Quote from: Rodal on 04/07/2015 09:16 pmQuote from: CW on 04/07/2015 09:06 pmQuote from: Rodal on 04/07/2015 08:50 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 04/07/2015 08:10 pm....Be it nuclear, fuel cell or even solar, as the source of electricity, mass is being expended in the form of electrons. (Solar is taking advantage of the Sun's own expendature of mass in the form of photons). Whiloe the quantity of mass being expended is minute, it IS being expended. ...Even if (for discussion's sake) mass would be converted into energy with a nuclear reaction E=mc^2 inside the spacecraft to provide the electricity for the EM Drive, that does not solve the conundrum: the issue is not "to expend energy", the issue is to satisfy conservation of momentum. If no mass leaves the spacecraft, while kinetic energy is converted into a change in momentum of the spacecraft's center of mass, you still have the same conundrum and the same paradoxes I previously noted: The needed power for the EM Drive (to escape the surface of the Earth, or anything else you want the spacecraft to do) depends on your frame of reference. As Paul March himself admitted, for their Quantum Vacuum explanation for the EM Drive to hold, they need to disrespect the mainstream physics assumption that the Quantum Vacuum is indestructible and immutable.Bottom line: no, "according to basic physics, it should" not be possible to directly convert electrical energy into a spacecraft's momentum change without any change in mass of the spacecraft (or the action of external forces). If the EM Drive were to work for space propulsion, it certainly would not be explainable in terms of mainstream physics where conservation of momentum is paramount, and the Quantum Vacuum is both indestructible and immutable.Just being curious: What, in your book, would be the most important theoretical consequences of the discovery of a different QV nature?If the QV is not immutable and indestructible, the theoretical and practical consequences would be so groundbreaking that they would make the 20th century's discoveries of atomic and nuclear energy pale in comparison.Dr. Rodal:"If the QV is not immutable and indestructible,''')We've not tired to make that a secret and in fact that is at the core of our Q-V conjecture and Q-V plasma code that Dr. White and Dr. Vera have written that produced the Q-Thruster thrust predictions that I posted earlier on this forum. And this new paper is an expansion of Dr. White's STAIF-2007 conjecture and a partial rebuttal to the criticisms raised by the NASA Blue Ribbon panel's critique from last summer, an independent body of eight PhDs knowledge in the field that was created by NASA/JSC/EP management to vet Dr. White's QVF/MHD conjecture. And yes, if the accumulated chemical and nuclear data keeps pointing us in the same direction as it and our own experimental data has so far, we will be able to transmit and receive momentum through the Q-V via Q-Thruster like device. AND ultimately, be able harvest energy from the Q-V based cosmological gravitational field via various thermodynamic processes, at least in the far term. So find attached the Abstract and Introduction of our "Dynamics of the Vacuum" paper that will be out on the NASA servers hopefully by the end of April.Best, Paul M.
Quote from: CW on 04/07/2015 09:06 pmQuote from: Rodal on 04/07/2015 08:50 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 04/07/2015 08:10 pm....Be it nuclear, fuel cell or even solar, as the source of electricity, mass is being expended in the form of electrons. (Solar is taking advantage of the Sun's own expendature of mass in the form of photons). Whiloe the quantity of mass being expended is minute, it IS being expended. ...Even if (for discussion's sake) mass would be converted into energy with a nuclear reaction E=mc^2 inside the spacecraft to provide the electricity for the EM Drive, that does not solve the conundrum: the issue is not "to expend energy", the issue is to satisfy conservation of momentum. If no mass leaves the spacecraft, while kinetic energy is converted into a change in momentum of the spacecraft's center of mass, you still have the same conundrum and the same paradoxes I previously noted: The needed power for the EM Drive (to escape the surface of the Earth, or anything else you want the spacecraft to do) depends on your frame of reference. As Paul March himself admitted, for their Quantum Vacuum explanation for the EM Drive to hold, they need to disrespect the mainstream physics assumption that the Quantum Vacuum is indestructible and immutable.Bottom line: no, "according to basic physics, it should" not be possible to directly convert electrical energy into a spacecraft's momentum change without any change in mass of the spacecraft (or the action of external forces). If the EM Drive were to work for space propulsion, it certainly would not be explainable in terms of mainstream physics where conservation of momentum is paramount, and the Quantum Vacuum is both indestructible and immutable.Just being curious: What, in your book, would be the most important theoretical consequences of the discovery of a different QV nature?If the QV is not immutable and indestructible, the theoretical and practical consequences would be so groundbreaking that they would make the 20th century's discoveries of atomic and nuclear energy pale in comparison.
Quote from: Rodal on 04/07/2015 08:50 pmQuote from: JasonAW3 on 04/07/2015 08:10 pm....Be it nuclear, fuel cell or even solar, as the source of electricity, mass is being expended in the form of electrons. (Solar is taking advantage of the Sun's own expendature of mass in the form of photons). Whiloe the quantity of mass being expended is minute, it IS being expended. ...Even if (for discussion's sake) mass would be converted into energy with a nuclear reaction E=mc^2 inside the spacecraft to provide the electricity for the EM Drive, that does not solve the conundrum: the issue is not "to expend energy", the issue is to satisfy conservation of momentum. If no mass leaves the spacecraft, while kinetic energy is converted into a change in momentum of the spacecraft's center of mass, you still have the same conundrum and the same paradoxes I previously noted: The needed power for the EM Drive (to escape the surface of the Earth, or anything else you want the spacecraft to do) depends on your frame of reference. As Paul March himself admitted, for their Quantum Vacuum explanation for the EM Drive to hold, they need to disrespect the mainstream physics assumption that the Quantum Vacuum is indestructible and immutable.Bottom line: no, "according to basic physics, it should" not be possible to directly convert electrical energy into a spacecraft's momentum change without any change in mass of the spacecraft (or the action of external forces). If the EM Drive were to work for space propulsion, it certainly would not be explainable in terms of mainstream physics where conservation of momentum is paramount, and the Quantum Vacuum is both indestructible and immutable.Just being curious: What, in your book, would be the most important theoretical consequences of the discovery of a different QV nature?
Quote from: JasonAW3 on 04/07/2015 08:10 pm....Be it nuclear, fuel cell or even solar, as the source of electricity, mass is being expended in the form of electrons. (Solar is taking advantage of the Sun's own expendature of mass in the form of photons). Whiloe the quantity of mass being expended is minute, it IS being expended. ...Even if (for discussion's sake) mass would be converted into energy with a nuclear reaction E=mc^2 inside the spacecraft to provide the electricity for the EM Drive, that does not solve the conundrum: the issue is not "to expend energy", the issue is to satisfy conservation of momentum. If no mass leaves the spacecraft, while kinetic energy is converted into a change in momentum of the spacecraft's center of mass, you still have the same conundrum and the same paradoxes I previously noted: The needed power for the EM Drive (to escape the surface of the Earth, or anything else you want the spacecraft to do) depends on your frame of reference. As Paul March himself admitted, for their Quantum Vacuum explanation for the EM Drive to hold, they need to disrespect the mainstream physics assumption that the Quantum Vacuum is indestructible and immutable.Bottom line: no, "according to basic physics, it should" not be possible to directly convert electrical energy into a spacecraft's momentum change without any change in mass of the spacecraft (or the action of external forces). If the EM Drive were to work for space propulsion, it certainly would not be explainable in terms of mainstream physics where conservation of momentum is paramount, and the Quantum Vacuum is both indestructible and immutable.
....Be it nuclear, fuel cell or even solar, as the source of electricity, mass is being expended in the form of electrons. (Solar is taking advantage of the Sun's own expendature of mass in the form of photons). Whiloe the quantity of mass being expended is minute, it IS being expended. ...
"One should not take this vacuum energy too literally, however, because the free-field theory is just a mathematical tool to help us understand what we are really interested in: the interacting theory. Only the interacting theory is supposed to correspond directly to reality. Because the vacuum state of the interacting theory is the state of least energy in reality, there is no way to extract the vacuum energy and use it for anything."It is a bit like this: say a bank found it more convenient (for some strange reason) to start counting at 1,000, so that even when you had no money in the bank, your account read $1,000. You might get excited and try to spend this $1,000, but the bank would say, 'Sorry, that $1,000 is just an artifact of how we do our bookkeeping: you're actually flat broke.'"Similarly, one should not get one's hope up when people talk about vacuum energy. It is just how we do our bookkeeping in quantum field theory. There is much more to say about why we do our bookkeeping this funny way, but I will stop here.
The one who follows the crowd will usually get no further than the crowd. The one who walks alone, is likely to find himself/herself in places no one has ever been
this might be topical here: http://phys.org/news/2015-04-electromagnetism-enable-antennas-chip.htmlSince it couples electromagnetic radiation in dielectrics with quantum phenomenon.
We report our observation that radiation from a system of accelerating charges is possible only when there is explicit breaking of symmetry in the electric field in space within the spatial configuration of the radiating system. Under symmetry breaking, current within an enclosed area around the radiating structure is not conserved at a certain instant of time resulting in radiation in free space. Electromagnetic radiation from dielectric and piezoelectric material based resonators are discussed in this context. Finally, it is argued that symmetry of a resonator of any form can be explicitly broken to create a radiating antenna.
BTW, we have also started the build of our 1.2kW magnetron powered EM-Drive prototype in a tetter-totter balance system that is being built to replicate the thrust magnitudes of the Shawyer tests and the Chinese replication of same. Estimated build time should in the 2 month time period with the limited manpower available. A picture of the chaotic magnetron spectra that will be used on this system is attached along with the TE011 mode that will be driven.Best, Paul M.
I don't want to put a tangent on this discussion here but I have a question about something that could pertain to exotic drives of this nature. I posted my question in the "ansible" thread at http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37002.msg1355745#msg1355745 The post is reply 38 in that thread. It's about the implicit negative mass that should have to be involved in turning positive mass particles into zero mass meta-particles called unparticles in the literature. I would appreciate your thoughts (because there are some heavy hitters in this thread) but over there so as not to further disturb this thread.
We know the missing mass is zero if there is a single invisible massless particle. what missing mass do we expect for two? In any given event, we don’t know, but if we repeat the process many times, the angle between the two invisible particle momenta will be distributed at random. If there are three invisible massless particles, all three momenta have to line up exactly to get zero missing mass, even less likely to happen at random! So small missing mass is even more unlikely, and the number of events as a function of missing mass would increase even faster
In a particle detector, unparticles would look like particles with random masses. One unparticle decay might have many times the apparent mass of the next — the distribution would be broad.
Quote from: mlindner on 04/07/2015 10:03 amQuote from: RotoSequence on 04/07/2015 09:23 amQuote from: mlindner on 04/07/2015 08:48 amWhile that's all very interesting. You can immediately rule out the drive's functionality because of the lack of reaction mass. CoM is clearly broken.I only have a minor in physics so I honestly can't understand most of what's talked about here, but I know at the least you can't go about thrusting around the universe with no particles/energy leaving the engine without something like an Alcubierre drive. Even if you're pushing against quantum virtual particle pairs, virtual particle pairs have opposite signs so will be propelled in opposite directions thus canceling out any net force.I have yet to year a simple explanation of how this drive works that doesn't dive into theoretical physics to explain its operation. It is true of everything in physics that simple laws lead to complex behavior. If the operation of the EmDrive or other various families of the drive cannot be explained in an abstract way within a couple sentences then it doesn't work.People are being sold snake oil and I don't like it."We don't know how, why, or if it works and known physics do not readily suffice, therefore it doesn't work and its proponents are perpetuating fraud" is jumping the gun a bit, don't you think?Tornados don't produces magical instruments. They produce junk. Luck doesn't make engineering.The chances of someone stumbling upon some contraption that violates physics principles by throwing electronics parts out of his garage together is nil."I only have a minor in physics so I honestly can't understand most of what's talked about here, but I know at the least you can't go about thrusting around the universe with no particles/energy leaving the engine without something like an Alcubierre drive. Even if you're pushing against quantum virtual particle pairs, virtual particle pairs have opposite signs so will be propelled in opposite directions thus canceling out any net force."In a neutral plasma there is an equal number of plus and minus electrical charges or ions that can react to applied E-fields and B-fields in various ways. If there is only an electric field applied to the plasma volume then yes the positive charges will go one way and the negative charges will go in the opposite direction. However if we apply a spatially crossed E-field and B-field across this volume, then we have a Lorentz force produced on the plasma ions that is at right angles to the applied E-field and B-field. Then BOTH the positive and negative ions will be accelerated in the SAME direction, but with counter rotating twists AKA Gyro radius modifying their accelerated trajectories. All of these EM-Drive like thruster utilize some form of this Lorentz force acceleration on some type of propellant, be it real as in a Hall thruster or semi-virtual.Best, Paul M.
Quote from: RotoSequence on 04/07/2015 09:23 amQuote from: mlindner on 04/07/2015 08:48 amWhile that's all very interesting. You can immediately rule out the drive's functionality because of the lack of reaction mass. CoM is clearly broken.I only have a minor in physics so I honestly can't understand most of what's talked about here, but I know at the least you can't go about thrusting around the universe with no particles/energy leaving the engine without something like an Alcubierre drive. Even if you're pushing against quantum virtual particle pairs, virtual particle pairs have opposite signs so will be propelled in opposite directions thus canceling out any net force.I have yet to year a simple explanation of how this drive works that doesn't dive into theoretical physics to explain its operation. It is true of everything in physics that simple laws lead to complex behavior. If the operation of the EmDrive or other various families of the drive cannot be explained in an abstract way within a couple sentences then it doesn't work.People are being sold snake oil and I don't like it."We don't know how, why, or if it works and known physics do not readily suffice, therefore it doesn't work and its proponents are perpetuating fraud" is jumping the gun a bit, don't you think?Tornados don't produces magical instruments. They produce junk. Luck doesn't make engineering.The chances of someone stumbling upon some contraption that violates physics principles by throwing electronics parts out of his garage together is nil.
Quote from: mlindner on 04/07/2015 08:48 amWhile that's all very interesting. You can immediately rule out the drive's functionality because of the lack of reaction mass. CoM is clearly broken.I only have a minor in physics so I honestly can't understand most of what's talked about here, but I know at the least you can't go about thrusting around the universe with no particles/energy leaving the engine without something like an Alcubierre drive. Even if you're pushing against quantum virtual particle pairs, virtual particle pairs have opposite signs so will be propelled in opposite directions thus canceling out any net force.I have yet to year a simple explanation of how this drive works that doesn't dive into theoretical physics to explain its operation. It is true of everything in physics that simple laws lead to complex behavior. If the operation of the EmDrive or other various families of the drive cannot be explained in an abstract way within a couple sentences then it doesn't work.People are being sold snake oil and I don't like it."We don't know how, why, or if it works and known physics do not readily suffice, therefore it doesn't work and its proponents are perpetuating fraud" is jumping the gun a bit, don't you think?
While that's all very interesting. You can immediately rule out the drive's functionality because of the lack of reaction mass. CoM is clearly broken.I only have a minor in physics so I honestly can't understand most of what's talked about here, but I know at the least you can't go about thrusting around the universe with no particles/energy leaving the engine without something like an Alcubierre drive. Even if you're pushing against quantum virtual particle pairs, virtual particle pairs have opposite signs so will be propelled in opposite directions thus canceling out any net force.I have yet to year a simple explanation of how this drive works that doesn't dive into theoretical physics to explain its operation. It is true of everything in physics that simple laws lead to complex behavior. If the operation of the EmDrive or other various families of the drive cannot be explained in an abstract way within a couple sentences then it doesn't work.People are being sold snake oil and I don't like it.
Sonny White formulated a compressible quantum vacuum conjecture that requires us to live in a portion of the universe that is immersed in a false vacuum that apparently has a ground or zero-energy level much smaller than science first assumed. However what will drive this debate is experimental data first and foremost. Experimental data like what just came out of the Eagleworks Lab's latest warp-field interferometer tests based on 27,000, 1.5 second long on/off data samples that indicates we have finally observed the first spacetime contraction effects that we are fairly confident are the real deal. We again are looking for more possible false positives as well as ways of increasing the signal to noise ratio above its current ~2-to-3 sigma level, which I've already suggested several ways to do so to Dr. White. However what is really interesting about these new test results is that the laser interferometer observed spacetime contractions are being developed in a TM010 RF resonant cavity that is driving ac E-field levels over 900kV/m at a 1.48 GHz rate. A similar RF resonant system used to implement the EM-Drive and Q-thruster designs, for these spacetime contraction effects are paramount to the operation of both.
Dr. Rodal:As promised, find attached a few related papers from work. As to the rest of your and Mulletron's concerns over the Eagleworks evolving theoretical musings on the EM-Drive propulsion topic, I leave you with Boyd Bushman's, (was senior scientist at LM/FW, now retired and passed-on), admonition to me when I first met him back in 2000 when discussing Jim Woodward's Mach-Effect work with Boyd's boss, "Follow the data, theory be dammed!" We intend to do just that, no matter where it might take us.Best, Paul M.
Based on our data, we can exclude the possibility that the gravitiational mass of antihydrogen is more than 110 times its inertial mass, or that it falls upwards with a gravitational mass more than 65 times its inertial mass.Our results far from settle the question of antimatter gravity. But they open the way towards higher-precision measurements in the future, using the same technique, but more, and colder trapped antihydrogen atoms, and a better understanding of the systematic effects in our apparatus.
Talking of CERN will the LHC be able to help with any of this? I know they are using it to see if they can prove if super-symmetry exists.
Virtual particles are indeed real particles...But while the virtual particles are briefly part of our world they can interact with other particles, and that leads to a number of tests of the quantum-mechanical predictions about virtual particles. The first test was understood in the late 1940s. In a hydrogen atom an electron and a proton are bound together by photons (the quanta of the electromagnetic field). Every photon will spend some time as a virtual electron plus its antiparticle, the virtual positron, since this is allowed by quantum mechanics as described above. The hydrogen atom has two energy levels that coincidentally seem to have the same energy. But when the atom is in one of those levels it interacts differently with the virtual electron and positron than when it is in the other, so their energies are shifted a tiny bit because of those interactions. That shift was measured by Willis Lamb and the Lamb shift was born, for which a Nobel Prize was eventually awarded....Another very good test some readers may want to look up, which we do not have space to describe here, is the Casimir effect, where forces between metal plates in empty space are modified by the presence of virtual particles.Thus virtual particles are indeed real and have observable effects that physicists have devised ways of measuring.