In his website he has posted several of his articles. For example thisrelatively recent one on the Mach principle and origin of inertia:http://mendelsachs.com/wp-content/uploads/articles/the-mach-principle.pdfIn that reference, Sachs convincingly argues against the approach to Mach'sPrinciple followed by Woodward (-of course- he does not mention Woodward),he considers the particle-antiparticle pairs of the quantum vacuum havinga most important effect, while the effect of distant stars isnegligible:Quote from: SachsI have found in my research program in general relativity, that the primarycontribution to the inertial mass of any local elementary matter, such as an'electron', are the nearby particle-antiparticle pairs that constitute whatwe call the 'physical vacuum'. [The main developments of this research aredemonstrated in my two monographs: General Relativity and Matter, andQuantum Mechanics from General Relativity]. A prediction of this researchprogram is that the main influence of these pairs on the mass of, say, anelectron comes from a domain of the 'physical vacuum' in its vicinity, whosevolume has a radius that is the order of 10^(-15) cm. Of course, the distantstars, billions of light-years away, also contribute to the electron's mass,though negligibly, just as the Sun's mass contribution to the weight of aperson on Earth is negligible compared with the Earth's influence on thisperson's weight! Nevertheless, it was Mach's contention that in principleall of the matter of the closed system - the nearby as well as far awayconstituents - determines the inertial mass of any local matter. (Bold added for emphasis) ==> this is the anti-thesis of Woodward'sapproach to Mach's principle!

I have found in my research program in general relativity, that the primarycontribution to the inertial mass of any local elementary matter, such as an'electron', are the nearby particle-antiparticle pairs that constitute whatwe call the 'physical vacuum'. [The main developments of this research aredemonstrated in my two monographs: General Relativity and Matter, andQuantum Mechanics from General Relativity]. A prediction of this researchprogram is that the main influence of these pairs on the mass of, say, anelectron comes from a domain of the 'physical vacuum' in its vicinity, whosevolume has a radius that is the order of 10^(-15) cm. Of course, the distantstars, billions of light-years away, also contribute to the electron's mass,though negligibly, just as the Sun's mass contribution to the weight of aperson on Earth is negligible compared with the Earth's influence on thisperson's weight! Nevertheless, it was Mach's contention that in principleall of the matter of the closed system - the nearby as well as far awayconstituents - determines the inertial mass of any local matter.

...52.Terletskiy, Y. P. Paradoxes of the Theory of Relativity. Moscow: Nauka, 1966. 120 pp.58.Terletskiy, Ya. P., and Yu. P. Rybakov. Electrodynamics. Moscow: Vyssh. shk., 1990. 352 pp.Which "sounds like" a Russian invention of the Sachs-Schwebel ( quadrigues vs quarternions )...

In accepting negative mass, one must therefore accept the quadrigue (group of four) of particlesof Terletskiy (88), which is neatly buttressed by Dirac’s quadrupling of states in his quantum theory. Itis also a remarkable turn of events in the modeling of the physical vacuum as a polarizing medium.Terletskiy’s quadrigue is actually four particles (or, actually, four electrical charges, masses, magneticmoments and spin moments), the sum of which equal zero – from which, interestingly enough, one canderive any two pairs of particles in which their electrical charges, masses, magnetic and spin momentsequal zero! This allows theorists to build a basic model of cella (or distinguishable compartments) ofthe physical vacuum as a whole-cloth neutral polarizing medium, from which then three kinds ofphysical vacuums can manifest: (a) an absolute physical vacuum, represented by the quadrigues; (b) aphysical vacuum of matter, which is made up of particles, one of which is an ordinary one; and (c) aphysical vacuum of antimatter, which is made up of particle pairs, one of which is an antiparticle.What is most remarkable is that the absolute physical vacuum is described quite well by Maxwell andHeaviside equations, and thus in the absolute physical vacuum, the polarization model breaks downinto two independent models: the Maxwell theory of electromagnetism, and the Heaviside theory ofgravitational spin. But in physical reality, the relationships of electrical and gravitational polarizationsand of magnetic and spin polarization in the absolute- as well as in the physical matter vacuums comeout as quite a unified system of equations that become the basis of a combined electrogravitodynamicmodel of matter electrogravitogeneration (via electrical charges and magnetic polarizations) andcontinuum dynamics (via masses and moments of the quantity of movement set by way of theHeaviside equations).

We have investigated in this work the quaternionic momentum eigen value problem in quantum mechanics. We have written the wave function, energy and momentum of the particle as quaternionic quantities. The momentum eigen value equation reveals that the scalar and vector parts of the wavefunction are governed by a new wave equation. This is a new equation that we wish it will describe bosons and fermions. When the interaction of the particle with an electromagnetic field is introduced a spin term appeared in the equation of motion. The scalar equation doesn't change due to the interaction of the electromagnetic field with the particle. However, the vector equations are altered. We generalized the ordinary uncertainty relation to quaternionic one. This generalization provides us with the energy momentum relation of Einstein and the remaining uncertainty relations. Hence, by adopting the quaternionic quantum mechanics, namely, Dirac equation, we arrived at a dissipative or generalizedKlein-Gordon equation with a particle spin. This formalism gives rise to the generation of spin angular momentum of the particle when a photon field is introduced in the equation of motion. Further investigation is going on to explore the physics of these two waves

Quote from: wembley on 12/31/2014 08:51 amQuote from: Mulletron on 12/28/2014 01:13 pmSo what TRL would you guys say the devices presented in the "Anomalous Thrust Production...." papers are at right now? I'd say probably a TRL 2. Possibly on the way to a TRL 3, hopefully. Well, Cannae were talking about flying theirs in a nanosatellite about a year ago, and I suspect that is still ongoing. The Chinese appear to be more cautious but are somewhere around 4+. Shawyer certainly claimed to be at 4 some time ago. And if rumour is to be believed, an aerospace company has pushed Shawyer's work on some from there.No, it's TRL-1. Basic research has not even established sufficient evidence of anything anomalous to convince even a small part of the mainstream physics community.

Quote from: Mulletron on 12/28/2014 01:13 pmSo what TRL would you guys say the devices presented in the "Anomalous Thrust Production...." papers are at right now? I'd say probably a TRL 2. Possibly on the way to a TRL 3, hopefully. Well, Cannae were talking about flying theirs in a nanosatellite about a year ago, and I suspect that is still ongoing. The Chinese appear to be more cautious but are somewhere around 4+. Shawyer certainly claimed to be at 4 some time ago. And if rumour is to be believed, an aerospace company has pushed Shawyer's work on some from there.

So what TRL would you guys say the devices presented in the "Anomalous Thrust Production...." papers are at right now? I'd say probably a TRL 2. Possibly on the way to a TRL 3, hopefully.

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Arbab_Arbab/publication/51916988_The_unified_quantum_wave_equation/links/0912f50de92ef30406000000.pdfQuoteWe have investigated in this work the quaternionic momentum eigen value problem in quantum mechanics. We have written the wave function, energy and momentum of the particle as quaternionic quantities. The momentum eigen value equation reveals that the scalar and vector parts of the wavefunction are governed by a new wave equation. This is a new equation that we wish it will describe bosons and fermions. When the interaction of the particle with an electromagnetic field is introduced a spin term appeared in the equation of motion. The scalar equation doesn't change due to the interaction of the electromagnetic field with the particle. However, the vector equations are altered. We generalized the ordinary uncertainty relation to quaternionic one. This generalization provides us with the energy momentum relation of Einstein and the remaining uncertainty relations. Hence, by adopting the quaternionic quantum mechanics, namely, Dirac equation, we arrived at a dissipative or generalizedKlein-Gordon equation with a particle spin. This formalism gives rise to the generation of spin angular momentum of the particle when a photon field is introduced in the equation of motion. Further investigation is going on to explore the physics of these two waves

Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 12/31/2014 10:30 amQuote from: wembley on 12/31/2014 08:51 amQuote from: Mulletron on 12/28/2014 01:13 pmSo what TRL would you guys say the devices presented in the "Anomalous Thrust Production...." papers are at right now? I'd say probably a TRL 2. Possibly on the way to a TRL 3, hopefully. Well, Cannae were talking about flying theirs in a nanosatellite about a year ago, and I suspect that is still ongoing. The Chinese appear to be more cautious but are somewhere around 4+. Shawyer certainly claimed to be at 4 some time ago. And if rumour is to be believed, an aerospace company has pushed Shawyer's work on some from there.No, it's TRL-1. Basic research has not even established sufficient evidence of anything anomalous to convince even a small part of the mainstream physics community.Being believed by the mainstream community has nothing to do with TRL. If it works, it works. And if the Chinese fly their Emdrive (possibly this year?) and get acceleration, I doubt they'll care what anyone else thinks however loudly they say it can't be true.I suspect these things really will be operational before a lot of the mainstream starts accepting them, the will to disbelieve is that strong.

Source Article: Physics of Extreme Gravitomagnetic and Gravity-Like Fields for Novel Space Propulsion and Energy Generation Jochem Hauser, Walter Dröscher [Hide abstract]ABSTRACT: In 2006 Tajmar et al. reported on the measurements of extreme gravitomagnetic fields from small Nb rings at cryogenic temperatures that are about 18 orders of magnitude larger than gravitomagnetic fields obtained from GR (general relativity). Cifuolini in 2004 and the NASA-Stanford Gravity Probe-B experiment in 2007 confirmed the Lense-Thirring effect as predicted by GR (gravitomagnetic fields generated by a rotating massive body, i.e. Earth) within some 10%. In 2007 gravitomagnetic fields generated by a rotating cryogenic lead disk were measured by Graham et al. Though these measurements were not conclusive (the accuracy of the laser gyrometer was not sufficient to produce a standard deviation small enough) their experiment seems to have seen the same phenomenon reported earlier by Tajmar et al., termed parity violation. This means that gravitomagnetic fields produced by the cryogenic rotating ring or disk vary substantially and change sign for clockwise and counter-clockwise directions of rotation. The experimental situation therefore occurs to be contradictory. On the one hand GR has been confirmed while at the same time, there seems to be experimental evidence for the existence of extreme gravitomagnetic fields that cannot be generated by the movement of large masses. If these experiments can be confirmed, they give a clear indication for the existence of additional gravitational fields of non-Newtonian nature. As was shown by the GP-B experiment, measuring gravitomagnetic fields from GR poses extreme difficulties. Therefore a novel physical mechanism should exist for the generation of gravity-like fields, which might also provide the key to gravitational engineering similar to electromagnetic technology

: Emerging Physics for Novel Field Propulsion Science Jochem Hauser, Walter Dröscher [Hide abstract]ABSTRACT: All space vehicles in use today need some kind of fuel for operation. The basic physics underlying this propulsion principle severely limits the specific impulse and/or available thrust. Launch capabilities from the surface of the Earth require huge amounts of fuel. Hence, space flight, as envisaged by von Braun in the early 50s of the last century, will not be possible using this concept. Only if novel physical principles are found can these limits be overcome. Gravitational field propulsion is based on the generation of gravitational (gravity-like) fields by manmade devices. In other words, gravity-like fields should be experimentally controllable. Present physics believes that there are four fundamental interactions: strong (nuclei), weak (radioactive decay), electromagnetism and Newtonian gravitation. As experience has shown for the last six decades, none of these physical interactions is suitable as a basis for novel space propulsion. None of the advanced physical theories like string theory or quantum gravity, go beyond these four known interactions. On the contrary, recent results from causal dynamical triangulation simulations indicate that wormholes in spacetime do not seem to exist, and thus even this type of exotic space travel may well be impossible. Recently, novel physical concepts were published that might lead to advanced space propulsion technology, represented by two additional long range gravitational-like force fields that would be both attractive and repulsive, resulting from interaction of gravity with electromagnetism. A propulsion technology, based on these novel long range fields, would be working without propellant

Ok, paging Doctor Rodal for a translation here (from Not so sure of its' link);

Very nice, if I'm reading it right, there may be the implication that the spins of the counter-propagating cavity photons could add to 2 in an interaction. But, at the moment, I don't see that generating enough force. (who knows at this point, .... it would need a very high vacuum energy density ?)

Along the way, Zvi, John Joseph and Henrik, thanks to the time-honored method of “just staring at” the loop integrand provided by unitarity, also stumbled on a new property of gauge theory amplitudes, which tightly couples them to gravity. They found that gauge theory amplitudes can be written in such a way that their kinematic part obeys relations that are structurally identical to the Jacobi identities known to fans of Lie algebras. This so-called color-kinematics duality, when achieved, leads to a simple “double copy” prescription for computing amplitudes in suitable theories of gravity: Take the gauge theory amplitude, remove the color factors and square the kinematic numerator factors. Crudely, a graviton looks very much like two gluons laid on top of each other. If you’ve ever looked at the Feynman rules for gravity, you’d be shocked that such a simple prescription could ever work, but it does. Although these relations could in principle have been discovered without unitarity-based methods, the power of the methods to provide very simple expressions, led people to find initial patterns, and then easily test the patterns in many other examples to gain confidence.

http://www.emdrive.com/EmDriveForceMeasurement.pdfNew info:Some clarification from Shawyer. Helps to clear up some of the arguments we had about how Shawyer uses thrust and reaction, and which way it moves.

Quote from: Mulletron on 01/03/2015 12:47 pmhttp://www.emdrive.com/EmDriveForceMeasurement.pdfNew info:Some clarification from Shawyer. Helps to clear up some of the arguments we had about how Shawyer uses thrust and reaction, and which way it moves.Hold the phone... am I reading this right. You can only ever measure thrust if the cavity is accelerating? So just sitting on a flat floating stationary table top should yield no force, the same with when the cavity is moving at constant velocity. Did I mis interpret that pdf?

if so that pushes it into Dr Woodward and vis inert or "fictitious" fields such as inertia, and gravity. (I'm currently reading Woodward's book )

Clearly, in a static situation, where T and R both exist as forces, they will cancel out. Thus any attempt to measure them by simply placing the thruster vertically on a set of scales will fail. If however the thrust is sufficient such that a=-g,then the thruster could be made to hover above the scales.

It therefore appears that a force measurement can only be made in a dynamic environment, ideally by allowing the thruster to accelerate, ...