 seconds. When the calibration pulse is turned off there's an impulsive shift in the displacement that takes about 10 seconds. When the RF is turned on there's an impulsive shift in the displacement that takes around 20 seconds. When the RF is turned off no impulsive shift is visible (or it takes minutes and is obscured by the thermal displacement). What happened to the RF-off impulsive shift?DeltaV:Question: "What happened to the RF-off impulsive shift?"Look at the attached slide-2 and try to understand what the superposition of an impulsive signal with a thermally induced torque pendulum (TP) center of gravity (cg) signal can look like when the thrust signal is about 1/3 of the magnitude of the value of the TP cg-shift signal at the time of RF turn-off. Of course the impulsive turn-off signal is swallowed or buried by the TP cg-shift signal as shown in the report's figure-5 and in the below repeat of same slide-2_Answer slide. It's just a graphic addition problem...
In Figure 7:When the calibration pulse is turned on there's an impulsive shift in the displacement that takes around 5 seconds. When the calibration pulse is turned off there's an impulsive shift in the displacement that takes about 10 seconds. When the RF is turned on there's an impulsive shift in the displacement that takes around 20 seconds. When the RF is turned off no impulsive shift is visible (or it takes minutes and is obscured by the thermal displacement). What happened to the RF-off impulsive shift?
Quote from: rfmwguy on 11/27/2016 01:38 amQuote from: Klebiano on 11/27/2016 01:26 amQuoteWell, how else would Mill describe his work if he leads the field as the first hydrino scientist since he discovered the concept?Since it was discovered, if it is real serious stuff i'd imagine that more people would join the research as it promise so much technological advances. When you're the only one to research something for decades, is very probable that this something doesn't have so much evidence.This is a good thought that I have applied it to both shawyers and Woodward's efforts. Shawyers recently has been picked up by others, Woodward's I am not so sure. Regardless, shawyers emdrive appears to be yielding more replication efforts at much higher force levels...mN compared to microN. NASA's Eagle Works DID NOT measure milliNewtons of thrust. They measured microNewtons of purported thrust with a microwave input of 40 to 80 watts, extrapolated to roughly 1.2 milliNewtons per kilowatt of microwave input. Just for scale, 1.2 milliNewtons is roughly 1/50 the weight of a United States coin referred to as a nickel. The EW results require 1 kilowatt of EFFECTIVE (applied) microwave energy to offset 1/50 the mass of that small coin. And folks don't think this just might be thermal or other artifact? I have a flying car for sale. It will be on Ebay in the second quarter of 2017. No, wait, the first quarter of 2018. No, wait...
Quote from: Klebiano on 11/27/2016 01:26 amQuoteWell, how else would Mill describe his work if he leads the field as the first hydrino scientist since he discovered the concept?Since it was discovered, if it is real serious stuff i'd imagine that more people would join the research as it promise so much technological advances. When you're the only one to research something for decades, is very probable that this something doesn't have so much evidence.This is a good thought that I have applied it to both shawyers and Woodward's efforts. Shawyers recently has been picked up by others, Woodward's I am not so sure. Regardless, shawyers emdrive appears to be yielding more replication efforts at much higher force levels...mN compared to microN.
QuoteWell, how else would Mill describe his work if he leads the field as the first hydrino scientist since he discovered the concept?Since it was discovered, if it is real serious stuff i'd imagine that more people would join the research as it promise so much technological advances. When you're the only one to research something for decades, is very probable that this something doesn't have so much evidence.
Well, how else would Mill describe his work if he leads the field as the first hydrino scientist since he discovered the concept?
Doctor Rodal mentioned something a few days (and a dozen pages or so ago) that seems to have gotten lost in debates since then:A SECOND Estes confab, apparently slated for this December. His mention was the first I'd heard of this event.So...1 - When is the conference slated to happen?2 - Rodal mentioned a lengthy, 40+ page paper apparently focusing on Woodward's theory. Who else is participating? What papers are slated for presentation? Will Todd present his latest theory? Will Shell at long last reveal some of her results? Will Paul March be able to make an appearance? Will Monomorphic be able to attend this time? 3 - Did the video team that documented the last Estes meeting ever finish their work? Sort of dropped off the radar, there.
Quote from: WarpTech on 11/26/2016 07:58 pmGood questions!"... can we convert that to a phase derivative and compute the change per cycle? That would save time and steady state operation is really what we're after right?"I would agree that the derivative per cycle, or half-cycle even would be preferable, but "steady state" would be a pulsed, repetitive input signal they way Shawyer does it."How do Q (and dampening factor) vary with time if the drive is at steady state?"Haha, they don't! It should only thrust when charging and discharging. The magnetic flux into and out of the system is the momentum per unit charge."Is the mass density referring the air inside the cavity?"No, it is referring to the EM mass density, but later I used Reactive Energy/c2, the (mass) energy stored and not dissipated."If this was vacuum would there be an undefined velocity vector potential?"Yes! This is the gravito-magnetic vector potential. It's not undefined because I am equating this with the magnetic vector potential, at high Q."What does relative voltage potential mean, relative to what?"It is relative to the status of the magnetic flux inside the circumference of the circle, the integral of the electric field around 2pi*r. If the magnetic flux is not increasing or decreasing, then the voltage potential around this loop is zero "0". If the flux is increasing or decreasing there is voltage, and if it that change is accelerating, there is divergence. "Are we ultimately after momentum density?"We are after the momentum density normal to the unit area, through the big end as one integral, and through the rest of the frustum as the other integral. Preferably expressed as a difference between the two, where the damping factor can be different in each integral.That would express the thrust forward or backward, as positive or negative numbers, or 0.The divergence of the force would be the time derivative.OK interesting! I'll be able to work on it Monday after 5 EST and ill come up with more questions when I get stuck
Good questions!"... can we convert that to a phase derivative and compute the change per cycle? That would save time and steady state operation is really what we're after right?"I would agree that the derivative per cycle, or half-cycle even would be preferable, but "steady state" would be a pulsed, repetitive input signal they way Shawyer does it."How do Q (and dampening factor) vary with time if the drive is at steady state?"Haha, they don't! It should only thrust when charging and discharging. The magnetic flux into and out of the system is the momentum per unit charge."Is the mass density referring the air inside the cavity?"No, it is referring to the EM mass density, but later I used Reactive Energy/c2, the (mass) energy stored and not dissipated."If this was vacuum would there be an undefined velocity vector potential?"Yes! This is the gravito-magnetic vector potential. It's not undefined because I am equating this with the magnetic vector potential, at high Q."What does relative voltage potential mean, relative to what?"It is relative to the status of the magnetic flux inside the circumference of the circle, the integral of the electric field around 2pi*r. If the magnetic flux is not increasing or decreasing, then the voltage potential around this loop is zero "0". If the flux is increasing or decreasing there is voltage, and if it that change is accelerating, there is divergence. "Are we ultimately after momentum density?"We are after the momentum density normal to the unit area, through the big end as one integral, and through the rest of the frustum as the other integral. Preferably expressed as a difference between the two, where the damping factor can be different in each integral.That would express the thrust forward or backward, as positive or negative numbers, or 0.The divergence of the force would be the time derivative.
No, you are mistaken, there is no conference in December. The proceedings from the workshop we had in September will be released in December or early January, along with the videos, as soon as they are done putting it all together. Dr. Rodal is working on the paper that was presented in that workshop, for those proceedings
Science has room for surprises left in it. Otherwise we would not be reading things like this:http://phys.org/news/2016-11-na64-mysterious-dark-photon.htmlNot saying there are such things... But there could be.
Quote from: meberbs on 11/26/2016 10:23 pmAre you claiming that providing widely accepted definitions is a point of authority argument?The only place he speaks on behalf of every physicist is "Every physicist dreams of that Nobel prize that comes from discovering some new phenomenon that contradicts known theory." Obviously people all have different motivations, but this checking on this statement would be like asking lottery players "would you like to win the lottery?" Even the ones who understand that they do not have a real chance of winning would say yes."Widely accepted" is the slippery slope. It might be in your home, on your block, at your work, in your county, ad nauseum. It's my recommendation not to attack others for posting styles like your own. There are thousands commenting on the emdrive in about every language. Google it sometimes then use translate. The OP you challenged has commentary points I've read many times elsewhere. Check it for yourself. EmDrive is a leading concept to break free of rocket limitations.
Are you claiming that providing widely accepted definitions is a point of authority argument?The only place he speaks on behalf of every physicist is "Every physicist dreams of that Nobel prize that comes from discovering some new phenomenon that contradicts known theory." Obviously people all have different motivations, but this checking on this statement would be like asking lottery players "would you like to win the lottery?" Even the ones who understand that they do not have a real chance of winning would say yes.
Quote from: rfmwguy on 11/27/2016 02:23 amI don't post or read here much lately, but the last few pages have given me the urge to make a public service announcement for those interested in emdrive discussions: Don't become an SJW:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Science%20Justice%20WarriorI'll see myself out now...Methinks you need a more Machevellian worldview. Historically, that's how humans tend to work. Good luck, be well, and many thanks for the massive efforts you have made on the experimental side of the Emdrive. Personally, I hope to see here the results of your design promised for 2017.
Quote from: rq3 on 11/27/2016 02:43 amQuote from: rfmwguy on 11/27/2016 02:23 amI don't post or read here much lately, but the last few pages have given me the urge to make a public service announcement for those interested in emdrive discussions: Don't become an SJW:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Science%20Justice%20WarriorI'll see myself out now...Methinks you need a more Machevellian worldview. Historically, that's how humans tend to work. Good luck, be well, and many thanks for the massive efforts you have made on the experimental side of the Emdrive. Personally, I hope to see here the results of your design promised for 2017.Lol, you are probably right. Fighting for public monies is an art. I've seen far better players than myself here and elsewhere.I do have a pre-announcement about 1701B and 2017 plans. 2 things are on the horizon for me and emdrive development next year.#1 is a plan for someone to take over my build on the 1701B frustum for validation testing and eventual space launch. Very exciting and I'll know more in December. I may not be able to discuss specifics other than the project is a go.#2 is potentially as exciting. Taking what I've learned over these past couple of years and begin designing, building and testing a much higher force producing engine. A totally new configuration.This would be ideal to stage it in 2 steps like this. Get into the space race in 2017 with 1701B followed by a more powerful 1701C down the road. Nothing locked in yet but am jazzed about the possibilitiesWith the aiaa paper released, my own observations as well as those of trusted colleagues, I'm convinced the emdrive is the most likely pathway to interstellar exploration as it now stands. Other concepts rely on propellant or are just too low of a force production to be useful in this regard.I'll be back some day with an update, hopefully soon.
