Author Topic: E/M propellant-less propulsion using delayed information/dielectrics (patent) (Read 101640 times)

dustinthewind · « **on:** 02/27/2015 08:20 am »

I wanted to suggest this concept for propellant-less propulsion. The guys that did the patent beat me me to the punch and did a good job of it. I think the concept needs to be more widely known. The patent is attached. How it works is by light speed delayed information. They suggesting using barium titanate as a dielectric to slow the rate of universe information transfer. The patent pending was my attempt but I found theirs later. Some of the wording is a bit off in mine and is not well thrown together (the company threw it together a bit for me and used the word electromagnetic a bit oddly I think) but still conveys the basic concept. My figures are drawn in ms paint.

What is interesting is their finished patent suggests the device could beat the best ion engines by orders of magnitude. I am eager to hear if any testing can be done. I don't see much reason for why the effect should not be there.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #1 on:** 02/27/2015 08:28 am »

If this effect exists I have another concept that could possibly provide even more propulsion than this but again I am eager to see if even this effect can be shown to exist.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #2 on:** 02/28/2015 03:39 am »

I suppose I should mention and I didn't see much of this in the patent but you will experience increasing dB/dt emf in the layers where fuel would come out in a normal rocket and so each lower layer will have to have slightly higher voltages while the upper layers not so much work to keep the current in phase. The important factor is keeping the current in phase as it should be. Changes in the magnetic field will be fighting the effect and its important to monitor the current in each layer. The electric field coming out the back should be large but I'm assuming with the dielectrics it should be low frequency radiation though classically one would imagine the electric fields stacking that may just be the intensity of the radiation out the back. The lower frequency is important which the dielectrics make possible.

There should also be a capacitance effect due to the AC current while charge is separated. This effect provides propulsion in the opposite direction. With lower frequency I think the capacitance effect should be lessened.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #3 on:** 03/01/2015 09:01 am »

mmm, they do cover the effects of the changing magnetic fields in the patent I suppose. I'm just emphasizing to beware the radiation as I don't know if the radiation will correspond to em fields of high energy radiation (radiation corresponding to large electric fields) or low frequency radiation at high intensity. If I had to guess it will be low frequency radiation.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #4 on:** 03/07/2015 02:12 am »

I found another physics minded fellow on youtube that apparently came across the same idea. Here is the link to his video:

dustinthewind · « **Reply #5 on:** 03/24/2015 08:32 am »

A scientific paper that clarifies how newtons 3rd law does not apply to the time delay of information and how it can be used for electromagnetic propulsion. It provides a mathematical background for the time delayed magnetic fields but first illustrating how the static equations miss the effect. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=7136673109349846373&hl=en&as_sdt=0,48

I must appologize this paper is not what I thought it was about. I expected two current changing loops %pi/2 out of phase and I should have noticed it was not.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #6 on:** 03/25/2015 08:21 pm »

Some more papers for those interested in violations of newtons 3rd law. Some examples are given of systems that violate the action reaction concept: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=2477405758829577437&hl=en&as_sdt=0,48 . A paper specifically on utilizing it as a principle for electromagentic propulsion. It confirms the need for the phase to be out by 90 or -90 degrees given as %pi/2 or 3*%pi/2 : http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.06288 . I speculate these systems play with space and time information delay and in so doing seem to push off space and time. It also suggests the use of barium titanate as a dielectric to slow the speed of light.

aceshigh · « **Reply #7 on:** 03/25/2015 10:20 pm »

I am not sure, but the fact noone replied to this thread yet might mean that you should have posted this on the EM Drive thread, instead of opening a new thread.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #8 on:** 03/26/2015 08:05 pm »

Quote from: aceshigh on 03/25/2015 10:20 pm

I am not sure, but the fact noone replied to this thread yet might mean that you should have posted this on the EM Drive thread, instead of opening a new thread.

I understand. I suppose at the time, and I am still uncertain the two are actually related. I didn't want to drive them off topic but I am curious if they are related. Time should tell.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #9 on:** 04/19/2015 08:51 am »

One way of implementing this effect is I would take two cylindrical cavities with the radiation input of one cavity able to be phase shifted and amplified. Put the two cavities flat plates next to each other so that the imaginary magnetic field (non radiating [decaying]) overlaps. The separation would be about 1/4 lambda separation in air for the frequency chosen. My guess is the signal of one would bleed into the other cavity which would seem to push them to be matched up in phase and not perfectly out of phase %pi/2. They are supposed to be out of phase %pi/2 so you increase the phase and amplitude of the cavity that is working against the other till it seems they are properly out of phase 1/4 lambda with matching amplitude. You might install a current sensor on each cavity to make sure you know the exact current phase and amplitude. Maybe then its possible to stack the cavities on top of each other one after the other all being off in phase 0, %pi/2, %pi, 3%pi/2 ect. I would possibly throw a dielectric between the two cavities which would change their separation thickness depending on the change in speed of light between them making the two cavities closer. The result should be some form of force along the axial direction.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #10 on:** 04/19/2015 08:54 am »

Another image of the effect to assist understanding the concept. The black loops are the currents and the colored loops are the signal that can be thought of propagating between them though they are not exactly between them for separation of signals.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #11 on:** 04/23/2015 04:23 am »

I wanted to make the concept more simple to understand and this is an attempt to do so. It stems from a very simple observation of current moving in wires. Simply put current moving the same direction in two wires will cause attraction between the wires. Current moving in opposite direction between two wire will cause repulsion. Now take into consideration this concept but mix in the limits of information transfer at the speed of light over a distance. If currents are out of phase by pi/2 and separated a distance lambda/4 then it appears newtons law of momentum conservation are violated as can be seen in the images below.

The information on this thread are I believe all linked to this simple concept but it appears to not only apply to light but near field effects and possibly increased by inserting dielectrics between the currents to slow down the speed of light and decreasing distance. Pushing off of information delay smacks of pushing off space and time and one begins to wonder if more is going on than simple light propulsion.

Figures included below. For simplicity please see figure , "Fig1 Simple.png" rather than "Fig1.png".

dunt231 · « **Reply #12 on:** 04/23/2015 06:32 pm »

Hey. Cool Idea. Have you tried to make a simulation of this with a computer, as in solving the maxwell equations for a bunch of times calculating the forces and such. This would be a great way to analyze dynamic effects. If it works in the simulation, you could try an experiment: Like in the video two LC circuits at a distance of 1 meter (now you can work with signals in the 100MHz-1GHz frequency range) and measure the forces on both LCs using piezos.

Hanelyp · « **Reply #13 on:** 04/26/2015 10:04 pm »

Quote

If currents are out of phase by pi/2 and separated a distance lambda/4...

The first suspicion I'd have if such an arrangement generated thrust is a photon rocket. That description fits a well known directional antenna.

From a practical perspective a "propellantless" thruster isn't interesting unless it delivers more thrust than a photon rocket with the same power input.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #14 on:** 04/30/2015 05:05 am »

Quote from: Hanelyp on 04/26/2015 10:04 pm

Quote
If currents are out of phase by pi/2 and separated a distance lambda/4...
The first suspicion I'd have if such an arrangement generated thrust is a photon rocket. That description fits a well known directional antenna.

From a practical perspective a "propellantless" thruster isn't interesting unless it delivers more thrust than a photon rocket with the same power input.

While one might assume it would just be a photon rocket that assumption may be wrong. The paper here by Mario J. Pinheiro (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.06288v1.pdf) suggests as I suspected there should be near field effects and it is not just light providing the propulsion. What other than light would we be pushing off? I suspect we could end up realizing we would be pushing off the quantum vacuum, or in my own words, "we are playing with space/time energy to get push so we are pushing off space/time (what ever that is made of).

That diagram I posted above of the two cavities. How would that be a photon rocket? I don't think it could be.

Measurements of the Casimir force (http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/9911/9911062.pdf) gives us evidence of this quantum vacuum and further ideas around this quantum vacuum as a space time fluid exist that suggest it could be influenced by electromagnetism (http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9902029). I have my suspicions but I am not convinced yet it may, or may not, be linked to the EM Drive experiments.

CW · « **Reply #15 on:** 04/30/2015 05:53 am »

I believe that one of the greatest misconceptions is the stance that QV is nothing. Actually, if you write nothing as Zero and make an equation:

0 = X_n + (-X_n)

with index n denoting a specific phenomenon, one instantly realizes that nothing can actually also be understood as the superposition of everything and its opposite, that could possibly exist, in each specific point of the QV. That is very different from being boring old nothing.

Using the right combinations of matter, topology, timing and energy, the QV can be 'provoked' into showing phenomena that are normally not visible. Particle colliders are one example of an application that makes QV spew out particles that are normally not observable.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #16 on:** 05/10/2015 05:08 pm »

Another paper that suggest we can get forces comparable to magnetic motors from time/space phase em propulsion with near field effects. Here is the paper below and a quote from page 9.
"Exotic Matter and Propulsion within Maxwell’s Equations

Todd J. Desiato1
, Riccardo C. Storti2
November 6, 2003 v1"
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.10.1027&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Quote: "Note that equation (4) is not the equation typically considered for EM propulsion, that is force = power c/ . This is a very week force because there is no Lorentz force coupled to the radiation emitter. For example, it’s like using a flashlight for EM propulsion.

The EGM Array produces EM propulsion that is derived from the exertion Lorentz forces on the 4-currents, not simply by the exhaust of EM radiation. This is the same principle that moves electric motors, in which the current carrying conductors are coupled to magnetic flux linkages. [16] Gradients in the flux exert Lorentz forces on the conductors to turn the motor. Reciprocity between the forces acting on each source is suppressed by engineering considerations such as proper phase control and by purposeful design.

For example, compare the thrust produced by a 1 watt flashlight to the torque produced by a 1 watt electric motor. The coupling of the 4-currents to the EM field to produce Lorentz forces does mechanical work that a radiated EM field alone cannot do.

The EGM Array is comparable to a linear electric motor and may be described as a linear Rotor with a holographic Stator. [10,16] Holographic referring to the time-varying superposition of EM fields surrounding the EGM Array, from which the Lorentz forces emerge."

This paper appears to be in agreement with the paper already cited above and listed below.

DEF: The Physical Basis of Electromagnetic Propulsion
Mario J. Pinheiro
http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.06288

Quote: page 4 "As is exposed in textbooks (see, e.g., Ref. [3]), from Eqs. 8- 9 we can obtain the electric and magnetic elds, showing terms that vary as 1=r (radiation eld), 1=r2 (induction terms), and 1=r3 (electrostatic eld terms). Therefore, as it is shown in Ref. [15], the propulsive force can result from the near-eld and=or the far-eld (radiative) mode, that is, it is not always the radiative mode of propulsion that can be useful under the point of view of practical engineering."

As stated above by Hanelyp, one worry was that the propulsion would be that of a photon rocket. However this should not be the case. We have the potential to see much larger forces with the correct engineering. It is my suspicion that this may be what is also occurring in the EM drive if it actually works but due to the obscurity of what is actually happening inside it can't yet be confirmed. It is possible it is not yet taking full advantage of the maximum potential that can be achieved.

As stated in the top quoted article and others, there is the possibility of connections to this type of propulsion and manipulating space and time with EM.

How Electrodynamics with Statistical Mechanics
Can Imply Gravitation
Cynthia Kolb Whitney
Editor, Galilean Electrodynamics
http://worldnpa.org/abstracts/abstracts_7185.pdf

Archimedes’ Principle and Gravitational Levitation
Charles T. Ridgely
Fullerton, CA
http://ridgely.ws/inertia/Ridgely-Archimedes.pdf

laszlo · « **Reply #17 on:** 05/10/2015 07:02 pm »

Papers are great, patents are meaningless (you can patent anything - in June of 2000 someone received a patent for toasting bread) so I'm holding out for the working model. When are you building one?

ChrisWilson68 · « **Reply #18 on:** 05/10/2015 07:43 pm »

You can't get a propellantless drive with known physics. It's true that known physics might be wrong in places and that might allow propellantless propulsion. But not with known physics.

All of known physics has been mathematically shown to always conserve momentum and energy, and you can't get around that with a quantum vacuum. The quantum vacuum is part of known physics, and it is known that there's no way to transfer momentum to or from the quantum vacuum.

So all everything mentioned on this thread is nonsense. None of it is based on new physics, it's all misunderstanding of the details of known physics.

There's no need to read any of the papers to know this, any more than it's necessary to read a paper claiming to show pi is rational. Once you have a mathematical proof of something, there's no need to read through the details of claiming something that contradicts that. And these propellantless propulsion ideas are all in that category since they are all based on known physics.

A photon drive is not propellantless since the photons carry momentum. Photon drives have huge Isp but very, very tiny energy efficiency, and nothing that only emits photons can do better (or worse) than any photon drive.

dustinthewind · « **Reply #19 on:** 05/10/2015 08:22 pm »

Quote from: ChrisWilson68 on 05/10/2015 07:43 pm

You can't get a propellantless drive with known physics. It's true that known physics might be wrong in places and that might allow propellantless propulsion. But not with known physics.

All of known physics has been mathematically shown to always conserve momentum and energy, and you can't get around that with a quantum vacuum. The quantum vacuum is part of known physics, and it is known that there's no way to transfer momentum to or from the quantum vacuum.

So all everything mentioned on this thread is nonsense. None of it is based on new physics, it's all misunderstanding of the details of known physics.

There's no need to read any of the papers to know this, any more than it's necessary to read a paper claiming to show pi is rational. Once you have a mathematical proof of something, there's no need to read through the details of claiming something that contradicts that. And these propellantless propulsion ideas are all in that category since they are all based on known physics.

A photon drive is not propellantless since the photons carry momentum. Photon drives have huge Isp but very, very tiny energy efficiency, and nothing that only emits photons can do better (or worse) than any photon drive.

I don't think I would want to be on record stating that it's impossible. There are a lot more papers than these that support the concept. One device built demonstrates the concept of effective negative mass. http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v9/n12/full/nphys2777.html Were also not talking photon drives here. Were talking that information can't travel faster than light and that can be manipulated to violate conservation of momentum.

@ laszlo This thread was started to encourage those who would like to build one. Are you interested?