Author Topic: E/M propellant-less propulsion using delayed information/dielectrics (patent)  (Read 54482 times)

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Liked: 1982
  • Likes Given: 448
...
I am of the opinion that the near field isn't FTL and that what people are measuring as FTL is standing energy between their measuring device and the generating circuit.
I am not sure exactly what you are referring to about people claiming near-field FTL, but there are several misunderstandings I can think of that could lead to claims like that.

One interesting example in electrodynamics is the field of a relativistic charged particle moving at constant velocity. In any frame, the electric field always points directly away from the current true position of the particle, rather than the observed speed of light delayed position. This sounds like FTL, but is just due to nice ways things cancel out when you do the math. If the particle suddenly changed direction, the fields at some point some distance away would still point to the particle's location on its original trajectory, and until the speed of light delay happens, there would be no change in the measured fields to indicate the change of course.  The apparent pointing to the current location of the particle in real time, is an illusory prediction of the future based on the past.

Similarly, you can see results like that when you are putting a sinusoidal electromagnetic field through some system. For example, phase velocity in a dielectric is typically FTL, but this is the same kind of effect, where the result is based on the signals that have already passed through, and the meaningful things such as energy travel at the group velocity, which is never FTL, (and in the case of a signal through dielectric it is typically slower.)

There probably would be an effect on the appropriate spacing of antenna elements in a phased array if you added a dielectric, but I would expect the exact answer to highly depend on the exact placement and extent of the dielectric.

Offline elektryx tech

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Winnipeg
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 3

Good question.  Some poeple were also telling me there are anomalies where they thought the near field appears to be traveling faster than light.  If so this messes with the quarter wavelenth distance.  I'm not sure I necessarily believe it actually moves faster than light but I think I have heard it from more than one source. 

I also considered the possibility that they develop a standing wave that seems to travel faster than light but can't quite seem to justify that.  There is also the possibility that some how virtual particles are responsible for near field ftl behavior.  Either way it just means to get the quarter phase delay you have to slightly increase distance to get the light speed limit again.  Not 100% sure but it may be like a negative index dielectric.

I would just use an oscilloscope with two cables of equal length and measure the distance when the two circuits drop out of phase 1/4 wavelength.

On second thought, here is what happens in a phased array.  One circuit has to do positive work in the other circuit has to do negative work.  this means that one circuit sees the electric field from the other circuit and it flows with it.  The other circuit number two sees the electric field from the other circuit but has to work against it.  I think what is happening is that when they measure the near field of the other circuit there is increased coupling as you earlier suggested.  both circuits want to work with each other's lightspeed delayed electric fields and in the process develop a standing wave which appears to be FTL but just represents the standing energy between them. 

the simple way to do this then would be to space the circuits 1/4 wavelength assuming that the signal between then travels at the speed of light.  in order to keep them at 1/4 of phase relation both circuits requires an applied voltage.  1 circuit requires More voltage than the other to maintain the quarter phase relationship.  This is assuming that the near field isn't FTL and that what people are describing as an FTL field is actually standing energy between two circuits.

I am of the opinion that the near field isn't FTL and that what people are measuring as FTL is standing energy between their measuring device and the generating circuit.

Currently I'm not considering faster than light anything to be possible. I'm also not considering standing waves between the two elements, might be something to think about.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 277
  • Likes Given: 315
Just one more thing to consider.  In the patent they suggest using low frequency in the MHz.  This induces less heating of the wires but what allows this is the amazing dielectric, slowing the speed of light between the wires allowing them to be close.  The wavelength at c/50MHz=meters/cycle=6 meters is a bit long to space.  If we slow the speed of light by a factor of 100 that's only 6cm and 1/4lambda being 1.5cm .  I think there is some intricate knowledge in using dielectrics to slow signals also such as frequency dependence and I think magnetic and electric permeability but I'm a bit rusty on it. 

I guess what got my attention was that you suggested testing them with out dielectric first.  If so then getting them in proximity may require higher frequencies in the GHz range.  Not sure if this may be problematic. 

Below is a side note.  I was looking up Mario Pinheiro and found these two papers which got my attention.  I wonder if there might be a connection.  I have always wondered if the "A" vector field might be an induced current in the vacuum. 

Quote from: Fluidic electrodynamics: Approach to electromagnetic propulsion
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=9446986378025307299&hl=en&as_sdt=0,26
Alexandre A. Martins and Mario J. Pinheiro

 let’s suppose that we have a potential flow with A = ∇χ

This is fundamentally the law of conservation of energy, and it states that the energy of matter plus the energy of this
“fictitious” fluid (carrying electromagnetic fields) is constant along a streamline. Hence, the nature of the fluid can
enter through this u function, which means here the internal energy per unit mass. The Bernoulli’s integral can also
be obtained in the presence of a B-field for a particle of fluid flowing along the line of current, since then ∂A/∂t = 0.


Quote from: General Relativistic Gravity Machine using Electromagneto-Torsion Field
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=14099488751050058436&hl=en&as_sdt=5,26&sciodt=0,26
Takaaki Musha1, Mario J.Pinheiro2

It is interesting to note that Eq.(15) points to the
existence of dual forces: one dependent on the fluid
angular acceleration (or time-dependent magnetic
force), the other dependent on the Lamb-vector time
dependency (or time-dependent electric field)

Remember that I was saying that in a normal phased array the magnetic propulsion opposes the electric propulsion and I was assuming they are time dependent. 
« Last Edit: 02/20/2019 03:30 am by dustinthewind »

Offline elektryx tech

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Winnipeg
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 3
Just one more thing to consider.  In the patent they suggest using low frequency in the MHz.  This induces less heating of the wires but what allows this is the amazing dielectric, slowing the speed of light between the wires allowing them to be close.  The wavelength at c/50MHz=meters/cycle=6 meters is a bit long to space.  If we slow the speed of light by a factor of 100 that's only 6cm and 1/4lambda being 1.5cm .  I think there is some intricate knowledge in using dielectrics to slow signals also such as frequency dependence and I think magnetic and electric permeability but I'm a bit rusty on it. 

I guess what got my attention was that you suggested testing them with out dielectric first.  If so then getting them in proximity may require higher frequencies in the GHz range.  Not sure if this may be problematic. 

Below is a side note.  I was looking up Mario Pinheiro and found these two papers which got my attention.  I wonder if there might be a connection.  I have always wondered if the "A" vector field might be an induced current in the vacuum. 

Quote from: Fluidic electrodynamics: Approach to electromagnetic propulsion
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=9446986378025307299&hl=en&as_sdt=0,26
Alexandre A. Martins and Mario J. Pinheiro

 let’s suppose that we have a potential flow with A = ∇χ

This is fundamentally the law of conservation of energy, and it states that the energy of matter plus the energy of this
“fictitious” fluid (carrying electromagnetic fields) is constant along a streamline. Hence, the nature of the fluid can
enter through this u function, which means here the internal energy per unit mass. The Bernoulli’s integral can also
be obtained in the presence of a B-field for a particle of fluid flowing along the line of current, since then ∂A/∂t = 0.


Quote from: General Relativistic Gravity Machine using Electromagneto-Torsion Field
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=14099488751050058436&hl=en&as_sdt=5,26&sciodt=0,26
Takaaki Musha1, Mario J.Pinheiro2

It is interesting to note that Eq.(15) points to the
existence of dual forces: one dependent on the fluid
angular acceleration (or time-dependent magnetic
force), the other dependent on the Lamb-vector time
dependency (or time-dependent electric field)

Remember that I was saying that in a normal phased array the magnetic propulsion opposes the electric propulsion and I was assuming they are time dependent.

In order to slow down the fields a dielectric material will work for the capacitive areas of the elements, I believe a ferromagnetic material is needed to slow down the magnetic fields. ( you need to change the permittivity and permeability constants ) This should allow the elements to be closer together and or use a lower frequency.

Yes a normal phased array, the magnetic and electric fields are radiated in the same direction and cancel in the other, the forces on the elements will cancel. With the magnetic element reversed in one of the elements the electric field and magnetic field should radiate in different directions and the forces on the elements should push in the same direction.

On the other hand, it is likely more complicated than that, there is apparently a 'hidden momentum' that comes up when using Lorentz Force formula. According to a few sources that I could find the proper formula to use is the Einstein-Laub equation. So we may be just looking at a wonderful example of this 'hidden momentum'.

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Liked: 1982
  • Likes Given: 448
In order to slow down the fields a dielectric material will work for the capacitive areas of the elements, I believe a ferromagnetic material is needed to slow down the magnetic fields. ( you need to change the permittivity and permeability constants ) This should allow the elements to be closer together and or use a lower frequency.
Since in an electromagnetic wave, the electric and magnetic fields are linked together, you cannot slow one part without slowing the other. changing permittivity or permeability both work, but typically permittivity changes are easier to work with. A ferromagnetic material would typically have conducitivity which makes it a problem for what you are talking about.

Yes a normal phased array, the magnetic and electric fields are radiated in the same direction and cancel in the other, the forces on the elements will cancel. With the magnetic element reversed in one of the elements the electric field and magnetic field should radiate in different directions and the forces on the elements should push in the same direction.
Take a look at Maxwell's equations in free space, particularly the del cross E and del cross B terms. The fields are always travelling in the same direction, but orthogonal to each other in terms of field direction.

On the other hand, it is likely more complicated than that, there is apparently a 'hidden momentum' that comes up when using Lorentz Force formula. According to a few sources that I could find the proper formula to use is the Einstein-Laub equation. So we may be just looking at a wonderful example of this 'hidden momentum'.
Hidden momentum refers to situations where the relativistic momentum of moving charges has an effect. A typical example would be a square made out of wire carrying a current and immersed in an electric field, with 2 sides of the square parallel to the electric field. The current is the same along all sides of the square in steady state. The charges are accelerated and decelerated by the electric field as they travel along the sides parallel to the E field. this means that one side has more charges moving slower, and the other has fewer charges moving faster to result in the same current. A naive calculation would determine that the total momentum of the charges is equal and opposite on both of the sides. This all makes perfect sense and seems to add up correctly, but there is a problem: considering the magnetic field generated by the current in the wire and the electric field there is a net linear momentum in the fields. Since this is a quasi-static situation, where center of mass and the fields are not moving, this should not be possible. The missing link is that you have to consider the relativistic energy gained by the faster moving charges, which mean those charges carry more momentum, equal and opposite to that in the fields.

While that whole example is interesting, it is not directly relevant to what you are discussing here. What is more relevant is your mention of the Einstein-Laub formula. Typical formula that deal with electromagnetism in materials (including that one) effectively uses an approximate model, which defines the behavior of the material to be a linear response to the externally applied fields. These models can give correct answers, but you have to keep in mind that the actual E and B fields present are not the exact same thing as the H or D fields that such formulas use. It is generally very easy to use such formula incorrectly when determining hoe much momentum is present in the fields, especially as most applications of such models do not actually care about the physical motions of charges inside the material that physically underlies the response to the applied fields. The hidden momentum concept is applicable in a round about way because it illustrates how electrodynamics calculations have to be done very carefully to avoid incorrect conclusions about conservation of momentum.

In reality, any material is a collection of charges all bound together. The results that show that electrodynamics always conserves momentum therefore hold, and no amount of placing dielectrics around antennas will change that how much momentum photons carry after they leave any antenna system, or that the recoil felt by the antennas will be equal and opposite to the momentum carried away.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 277
  • Likes Given: 315
Just one more thing to consider.  In the patent they suggest using low frequency in the MHz.  This induces less heating of the wires but what allows this is the amazing dielectric, slowing the speed of light between the wires allowing them to be close.  The wavelength at c/50MHz=meters/cycle=6 meters is a bit long to space.  If we slow the speed of light by a factor of 100 that's only 6cm and 1/4lambda being 1.5cm .  I think there is some intricate knowledge in using dielectrics to slow signals also such as frequency dependence and I think magnetic and electric permeability but I'm a bit rusty on it. 

I guess what got my attention was that you suggested testing them with out dielectric first.  If so then getting them in proximity may require higher frequencies in the GHz range.  Not sure if this may be problematic. 

Below is a side note.  I was looking up Mario Pinheiro and found these two papers which got my attention.  I wonder if there might be a connection.  I have always wondered if the "A" vector field might be an induced current in the vacuum. 

Quote from: Fluidic electrodynamics: Approach to electromagnetic propulsion
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=9446986378025307299&hl=en&as_sdt=0,26
Alexandre A. Martins and Mario J. Pinheiro

 let’s suppose that we have a potential flow with A = ∇χ

This is fundamentally the law of conservation of energy, and it states that the energy of matter plus the energy of this
“fictitious” fluid (carrying electromagnetic fields) is constant along a streamline. Hence, the nature of the fluid can
enter through this u function, which means here the internal energy per unit mass. The Bernoulli’s integral can also
be obtained in the presence of a B-field for a particle of fluid flowing along the line of current, since then ∂A/∂t = 0.


Quote from: General Relativistic Gravity Machine using Electromagneto-Torsion Field
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=14099488751050058436&hl=en&as_sdt=5,26&sciodt=0,26
Takaaki Musha1, Mario J.Pinheiro2

It is interesting to note that Eq.(15) points to the
existence of dual forces: one dependent on the fluid
angular acceleration (or time-dependent magnetic
force), the other dependent on the Lamb-vector time
dependency (or time-dependent electric field)

Remember that I was saying that in a normal phased array the magnetic propulsion opposes the electric propulsion and I was assuming they are time dependent.

In order to slow down the fields a dielectric material will work for the capacitive areas of the elements, I believe a ferromagnetic material is needed to slow down the magnetic fields. ( you need to change the permittivity and permeability constants ) This should allow the elements to be closer together and or use a lower frequency.

Yes a normal phased array, the magnetic and electric fields are radiated in the same direction and cancel in the other, the forces on the elements will cancel. With the magnetic element reversed in one of the elements the electric field and magnetic field should radiate in different directions and the forces on the elements should push in the same direction.

On the other hand, it is likely more complicated than that, there is apparently a 'hidden momentum' that comes up when using Lorentz Force formula. According to a few sources that I could find the proper formula to use is the Einstein-Laub equation. So we may be just looking at a wonderful example of this 'hidden momentum'.

One thing that bothers me is if the electric and magnetic field emanate in opposite directions I wonder if that's even possible.  We wouldn't have light any more as light is electro-magnetic. 

On the other hand I have learned to view light as the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over infinity, propagating at the speed of light.  If you do this you get the corresponding electric field associated with it.  In this respect I don't view light as the static electric field so I view that as a separate entity. 

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 

You mention a ferromagnetic material.  In the patent I cite they mention "barium titanate" which is a ferroelectric ceramic for slowing down light. 

I think meberbs is right that the speed of light in the material should be the same for both the electro-magnetic as c=1/sqrt(epsilon*mu)  If I remember right a dielectric just modifies one or the other, mu or epsilon changing the speed of light. 

If I am right that the light is just the magnetic field moving at its speed then it is actually purely magnetic and its relative velocity determines its perpendicular electric field.  (why it's less in a dielectric for instance) If that is the case I am not sure how the static electric field that propagates in the opposite direction will move through the material.  On the other hand these propagate in the same direction in a normal phased array. 

I say light may just be the propagating of the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over space because I was looking at the biot-savart equation one day and noticed I could get the electric field for light from it but I had to integrate its magnetic field from infinity to the disturbance and assume it was moving at the speed of light.  I got the electric field for light in Purcell's book "Electricity and Magnetism" https://www.amazon.com/Electricity-Magnetism-Edward-M-Purcell/dp/1107014026 appendix H - radiation by an accelerated charge. 

I also think meberbs is right about the hidden momentum.  In generating a magnetic field a current is developed which causes a torque because we then have a current loop.  Discharging the magnetic field then provides that counter torque conserving momentum.  Not sure its important here or not. 

I attached the reverse magnetic phased array diagram for ease of confirmation that the static electric is enhanced in the opposite direction as the magnetic which you seem right about.   
I also attached an idea that speculated about pure magnetic phased propulsion.  Not sure the iron is a good idea.

My inspiration for pure magnetic phased propulsion is based off the fact that in cavities a transverse electric mode has no charge separation and thus eliminates that opposing force. Then again it may just project radiation. 
« Last Edit: 02/22/2019 06:55 am by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 277
  • Likes Given: 315
I suppose there might be more to hidden momentum than I thought.  I'm currently re-reading another old paper by Mario Pinheiro 2011
Quote from: On Newton's Third Law and its Symmetry-Breaking Effects
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=2477405758829577437&hl=en&as_sdt=0,26
"In particular,
it was shown (Shockley, 1968) that the “hidden linear momentum” has as quantum mechanical analogue the term
α · E, where α are Dirac matrices appearing in the hamiltonian form Hψb = i~∂ψ/∂t, where Hb = −ic~α · ∇· is the
hamiltonian operator (e.g., Ref. (?)). Although certainly an important issue, the concept of “hidden momentum”
needs further clarification (Boyer, 2005).
...
At the electromagnetic level, Maxwell conceived a dynamical model of a vacuum with hidden matter in motion. As
it is well-known, Einstein’s theory of relativity eradicated the notion of “ether” but later revived its interest in order
to give some physical mean to gij . Minkowski obtained as a mathematical consequence of the Maxwell’s mechanical medium that the Lorentz’s force should be exactly balanced by the divergence of the Maxwell’s tensor in vacuum Tvac minus the rate of change of the Poynting’s vector:"
...
Einstein and Laub have remarked (Einstein and Laub, 1908) that when Eq. 12 is integrated all over the entire Universe
the term ∇ · Tvac must vanish


The exploration of these ideas to propel a spacecraft as an alternative to chemical propulsion has been advanced
in the literature, e.g., see Refs. (Brito, 2004; Glen, Murad, and Davis, 2008; Maclay and Forward, 2004; Taylor, 1965; Trammel, 1964), and for the particular configuration of two electric dipoles the first term on the r.h.s. of Eq. 27 due to the near-field may result in propulsion, see Ref. (Obara and Baba, 2000) for a concrete analytical example. Also, propulsion based on Maxwell’s stress tensor have been proposed by Slepian (Slepian, 1949) and Corum et al. (Corum, Dering, Desavento, and Donne, 1999).

« Last Edit: 02/26/2019 04:21 am by dustinthewind »

Offline elektryx tech

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Winnipeg
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 3
Take a look at Maxwell's equations in free space, particularly the del cross E and del cross B terms. The fields are always travelling in the same direction, but orthogonal to each other in terms of field direction.
That would definitely be true by the time you get to the far field, Maxwell's equations indicate what I would describe as an oscillation in time and space. From what I've read the near field is more reactive and the far field is more radiative.

Hidden momentum refers to situations where the relativistic momentum of moving charges has an effect. A typical example would be a square made out of wire carrying a current and immersed in an electric field, with 2 sides of the square parallel to the electric field. The current is the same along all sides of the square in steady state. The charges are accelerated and decelerated by the electric field as they travel along the sides parallel to the E field. this means that one side has more charges moving slower, and the other has fewer charges moving faster to result in the same current. A naive calculation would determine that the total momentum of the charges is equal and opposite on both of the sides. This all makes perfect sense and seems to add up correctly, but there is a problem: considering the magnetic field generated by the current in the wire and the electric field there is a net linear momentum in the fields. Since this is a quasi-static situation, where center of mass and the fields are not moving, this should not be possible. The missing link is that you have to consider the relativistic energy gained by the faster moving charges, which mean those charges carry more momentum, equal and opposite to that in the fields.
Thanks for the explanation of the hidden momentum. If nothing else, I'm learning about a lot of things that I had not thought about before.

In reality, any material is a collection of charges all bound together. The results that show that electrodynamics always conserves momentum therefore hold, and no amount of placing dielectrics around antennas will change that how much momentum photons carry after they leave any antenna system, or that the recoil felt by the antennas will be equal and opposite to the momentum carried away.
It occurs to me that either element by itself will not produce any directional momentum. (radiation in one direction will equal radiation in the other) With two elements the fields will either add or subtract from each other, but not produce any new radiation, so overall this should not produce any net force. If this is true, the electric and magnetic forces from the first element should be acting against the electric and magnetic forces in the circuit of the second element. Time for some circuit simulations.

I think I will still go ahead with the build, but my first testing will be targeting the radio transmission/reception directionality. (I have a couple of radios in the 2 meter bandwidth that I can use for this.)

Offline elektryx tech

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Winnipeg
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 3
One thing that bothers me is if the electric and magnetic field emanate in opposite directions I wonder if that's even possible.  We wouldn't have light any more as light is electro-magnetic. 

On the other hand I have learned to view light as the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over infinity, propagating at the speed of light.  If you do this you get the corresponding electric field associated with it.  In this respect I don't view light as the static electric field so I view that as a separate entity. 

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I'm not sure what that means either. I think I will set up a radio test, see what the radiation pattern is for something like this. I have a couple radios in the 2 meter band that I can use and don't have to worry about measuring minute forces with that kind of test.

I say light may just be the propagating of the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over space because I was looking at the biot-savart equation one day and noticed I could get the electric field for light from it but I had to integrate its magnetic field from infinity to the disturbance and assume it was moving at the speed of light.  I got the electric field for light in Purcell's book "Electricity and Magnetism" https://www.amazon.com/Electricity-Magnetism-Edward-M-Purcell/dp/1107014026 appendix H - radiation by an accelerated charge.   
I find it interesting that you had to integrate the magnetic field all the way to infinity. Does that mean that all of space is involved in the magnetic field?

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Liked: 1982
  • Likes Given: 448
One thing that bothers me is if the electric and magnetic field emanate in opposite directions I wonder if that's even possible.  We wouldn't have light any more as light is electro-magnetic. 

On the other hand I have learned to view light as the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over infinity, propagating at the speed of light.  If you do this you get the corresponding electric field associated with it.  In this respect I don't view light as the static electric field so I view that as a separate entity.
As I tried to say in my previous post when I mentioned del cross E and del cross B, Maxwell's equations clearly show that a changing electric field generates a magnetic field and vice versa. It is nonsensical and unphysical to describe any setup that has one of those fields changing without the other field being present (and also changing)

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I am not sure what you are trying to say here, an oscillating current does not generate a static (unchanging) electric field.

You mention a few of your personal interpretations of how radiation works. This is not an section of physics that has mysteries left to be resolved. Electromagnetic fields  and how they propagate is completely understood, and precisely described with rigorous self-consistent equations. To fully follow and understand the physics you need familiarity with multivariable calculus, and for some of what you are discussing, it would help for you to also understand the relativistic transformations of electromagnetic fields, which is a tensor transformation where the electric and magnetic fields are a single inseparable tensor. This explains many things about electrodynamics such as how a single charge at rest floating in space produces only an electric field, but if you look at it from a frame that is moving with respect to the charge, you see both electric and magnetic fields. To make sense of such things you have to recognize that electrodynamic fields are not fundamentally generally separable into electric and magnet fields, but that those are just different aspects of a single underlying conceptual thing. If you insist on trying to handle them separately, your are on the wrong path to understanding them.

I suppose there might be more to hidden momentum than I thought.  I'm currently re-reading another old paper by Mario Pinheiro 2011
Quantum electrodynamics reduces to classical (relativistic*) electrodynamics, so it is expected that if you find the right setup, you should find an analogue of the classical effect.

*classical electrodynamics always includes relativity, it is baked into the theory, and the theory can't be consistent without it, due to effects like momentum stored in the fields, and hidden momentum.

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Liked: 1982
  • Likes Given: 448
In reality, any material is a collection of charges all bound together. The results that show that electrodynamics always conserves momentum therefore hold, and no amount of placing dielectrics around antennas will change that how much momentum photons carry after they leave any antenna system, or that the recoil felt by the antennas will be equal and opposite to the momentum carried away.
It occurs to me that either element by itself will not produce any directional momentum. (radiation in one direction will equal radiation in the other) With two elements the fields will either add or subtract from each other, but not produce any new radiation, so overall this should not produce any net force. If this is true, the electric and magnetic forces from the first element should be acting against the electric and magnetic forces in the circuit of the second element. Time for some circuit simulations.

I think I will still go ahead with the build, but my first testing will be targeting the radio transmission/reception directionality. (I have a couple of radios in the 2 meter bandwidth that I can use for this.)
Phased array antennas are well known to cancel the radiation in one direction while amplifying the radiation in another direction due to the phase difference. The forces of the antenna elements on each other are not equal and opposite to each other as has been noted in this thread (and some other similar threads on this site), but such apparent violations of Newton's laws of equal and opposite reaction in electrodynamics were discovered long ago, and resolved when it was realized that the fields themselves could carry momentum and energy. With that, the theory has been shown to be self-consistent, and always conserves momentum.

I will not discourage experimenting (unless it is dangerous), but the results of such an experiment are predictable, if you can get everything in phase correctly, and you don't have too much interference from reflections off other objects. For your case, just make sure you are using frequencies and power levels that the Canadian equivalent to the FCC allows you to use.

Offline elektryx tech

  • Member
  • Posts: 21
  • Winnipeg
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 3
In reality, any material is a collection of charges all bound together. The results that show that electrodynamics always conserves momentum therefore hold, and no amount of placing dielectrics around antennas will change that how much momentum photons carry after they leave any antenna system, or that the recoil felt by the antennas will be equal and opposite to the momentum carried away.
It occurs to me that either element by itself will not produce any directional momentum. (radiation in one direction will equal radiation in the other) With two elements the fields will either add or subtract from each other, but not produce any new radiation, so overall this should not produce any net force. If this is true, the electric and magnetic forces from the first element should be acting against the electric and magnetic forces in the circuit of the second element. Time for some circuit simulations.

I think I will still go ahead with the build, but my first testing will be targeting the radio transmission/reception directionality. (I have a couple of radios in the 2 meter bandwidth that I can use for this.)
Phased array antennas are well known to cancel the radiation in one direction while amplifying the radiation in another direction due to the phase difference. The forces of the antenna elements on each other are not equal and opposite to each other as has been noted in this thread (and some other similar threads on this site), but such apparent violations of Newton's laws of equal and opposite reaction in electrodynamics were discovered long ago, and resolved when it was realized that the fields themselves could carry momentum and energy. With that, the theory has been shown to be self-consistent, and always conserves momentum.

I will not discourage experimenting (unless it is dangerous), but the results of such an experiment are predictable, if you can get everything in phase correctly, and you don't have too much interference from reflections off other objects. For your case, just make sure you are using frequencies and power levels that the Canadian equivalent to the FCC allows you to use.
Yep, it's all amateur radio equipment and I have the licence. (CRTC is the FCC equivalent here) I've looked up the radiation patterns for each of the separate parts, so I have an idea as to what should happen.

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 277
  • Likes Given: 315
...

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I am not sure what you are trying to say here, an oscillating current does not generate a static (unchanging) electric field.

...

With time varying current, the current stops at some time.  At this time it is like a capacitor and there is separated charge.  This appearance of separated charge should travel through space at the speed of light.  I don't believe it to be the same as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field is perpendicular to both the magnetic field and the direction of current. 

The static electric field points toward/away from the separated charge. 

Regarding my calculation of light from the biot savart equation, I'll have to find my old PDF and post it. 
« Last Edit: 02/26/2019 03:04 am by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 277
  • Likes Given: 315
One thing that bothers me is if the electric and magnetic field emanate in opposite directions I wonder if that's even possible.  We wouldn't have light any more as light is electro-magnetic. 

On the other hand I have learned to view light as the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over infinity, propagating at the speed of light.  If you do this you get the corresponding electric field associated with it.  In this respect I don't view light as the static electric field so I view that as a separate entity. 

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I'm not sure what that means either. I think I will set up a radio test, see what the radiation pattern is for something like this. I have a couple radios in the 2 meter band that I can use and don't have to worry about measuring minute forces with that kind of test.

I say light may just be the propagating of the sum of the magnetic field to be deposited over space because I was looking at the biot-savart equation one day and noticed I could get the electric field for light from it but I had to integrate its magnetic field from infinity to the disturbance and assume it was moving at the speed of light.  I got the electric field for light in Purcell's book "Electricity and Magnetism" https://www.amazon.com/Electricity-Magnetism-Edward-M-Purcell/dp/1107014026 appendix H - radiation by an accelerated charge.   
I find it interesting that you had to integrate the magnetic field all the way to infinity. Does that mean that all of space is involved in the magnetic field?

the way I took it was that it meant that light, that we see, is the sum of all of the magnetic field that is to be deposited over the rest of space.  Meaning it's the rest of the magnetic field that hasn't yet been deposited over space.  so the universe is keeping track of all of the magnetic fields in the universe using light. 

Regarding the static electric field, I am pondering if it might be possible to make a phased array where are the current is accelerated perpendicular to the current of a regular phased array.  There should be radiation in the direction of the accelerated charge but this would point toward the radiation source.  one problem is I think this type of field would drop off with distance squared unlike light. 

With distance cubed as a dipole.
Not sure if there would be some kind of sum effect depositing over space.
« Last Edit: 02/25/2019 06:35 pm by dustinthewind »

Offline dustinthewind

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 723
  • U.S. of A.
  • Liked: 277
  • Likes Given: 315
...

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I am not sure what you are trying to say here, an oscillating current does not generate a static (unchanging) electric field.

...

With time varryinc current when the current stops osculating it stops.  At this time it is like a capacitor and there is separated charge.  This appearance of separated charge should travel through space at the speed of light.  I don't believe it to be the same as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field is perpendicular to both the magnetic field and the direction of current. 

The static electric field points toward the separated charge. 

Regarding my calculation of light from the biot savart equation, I'll have to find my old PDF and post it.

I guess I left the calculation of light from the Biot-Savart equaiton in my thesis. 
page 122 to 125.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286118593_Determining_if_an_axially_rotated_solenoid_will_induce_a_radial_EMF

Offline MathewOrman

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Poland
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
...

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I am not sure what you are trying to say here, an oscillating current does not generate a static (unchanging) electric field.

...

With time varryinc current when the current stops osculating it stops.  At this time it is like a capacitor and there is separated charge.  This appearance of separated charge should travel through space at the speed of light.  I don't believe it to be the same as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field is perpendicular to both the magnetic field and the direction of current. 

The static electric field points toward the separated charge. 

Regarding my calculation of light from the biot savart equation, I'll have to find my old PDF and post it.

I guess I left the calculation of light from the Biot-Savart equaiton in my thesis. 
page 122 to 125.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286118593_Determining_if_an_axially_rotated_solenoid_will_induce_a_radial_EMF
You are wrong and Lorentz force and law is now invalidated:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhldn0ef138&feature=youtu.be

Offline meberbs

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2020
  • Liked: 1982
  • Likes Given: 448
ou are wrong and Lorentz force and law is now invalidated:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhldn0ef138&feature=youtu.be
This has been thoroughly covered in another thread, where I explained that your equations have inconsistent units, and that you have incorrectly applied electromagnetic equations.
It seems rather inappropriate for you to continue to make absolute claims that the Lorentz force is wrong when you have simply ignored the problems with your math that I pointed out. If you are going to respond, go back to the original thread. There is no reason to spread this out across multiple threads.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38996.msg1902472#msg1902472

...

I went back and looked over the reverse-magnetic phased array diagram and you are correct.  It does appear it enhances the magnetic field in one direction and the static electric field in the other direction.  The opposite of what a standard phased array would do.  Not sure what that means but it is curious. 
I am not sure what you are trying to say here, an oscillating current does not generate a static (unchanging) electric field.

...

With time varryinc current when the current stops osculating it stops.  At this time it is like a capacitor and there is separated charge.  This appearance of separated charge should travel through space at the speed of light.  I don't believe it to be the same as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field as the electric field generated by the propagating magnetic field is perpendicular to both the magnetic field and the direction of current. 

The static electric field points toward the separated charge. 

Regarding my calculation of light from the biot savart equation, I'll have to find my old PDF and post it.

I guess I left the calculation of light from the Biot-Savart equaiton in my thesis. 
page 122 to 125.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286118593_Determining_if_an_axially_rotated_solenoid_will_induce_a_radial_EMF
You are wrong and Lorentz force and law is now invalidated:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhldn0ef138&feature=youtu.be

What would be the benefits of your technology? And do you have a prototype? Are these just calculations?

Offline MathewOrman

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Poland
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
What or whose  technology are you talking about?

What or whose  technology are you talking about?

You say that Lorentz's strength does not exist. Instead, you postulate Orman force. I understand that for a purpose. That's why I'm asking, what will be the implications for technology? Do you have a prototype? We are on a forum about space drives.

Tags: