Are you saying that given the reasoning and calculations depicted in your paper. After doing some numerical analysis on the equations for the frustum configuration you are left with a really small effect orders of magnitude below that which has been reported so far by Shawyer, Yang, Cannae, EW, and jullian (The ukranian replicator, I am sure I probably butchered his name.)?Just want to make sure I am understanding what your saying.
Quote from: TheTraveller on 05/26/2015 04:09 pmQuote from: VAXHeadroom on 05/26/2015 03:57 pmI really think this is a critical insight. The microwave frequencies being used are specifically tailored to heat water (as everybody is basically using a home microwave oven emitter) - this may indeed be a water molecule amplified maser. The humidity at time of testing in the various locations should be measured and considered as a data point in the measured thrust.The Flight Thruster EM Drive Shawyer built for Boeing was a sealed unit and operates at 3.85GHz.http://www.emdrive.com/flightprogramme.htmlThe effect we are discussing will certainly take place in a sealed unit, if the gas inside the sealed cavity has the properties required for the effect to take place. All that is required is for the gas inside the cavity to have these properties. As per Prof. Yang's analysis in her 2010 paper.
Quote from: VAXHeadroom on 05/26/2015 03:57 pmI really think this is a critical insight. The microwave frequencies being used are specifically tailored to heat water (as everybody is basically using a home microwave oven emitter) - this may indeed be a water molecule amplified maser. The humidity at time of testing in the various locations should be measured and considered as a data point in the measured thrust.The Flight Thruster EM Drive Shawyer built for Boeing was a sealed unit and operates at 3.85GHz.http://www.emdrive.com/flightprogramme.html
I really think this is a critical insight. The microwave frequencies being used are specifically tailored to heat water (as everybody is basically using a home microwave oven emitter) - this may indeed be a water molecule amplified maser. The humidity at time of testing in the various locations should be measured and considered as a data point in the measured thrust.
Isn't there some conference set for mid-September where we might hear more one way or the other on this topic? Unfortunately for the life of me I've forgotten what it's called but, I'm sure Mr Shawyer did a presentation at it in 2013 if that helps identify it.
Japan has used a Maser to beam a scale model rocket up a few feet:Microwave powered rocket ascends without fuelhttp://www.technologyreview.com/view/420700/microwave-powered-rocket-ascends-without-fuel/
I was going to attach the Sketchup model's file for people, but alas it's not an allowed type.
Quote from: phaseshiftI was going to attach the Sketchup model's file for people, but alas it's not an allowed type.Make it a zip file, then attach.Suggest you show the excitation mode (TM or TE) and m,n type as Df will change due to altering cut off wavelength.
Make it a zip file, then attach.
Hello again esteemed NFS forum posters.I have been thinking about the direction the discussion is taking, and I have to admit I am less thrilled about the theoretical explanations than about the experimental reports. Except in one point: finding potential ways to raise the thrust.I would like to know if there is some kind of laundry list of experiments someone with an Emdrive could do to help clarify the nature of this phenomenon and validate more its existence, and eventually help others get better results. And if not, maybe add it to the Wiki.For example, some people say the Q factor is relevant for getting more thrust, but others disagree. Maybe experiment no. 1 should be raise the Q factor somehow and see the impact on thrust at the same power input? maybe eventually do it with superconducting cavities, supposed to raise Q factor by a lot?Some say higher power is the key. So experiment no 2 should be measuring thrust a different input power regimes?Others say air or a dielectric inside the cavity may be relevant to having thrust or not (or much more or less). So experiment no 3. should be running it with and without a dielectric inside with a same power input, and experiment no 4. running it with and without air (e.g. with pure Nitrogen) in the cavity, maybe even with a vacuum cavity?And so on. It seems there are many theories hinting at potential factors and explanations, and it would be great if people with so many potential explanations gave hints to the experimentalists what to do, in order to do some triage of potential causes or factors impacting thrust (and help determine if there is any anomalous thrust or not).
Quote from: Star One on 05/26/2015 04:34 pmIsn't there some conference set for mid-September where we might hear more one way or the other on this topic? Unfortunately for the life of me I've forgotten what it's called but, I'm sure Mr Shawyer did a presentation at it in 2013 if that helps identify it.Shawyer did say he would be presenting a peer reviewed paper in 2015, detailing the superconducting work he has done with other companies.
Quote from: Rodal on 05/26/2015 04:16 pmQuote from: TheTraveller on 05/26/2015 04:09 pmQuote from: VAXHeadroom on 05/26/2015 03:57 pmI really think this is a critical insight. The microwave frequencies being used are specifically tailored to heat water (as everybody is basically using a home microwave oven emitter) - this may indeed be a water molecule amplified maser. The humidity at time of testing in the various locations should be measured and considered as a data point in the measured thrust.The Flight Thruster EM Drive Shawyer built for Boeing was a sealed unit and operates at 3.85GHz.http://www.emdrive.com/flightprogramme.htmlThe effect we are discussing will certainly take place in a sealed unit, if the gas inside the sealed cavity has the properties required for the effect to take place. All that is required is for the gas inside the cavity to have these properties. As per Prof. Yang's analysis in her 2010 paper.So how would that work? Would the gas be ionized in a preferred direction such that a gas molecule accelerated in the positive direction (to pick a coordinate direction) would be less massive (by an electron or a few electrons) than the gas returning. The ionized gas reaches the base plate and on contact is deionized by accepting electrons from the metal then the less strongly ionized (neutralized) gas is accelerated (drifts) back to the other end finding the region within the cavity where ionization occurs with electrons given up to the cavity walls or other end. The cycle repeats.The ionized gas molecule would be slightly less massive than the neutral molecule but due to much greater charge, would move at a much higher speed, hence impart more momentum to the end plate than would the slightly more massive (heavier) but much slower neutral molecule. The electrons added to the base plate don't actually circulate back with momentum because it is the charge that travels at near light speed, the electrons in the cavity metal oscilate with low or zero average momentum.Paul March reported that at one time Eagleworks did use a dielectric gasket separating the big end (maybe both ends) from the frustum body but they replaced the gasket with a metal/metal contact seal. I wonder why. Perhaps without electrical continuity it didn't work.Edit Add: I just described a recirculating ion gun didn't I? How hot is this antenna anyway?
Gas model.Pressure inside is everywhere the same. So the total force on the small end is less than that on the big end.The trick is to notice what happens on the sidewalls! So heavy ions or light atoms or light - it's all the same.Standard physics says "no net thrust"
regardless whether charge particles are presented within the volume, the surface electromagnetic force can change the momentum within the volume V.
...I have to admit I am less thrilled about the theoretical explanations than about the experimental reports...
Quote from: TheTraveller on 05/26/2015 04:26 pmQuote from: deltaMass on 05/26/2015 04:17 pmI wonder if "sealed" and "gas tight" are truly synonymous here. After all, there is an RF connector (at least)I'll ask Shawyer.It wouldn't matter unless the test was done in a vacuum. In ambient, the partial vapor pressure of the water wouldn't change (well...not much...heating MIGHT drive the moisture out somewhat). This is a potential explanation of why there is a difference between tests at ambient pressure and those in a vacuum (if the device is NOT a pressure vessel). Is it possible to get to White as well to ask about their test unit?
Quote from: deltaMass on 05/26/2015 04:17 pmI wonder if "sealed" and "gas tight" are truly synonymous here. After all, there is an RF connector (at least)I'll ask Shawyer.
I wonder if "sealed" and "gas tight" are truly synonymous here. After all, there is an RF connector (at least)
I think my point is being missed for the case of a completely static gas.I've seen people arguing for a net nonzero force even in this case.The reason for pointing this out is to make you think.
Maybe Aero you recall the possible range for such gap ?