Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 8  (Read 1560485 times)

Offline StrongGR


...

Would it be possible that what is happening in the cavity is the index of free space may be being modified (by the idea you mentioned), changing the mass of light.  As the light gains mass/slows in time, there is a back reaction on the dielectric of free space pushing the free space back, and as the light strikes the front of the cavity, the light provides more impulse than it did at the back of the cavity.  Energy is then lost from the light to the vacuum.

This polarizeable vacuum possibly being some mix of matter/anti-matter.  The anti-matter being negative mass but runs backwards in time (Similar to Richard Feynman's proposal Wiki Link) so appears to be positive mass but reverse in charge.  This anti-matter having the effect of modifying time (This may be my own modification of the idea so far as I am aware) when it is polarized in the presence of normal matter leading to the effects of Lorentz contraction for fast moving objects or large gravitational bodies.  Gravity being some gradient in the passage of time or possibly the vacuum being accelerated because of the gradient in time?

The idea coming from papers concerning light being measured to have more momentum inside water, having a higher index of refraction, and them having measured a back reaction of the light when entering the water.  Is it possible with the vacuum too?

Or is this not really connected to what your talking about?

The Woodward effect is also mentioned in the wiki link at the bottom.

Closed timelike curves?
http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch07/ch07.html#Section7.3

Quite different matters. I am just solving well-known theories of gravity coupled to e.m. fields. Yours seems a completely diverse approach.

Offline TheTraveller

What I'm asking is, with Q being equal (the Q factor, as defined as 2π times the ratio of the stored energy to the energy dissipated per oscillation cycle (is that the definition we settled on? I can't remember...), could be maintained, independent of the mode, by controlling the amount of energy dissipated per cycle), would TE013 yield a higher thrust than TE012? If so, why? Is it due to the larger asymmetry observed in TE013?

Each mode has different eddy current losses.

There is also the real issue of building a phase compliant coupler that factors in the near field effects of the dual reflected travelling waves crossing the coupler. Nice of all 3 are in phase.

Experimentation has shown that exciting with a 1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge can be adjusted to be phase compliant. According to my research, TE013 allows that to happen and TE102 does not.

Please note Roger excites his Cryo frustum via a central choke opening in the side wall. That opening position can be made to be phase compliant between excited Rf and dual reflected travelling waves.

EmDrive Engineering 101.
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline tleach

  • Member
  • Posts: 78
  • Berthoud, CO
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 105
Experimentation has shown that exciting with a 1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge can be adjusted to be phase compliant. According to my research, TE013 allows that to happen and TE102 does not.

Alrighty then... What about other modes? TE014, TE015, TE016, etc.? Certainly TE013 can't be the only mode that allows a "1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge [to be] adjusted to be phase compliant".
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 07:20 am by tleach »
T. Thor Leach

Offline tleach

  • Member
  • Posts: 78
  • Berthoud, CO
  • Liked: 75
  • Likes Given: 105
Experimentation has shown that exciting with a 1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge can be adjusted to be phase compliant. According to my research, TE013 allows that to happen and TE102 does not.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, my original question was intended to be in reference to StrongGR's Brans-Dicke solution, not Roger's direct momentum transfer solution.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 07:29 am by tleach »
T. Thor Leach

Offline TheTraveller

Experimentation has shown that exciting with a 1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge can be adjusted to be phase compliant. According to my research, TE013 allows that to happen and TE102 does not.

Alrighty then... What about other modes? TE014, TE015, TE016, etc.? Certainly TE013 can't be the only mode that allows a "1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge [to be] adjusted to be phase compliant".

You may be right. I can't say as I design for TE013, as per Roger's recommendations.
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline TheTraveller

Experimentation has shown that exciting with a 1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge can be adjusted to be phase compliant. According to my research, TE013 allows that to happen and TE102 does not.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, my original question was intended to be in reference to StrongGR's Brans-Dicke solution, not Roger's direct momentum transfer solution.

The interesting thing about Roger's solution is the engineering solutions it provides, allowing real devices to be modelled to the desired mode and resonant freq, built and for thrust to be measured. And ever more interesting is the predicted thrust is damn close to what is measured.

I gave Monomorphic the frustum design specs and he quickly verified they were correct and the edge 1/2 loop was a good solution.

While I can make no claim Roger's solution is correct, what I can say it is allows engineers to verify frustum designs and to build functional EmDrives.

As an engineer that is enough for me.

Eventually the theory will be verified but long before, many people will have working EmDrives and understand EmDrive Engineering 101.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 07:52 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
Although I can not identify the poster "stardriveEW" with 100% certainty, I have the impression that Paul March from Eagleworks visited the Reddit Emdrive forum yesterday.
I believe it might indeed be him , due to the very personal nature of what he says.

from the topic:
The one piece of evidence that gives me some optimism that there really might be something to this thing... by dangerousfoolishness in EmDrive

Quote
[–]StarDriveEW 25 points 14 hours ago
The skeptics will have plenty of firefighting to do when the December/January edition of the AIAA journal is released with our paper.
Quote
Thanks for the welcome. Before you ask I will not reveal details of the upcoming paper, but I have just today scanned this page (I'm new to reddit) and have made a few general comments. Did we speak with each other on Nasaspaceflight forums?

Quote
No I'm afraid not. If a copy leaks out then I'm positive it will not be from one of the group.

Quote
It is in a propulsion journal because it is an experimental propulsion device.
We have rectified the issues with using the dummy load.
The QVVP theory is not part of the paper.
I detect hostility towards me. Why?

Quote
Someone mentioned Harold's QVVP theory. There are currently interferometry tests being conducted at Eagleworks inside a resonant cavity. A paper is upcoming.

Quote
We did indeed address the damping issue.


Seems that Paul March has a bit more liberty to talk then before or is that just a perception of mine?


Offline TheTraveller

Although I can not identify the poster "stardriveEW" with 100% certainty, I have the impression that Paul March from Eagleworks visited the Reddit Emdrive forum yesterday.
I believe it might indeed be him , due to the very personal nature of what he says.

Agreed it does sound like Paul. Have emailed him to confirm.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 08:04 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
From what I can make up from his reaction(s), the peer review article is definitely positively oriented for an EMeffect, and they took precautions to distance themselves from Dr. White's QVVP theory...

Personally, I consider it a very good choice to publish in an propulsion engineering journal, simply because there is no solid theory yet that supports these findings. There is really no point in publishing in a physics oriented journal if you don't have any clue about the "how" it works...

At the same time, as a front seat observer in this topic, I'd like to thank dr.Frasca, dr Rodal, Todd Desiato and many others i might have forgotten, for their continuous POSITIVE and inspiring theoretical contributions.
Visiting reddit more often lately, made me realize how much (uncomprehensive) hostility there is in the scientific world. I salute your tenacity and honest will to get to the bottom of this, regardless what is being said and regardless what the final conclusion on this topic will be...
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 09:06 am by Flyby »

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
From what I can make up from his reaction(s), the peer review article is definitely positively oriented for an EMeffect, and they took precautions to distance themselves from Dr. White's QVVP theory...

Personally, I consider it a very good choice to publish in an propulsion engineering journal, simply because there is no solid theory yet that supports these findings. There is really no point in publishing in a physics oriented journal if you don't have any clue about the "how" it works...

At the same time, as a front seat observer in this topic, I'd like to thank dr.Frasca, dr Rodal, Todd Desiato and many others i might have forgotten, for their continuous POSITIVE and inspiring theoretical contributions.
Visiting reddit more often lately, made me realize how much (uncomprehensive) hostility there is in the scientific world. I salute your tenacity and honest will to get to the bottom of this, regardless what is being said and regardless what the final conclusion on this topic will be...

You're a braver person than I as there seems to be a different atmosphere there than here.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 11:50 am by Star One »

Offline Tellmeagain

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • maryland
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 34
Although I can not identify the poster "stardriveEW" with 100% certainty, I have the impression that Paul March from Eagleworks visited the Reddit Emdrive forum yesterday.
I believe it might indeed be him , due to the very personal nature of what he says.

Agreed it does sound like Paul. Have emailed him to confirm.

And this is what he said about which mode (TMxxx,TExxx) will produce thrust and which won't,
Quote
[–]StarDriveEW 5 points 19 hours ago
There is no magical 'correct' mode.

I interpret that as any mode will produce good amount of thrust, albeit some may produce more and some less.

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2442
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3186
  • Likes Given: 2708
Experimentation has shown that exciting with a 1/2 current loop coupler at the frustum edge can be adjusted to be phase compliant. According to my research, TE013 allows that to happen and TE102 does not.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, my original question was intended to be in reference to StrongGR's Brans-Dicke solution, not Roger's direct momentum transfer solution.

The interesting thing about Roger's solution is the engineering solutions it provides, allowing real devices to be modelled to the desired mode and resonant freq, built and for thrust to be measured. And ever more interesting is the predicted thrust is damn close to what is measured.

I gave Monomorphic the frustum design specs and he quickly verified they were correct and the edge 1/2 loop was a good solution.

While I can make no claim Roger's solution is correct, what I can say it is allows engineers to verify frustum designs and to build functional EmDrives.

As an engineer that is enough for me.

Eventually the theory will be verified but long before, many people will have working EmDrives and understand EmDrive Engineering 101.
Not refuting what your saying TT on the sidewall injections, although I'd like to offer some of my thoughts on it.

Side wall injection on particle accelerators are not truly a closed resonating cavity like the frustum. Small discrepancies in sidewall loop antenna couplings are not amplified by the actions of reflecting off endplates. Small deviations in beams can adjusted out downstream with other downstream injectors to make the beam travel a linear path.  It was one of the issues that many were concerned about and the reason we designed the Streak Camera imaging system for the SCC in Texas a few years back. 


Using a single loop antenna on the sidewall with a high Q frustum cavity where small coupling discrepancies in loop build and injecting into that asymmetrical cavity will be amplified. This can lead to amplified parasitic effects that will effect your mode generation.

Maybe you can tune it out in your build, but consider when Arero and Dr. Rodal and I were running loop antennas placed in the side walls using meep. (Dr. Rodal took the data files to give a poynting direction for 10 slices from a full cycle). It became apparent that the sidewall loop has it's advantages and disadvantages. One being it's not a symmetrical injection in a amplifying high Q cavity.

This is why I had monomorphic do a offset modified loop, centered in the cavity, symmetrically within the frustum, positioned within the maxium B field location and the only coupling changes that should be needed is in the Z direction (plate to plate).

I'm attaching the gifs we did in meep and calculated poynting vectors showing what can happen.

My Best,
Shell

Offline TheTraveller

Although I can not identify the poster "stardriveEW" with 100% certainty, I have the impression that Paul March from Eagleworks visited the Reddit Emdrive forum yesterday.
I believe it might indeed be him , due to the very personal nature of what he says.

Agreed it does sound like Paul. Have emailed him to confirm.

And this is what he said about which mode (TMxxx,TExxx) will produce thrust and which won't,
Quote
[–]StarDriveEW 5 points 19 hours ago
There is no magical 'correct' mode.

I interpret that as any mode will produce good amount of thrust, albeit some may produce more and some less.

StarDriveEW is NOT Paul March.
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline jötunn

  • Member
  • Posts: 5
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 3
How do you know?

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
How do you know?

He did provide a link up thread, but it seems to have disappeared.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 03:00 pm by Star One »

Offline TheTraveller

How do you know?

I emailed him and asked.

Quote
Phil:
I just went to the below reddit.com URL and I have no clue who is writing it other than someone who has some inside information.
It will be interesting who it turns out to be and why they are writing now on reddit.com…

Best,
Paul March
Friendswood, TX

https://www.reddit.com/user/StarDriveEW
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 04:02 pm by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline tchernik

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 641
How do you know?

I emailed him and asked.

Quote
Phil:
I just went to the below reddit.com URL and I have no clue who is writing it other than someone who has some inside information.
It will be interesting who it turns out to be and why they are writing now on reddit.com…

Best,
Paul March
Friendswood, TX

https://www.reddit.com/user/StarDriveEW

I just hope this isn't someone trying to pin the blame of any potential leaks on Paul.

Offline Bob012345

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 278

...

Can you offer practical methods to greatly increase the thrust or is all the Brans-Dicke discussion just academic?

Yes, of course. This was already done in the previous part of the paper where the dependences on the radii of the cavity, its angular opening and other parameters as well were all clearly stated.
Maybe I'm looking at the wrong paper. I'm looking at the paper by Frasca. It estimates a thrust for typical geometries of 6E-22N. Perhaps by 'practical' you get excited by the most minute possible effects but this does not relate to the thrusts reported for practical devices in the literature so I do not understand what you are saying. Six ten thousandth of a billionth of a billionth of one Newton is nothing to get excited about. At least for me. Do we have a disconnect? Thanks.

Offline StrongGR


...

Can you offer practical methods to greatly increase the thrust or is all the Brans-Dicke discussion just academic?

Yes, of course. This was already done in the previous part of the paper where the dependences on the radii of the cavity, its angular opening and other parameters as well were all clearly stated.
Maybe I'm looking at the wrong paper. I'm looking at the paper by Frasca. It estimates a thrust for typical geometries of 6E-22N. Perhaps by 'practical' you get excited by the most minute possible effects but this does not relate to the thrusts reported for practical devices in the literature so I do not understand what you are saying. Six ten thousandth of a billionth of a billionth of one Newton is nothing to get excited about. At least for me. Do we have a disconnect? Thanks.

General relativity grants a tiny effect indeed but the effect is there, anyway. This is important for physicists because one can think to observe gravitational effects in a lab. Who thought the emdrive being reactionless was just wrong.

Speaking with people at NASA, they just said that the effects they see seem to imply a varying Newton constant. This was the clue for the revision of my paper. Using a well-known theory, Brans-Dicke, you can have this and increase the effect by magnitude orders. I am on the way to get some numerical estimations. I hope to post some numbers in the next few days.

Offline TheTraveller

I just hope this isn't someone trying to pin the blame of any potential leaks on Paul.

If what Dr. Rodal disclosed about the abstract is correct, the paper will turn the world of propulsion physics on it's head.

Imagine what will happen to Ion and other exotic propulsion projects and budgets worldwide. There may just be a few who have investments & paychecks that do not wish the EW paper to have credibility or even to be published. I do trust Paul and others have taken measures to ensure the paper is published, no matter what. Can't imagine anyone would impersonate Paul to do good deeds.

Oh BTW Paul told me the paper will be a free download. Dr. White paid AIAA to make that happen, so
Dr. White, THANK YOU.
« Last Edit: 09/13/2016 05:29 pm by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0