-
#420 by rfmwguy on 13 Aug, 2015 02:51
-
Course my reply would be I will believe it when I see it personallyWill be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
Guest info to appear tomorrow abt 7:30 PM on othersideofmidnight.com website
Show is a mixture of science fiction, fantasy and science fact...I'll stay with facts and hope to still be entertaining, but understand its show biz. Will not over promise and under deliver however
Its late for sure but they archive shows. Will talk how and why I jumped in and where it could lead.
Sounds like fun...
Even money says Art brings up UFO's in the first 5 min.
Sorta the reason I started my build...
-
#421 by Rodal on 13 Aug, 2015 03:06
-
Be prepared what to answer if he asks you:
Course my reply would be I will believe it when I see it personallyWill be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
Guest info to appear tomorrow abt 7:30 PM on othersideofmidnight.com website
Show is a mixture of science fiction, fantasy and science fact...I'll stay with facts and hope to still be entertaining, but understand its show biz. Will not over promise and under deliver however
Its late for sure but they archive shows. Will talk how and why I jumped in and where it could lead.
Sounds like fun...
Even money says Art brings up UFO's in the first 5 min.
Sorta the reason I started my build...
1) Whether Shawyer invented the EM Drive as a result of a close encounter of the 3rd kind with UFO's that allowed him to get access to UFO's propulsion technology?
2) Whether the EM Drive is derived from Die Glocke Wunderwaffe antigravity research from WWII ?
3) What are you going to do if you accidentally create a wormhole in your garage as a result of your EM Drive research
4) if the EM Drive works, how long will a trip to Alpha Centauri take.
-
#422 by ElizabethGreene on 13 Aug, 2015 03:43
-
Be prepared what to answer if he asks you:
Art has been doing this a long time. Surely he knows the UFOs use Zero time zero space motion frozen 500KV (DC) repulsive electrostatic counter rotating vortexes in glass and copper plate capacitors radially around a central magnetic generator. Everyone knows that, right?*
1) Whether Shawyer invented the EM Drive as a result of a close encounter of the 3rd kind with UFO's that allowed him to get access to UFO's propulsion technology?
Ref:
Supreme Cosmic Secret Vol. 1, p2, publisher unknown.
* One observes that the rotation of static fields is, by definition, proportional to Maxwell's 1880 rotation rate. -
#423 by Rodal on 13 Aug, 2015 04:27
-
...
Some of these images seem wrong.
Example:
bighz
as I interpret this, it is the Hz field, the magnetic field normal to the Big Base
the magnetic field normal to a surface should be zero at a surface. It should be zero at the Big Base.
It is close to zero when I post-process the csv files with Wolfram Mathematica
Yet in the above images you show this bighz as having the highest magnitude magnetic field at the Big Base?
Ditto for smallhz
Interesting - We'll need to wait until Imbfan gets the automated field intensity extraction software running. That won't be to long based on the progress she is making.
Earlier today I was looking at the field intensity of the images around the base ends using hdfview. It seems clear from looking at adjacent slices that something may be not right. See the attached jpgs for z slice 14, 15, 16 and 17. Slice z-14 is within the metal, so nothing. Slice z-15 is the cut we have been taking as at the big base, while z-16 is one pixel inward and z-17 is 2 pixels inward. With the lattice measuring 0.275 meters (rounded up in deference to DeltaMass) and resolution 250, the distance between pixels is 1.1 mm so z-15 should be well out of the metal if z-14 is the metal surface. But the images seem to say that z-14 is well inside the metal and z-15 is somewhere close to the surface while z-16 is well outside the metal.
I wonder if the meep "subpixel averaging" is blending the dielectric constant at the edge of the metal with the air, also at the edge? If so, maybe I should quit using "subpixel averaging." On the other hand, the characteristic you wrote about above seems different than the one I observed.
Let's see what it looks like when the field intensities are automatically and correctly extracted for the images. Then we'll have something that we can fix, if it is broken. Fixing my fat fingers is much more difficult and they are not even broken - yet
P.S. I see you looked at this while I was typing.
Yes the Meep images are very wrong and misleading. Actually HXz is the largest, and HYz is close, but HZz at the Big Base is practically zero (contrary to the Meep images output that have it as the largest).
HZz must be zero at the Big Base to satisfy the Boundary Condition that the normal magnetic field must be zero at a conductor.
See my attachments below (using Wolfram Mathematica to post-process the csv files) and compare with the Meep output.
NOTICE that my contour plots are rotated by 90 degress from your contour plots
It very much looks like the problem is due to the commands used to get the contour plots to be plotted within the same range. The plot commands are doing the opposite of what should be done. The commands are incorrectly clipping the data: they are only allowing the small HZz component to have contour plots.
It very much looks like the problem is due to the wrong range commands used to get the contour plots to be plotted within the same range. The plot commands are doing the opposite of what should be done. The commands are incorrectly clipping the data: they are only allowing the small HZz component to have contour plots.
The range used is the wrong range:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38203.msg1415315#msg1415315Quote from: aeroThe ranges are from field components as follows:
# hx all data range from -0.000538633 to 0.000538633. H field big end
The correct range for HXz at the big end is -0.013 to +0.013
The contour plots are being clipped !!!!
Clipping is the complete opposite of what should be done. We are interested in the high values, not the low values !
QUESTION: At what time step did you output the pictures ?
-
#424 by lmbfan on 13 Aug, 2015 05:33
-
Interesting - We'll need to wait until Imbfan gets the automated field intensity extraction software running. That won't be to long based on the progress she is making.
Please find a python file attached. It works well on my machine using the flags presented before. There remain some rough edges, but this should do the bulk of the work automagically. Enjoy!QuoteI wonder if the meep "subpixel averaging" is blending the dielectric constant at the edge of the metal with the air, also at the edge? If so, maybe I should quit using "subpixel averaging." On the other hand, the characteristic you wrote about above seems different than the one I observed.
I'm pretty sure this is exactly what is happening. The boundary lies between pixels 14 and 16. It's late otherwise I'd math it out. If you don't subpixel average, the angled sides would go wonky, I bet.
-
#425 by flux_capacitor on 13 Aug, 2015 05:59
-
I keep thinking about the idea I had a few days ago and pushed it further. I thought about Rodal and WarpTech's advice of increasing cone angle and keeping the apex as near as possible of the small end. I also kept Shawyer's high Df and concentric spherical ends to maintain a high Q, and I've ended up with this wide and shallow resonant design, with incredible large spherical ends, making the frustum almost a half-sphere:
Db = 600 mm
Ds = 150 mm
L = 51.20 mm
r1 = 76.92 mm
r2 = 307.67 mm
r2-r1 = 230.75 mm
θ = 77.18°
Resonance at 2.45 GHz in TE013 mode, Df = 0.96
Would be a challenge to build but nevertheless interesting to test. What could be the Q of such a cavity?
Glad you found the spreadsheet useful. Using Goal Seek has made it super fast to find the exact resonance in the desired mode or not.
Interesting design.
As I understand the momenta gradient driven opposite Frustum movement and resultant Force vectors, they "PUSH" the frustum from the outer big end edge toward the vertex. Would not this design result in a lot of Force vectors pushing toward the vertex but not really helping axial Force generation so much?
Yes. Every force vector in an EmDrive with spherical ends has an inner component (yet the vector on the axis) since they all point towards the vertex. With a side wall angle > 45° this component is maybe too much. Maybe the wall would need to be less angled.
Whatever, I did that to explore "extreme shapes" and these kinds of possibilities:It is quite an interesting shape to explore for example whether there is a limit to the notion of large angles and proximity to the base. I will calculate the attenuation shape, Q and resonance when I have a chance
-
#426 by CraigPichach on 13 Aug, 2015 07:46
-
Using The Travellers spreadsheet to gauge resonance in the L-Band to compare with other modelling.
Frustrum Big Diameter 0.4335m
Frustrum Small Diameter 0.2461m
Frustrum Centre Length 0.3543m
Frequency: 932.3Hz - close to TM011 Mode? Am I using the spreadsheet as intended?
Any idea what Q you end up with given the larger frustrum at TM011?
Thoughts as to TM011 EM-Drive/Q-Thruster phenomena at TM011 (vs. say TM010)? Would go TE012 but looks hard to do in the L-Band according to this spreadsheet. -
#427 by OttO on 13 Aug, 2015 08:26
-
Please take a look at the conclusion of the below paper, it may explain why we have a decreasing force in vacuum.
When the particles in air (water,soot...) disappear the force decrease. What do you think of that? It could be an explanation for the thin shell frustums.
Lateral Chirality-sorting Optical Spin Forces in Evanescent Fields
http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.2268
"The transverse component of the spin angular momentum of evanescent waves gives rise to lateral optical forces on chiral particles, which have the unusual property of acting in a direction in which there is neither a field gradient nor wave propagation." -
#428 by Rodal on 13 Aug, 2015 11:43
-
Interesting - We'll need to wait until Imbfan gets the automated field intensity extraction software running. That won't be to long based on the progress she is making.
Please find a python file attached. It works well on my machine using the flags presented before. There remain some rough edges, but this should do the bulk of the work automagically. Enjoy!QuoteI wonder if the meep "subpixel averaging" is blending the dielectric constant at the edge of the metal with the air, also at the edge? If so, maybe I should quit using "subpixel averaging." On the other hand, the characteristic you wrote about above seems different than the one I observed.
I'm pretty sure this is exactly what is happening. The boundary lies between pixels 14 and 16. It's late otherwise I'd math it out. If you don't subpixel average, the angled sides would go wonky, I bet.
Subpixel averaging cannot be the cause of the problem because subpixel averaging should also affect the csv files, but as I show in message: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38203.msg1415788#msg1415788 the csv files do NOT have this problem: the csv files correctly show the HZz magnetic field normal to the big base to have the lowest magnitude (instead of the highest), the csv files show it to have a magnitude close to zero, and it should be zero to satisfy the boundary conditions.
So, the problem has everything to do with the routine and commands used to make the plots: it is a post-processing problem, not a processing problem. Since subpixel avearaging affects processing itself, it should affect the csv files output, and hence subpixel averaging cannot be the source of the problem.
It very much looks like the problem is due to the wrong range commands used to get the contour plots to be plotted within the same range. The plot commands are doing the opposite of what should be done. The commands are incorrectly clipping the data: they are only allowing the small HZz component to have contour plots.
The range used is the wrong range:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38203.msg1415315#msg1415315Quote from: aeroThe ranges are from field components as follows:
# hx all data range from -0.000538633 to 0.000538633. H field big end
The correct range for HXz at the big end is -0.013 to +0.013
The contour plots are being clipped at a very low value!!!!
Clipping is the complete opposite of what should be done. We are interested in the high values, not the low values ! -
#429 by rfmwguy on 13 Aug, 2015 11:49
-
Lol...I've thought about that. Tho it will be my chance to get realistic conversation going, like let's get more data before we talk about a jetsons lifestyle
Be prepared what to answer if he asks you:
Course my reply would be I will believe it when I see it personallyWill be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
Guest info to appear tomorrow abt 7:30 PM on othersideofmidnight.com website
Show is a mixture of science fiction, fantasy and science fact...I'll stay with facts and hope to still be entertaining, but understand its show biz. Will not over promise and under deliver however
Its late for sure but they archive shows. Will talk how and why I jumped in and where it could lead.
Sounds like fun...
Even money says Art brings up UFO's in the first 5 min.
Sorta the reason I started my build...
1) Whether Shawyer invented the EM Drive as a result of a close encounter of the 3rd kind with UFO's that allowed him to get access to UFO's propulsion technology?
2) Whether the EM Drive is derived from Die Glocke Wunderwaffe antigravity research from WWII ?
3) What are you going to do if you accidentally create a wormhole in your garage as a result of your EM Drive research
4) if the EM Drive works, how long will a trip to Alpha Centauri take.
-
#430 by Rodal on 13 Aug, 2015 12:40
-
Here are the two png sets scaled to the maximum range of the E and H fields for the t=0 time slice. The ranges are from field components as follows:
# ez all data range from -0.000245405 to 0.000245405. E field big end
# hx all data range from -0.000538633 to 0.000538633. H field big end
# ez all data range from -4.04811e-05 to 4.04811e-05. E field small end
# hy all data range from -0.000287974 to 0.000287974. H field small end
Please look these png's over closely to be sure that this is what you want to see as it will be considerable effort to scale the png files in this way for the general case.
Or do you need to see the side views for this t = 0 case?
...
They look like ContourPlots in Mathematica when I use PlotRange with a range smaller than the full magnitude, so the contours get cliped. I would double check whether magnitudes have not been clipped.
3) Is there some means to control the number of contour values in the contour plots? It looks to me like there are more contour levels than the number of colors available, as a result colors keep repeating themselves. What one wants is to have blue represent the lowest magnitude and red the highest magnitude, instead of red/green/blue/yellow patterns being repeated cyclically.
Yes, this whole problem was due to the fact that the command was doing the complete opposite of what is wanted: it was clipping the images at a value of +/- 0.0005 and preventing showing the actual values that go up to +/-0.013, thus it was showing contours only for the contours that had values close to zero.
Values were being clipped at 3.8% of the full range ! Anything higher than 3.8% was being clipped.
This error would have been evident if the numerical values of the contours would have been displayed, as I display them in the attachments to the message http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38203.msg1415788#msg1415788
This error was not evident to anybody because the numerical values of the contours are not being shown in the Meep image output. This shows the problem with these Meep images output: nobody can tell what they mean, or even tell when there is an error because numerical values are not being shown.
To prevent future errors and to be able to interpret the images, the best thing would be to display the numerical values of the contours
It looks like somebody realized that there was an issue with this and they wrote about this in the Wiki about the need to have numerical values shown in the Meep contour plots:
http://emdrive.wiki/MEEP#Contour_plotsQuote from: EM Drive WikiMeep adventurers may wish to consider improving h5topng to produce images which contain: - The numerical value on the contour boundaries
-
#431 by SeeShells on 13 Aug, 2015 13:04
-
http://www.enterprisemission.com/
Lol...I've thought about that. Tho it will be my chance to get realistic conversation going, like let's get more data before we talk about a jetsons lifestyle
Be prepared what to answer if he asks you:
Course my reply would be I will believe it when I see it personallyWill be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
Guest info to appear tomorrow abt 7:30 PM on othersideofmidnight.com website
Show is a mixture of science fiction, fantasy and science fact...I'll stay with facts and hope to still be entertaining, but understand its show biz. Will not over promise and under deliver however
Its late for sure but they archive shows. Will talk how and why I jumped in and where it could lead.
Sounds like fun...
Even money says Art brings up UFO's in the first 5 min.
Sorta the reason I started my build...
1) Whether Shawyer invented the EM Drive as a result of a close encounter of the 3rd kind with UFO's that allowed him to get access to UFO's propulsion technology?
2) Whether the EM Drive is derived from Die Glocke Wunderwaffe antigravity research from WWII ?
3) What are you going to do if you accidentally create a wormhole in your garage as a result of your EM Drive research
4) if the EM Drive works, how long will a trip to Alpha Centauri take.
rfmwguy this is so much right up your alley, you have a great way with words (great voice and face for radio I might add). In a email to me he said he was going to try to get Shawyer on as well.
I think I'll pass this time.
Shell -
#432 by SeeShells on 13 Aug, 2015 13:16
-
Today is going to be a busy day. I have my final 2 sheets of melamine white pressed white 3/4" 4x8' sheets being picked up and with some help start to get them laid out to cut for the remaining pieces of the stand. I had to wait for help as they just are too heavy for one old gal to move around.
Shell -
#433 by Warren Platts on 13 Aug, 2015 13:29
-
Will be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
PST? Did you mean midnight Pacific Daylight Time?
-
#434 by sghill on 13 Aug, 2015 13:41
-
I keep thinking about the idea I had a few days ago and pushed it further. I thought about Rodal and WarpTech's advice of increasing cone angle and keeping the apex as near as possible of the small end. I also kept Shawyer's high Df and concentric spherical ends to maintain a high Q, and I've ended up with this wide and shallow resonant design, with incredible large spherical ends, making the frustum almost a half-sphere:
I love this. I've been thinking about it since you first mentioned it too.
It reminds me of those Mirage 3D hologram generators they sell in expensive toy stores, but with a hemispheric "lid" inserted into the top opening to keep the reflections going.
-
#435 by SeeShells on 13 Aug, 2015 14:15
-
Yes.Will be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
PST? Did you mean midnight Pacific Daylight Time? -
#436 by rfmwguy on 13 Aug, 2015 14:40
-
Yes, PDT, 3 hours behind ESTWill be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
PST? Did you mean midnight Pacific Daylight Time? -
#437 by Flyby on 13 Aug, 2015 14:55
-
.................
How did you determine the very wide angle for this setup?
Db = 600 mm
Ds = 150 mm
L = 51.20 mm
r1 = 76.92 mm
r2 = 307.67 mm
r2-r1 = 230.75 mm
θ = 77.18°
Resonance at 2.45 GHz in TE013 mode, Df = 0.96
.....
Yes. Every force vector in an EmDrive with spherical ends has an inner component (yet the vector on the axis) since they all point towards the vertex. With a side wall angle > 45° this component is maybe too much. Maybe the wall would need to be less angled.
Whatever, I did that to explore "extreme shapes" and these kinds of possibilities:
On the assumption that an EMdrive does indeed produce a force, there is still the problem that we do not know where and how that force is produced. There are a few theories but we still have to see some tests that are specifically designed to eliminate or confirm one of the theories.
Some say the side wall contribute nothing to the created force others say just the opposite.
Some say the Q is THE factor to achieve a large force, others claim a low Q but high attenuation is the path to follow.
First step is to confirm the existence of a force that makes the EMdrive move. Once that done, the different experiments should focus in lining up with certain theories and then test them to find out what theory fits best. This is why attenuation calculations on ever wider angles would be interesting. If the attenuation keeps growing with the angle, you would end up with 90° half-cone angle, which doesn't make sense.. hence why I suspect there must be an optimal angle... somewhere...( if attenuation is indeed the key factor for force creation)
For that, a certain standardization in design might be needed, but with each type of cavity designed to maximize certain theoretical ideas....(fe, increase of angle design, increasing Q design, etc)
Too bad i don't have a real metal 3dprinter to create a few standard cavity models.
The best i could do is 3Dprint in copper filament, but I doubt the copper particles would be dense enough to give solid internal reflection. The plastic part of the filament would melt way sooner and the particles would give a very lousy Q...
Unless someone can convince me that is not the case....and that it does make sense.. -
#438 by SeeShells on 13 Aug, 2015 15:13
-
Please take a look at the conclusion of the below paper, it may explain why we have a decreasing force in vacuum.
I like this.... Thanks for the post.
When the particles in air (water,soot...) disappear the force decrease. What do you think of that? It could be an explanation for the thin shell frustums.
Lateral Chirality-sorting Optical Spin Forces in Evanescent Fields
http://arxiv.org/abs/1408.2268
"The transverse component of the spin angular momentum of evanescent waves gives rise to lateral optical forces on chiral particles, which have the unusual property of acting in a direction in which there is neither a field gradient nor wave propagation."
Several on here bend towards the evanescent decaying waves that have four distinct momenta and three distinct spins compared to the single momentum and single spin for a propagating EM wave as to providing a link to the "outside world".
It's interesting that traveling magnet can induce a action in a copper pipe.
http://video.mit.edu/watch/physics-demo-lenzs-law-with-copper-pipe-10268/
Coffee alert...
I theorise that the same is happening within the frustum with the traveling waves. We build up a DC magnetic component in the walls from the harmonic mode and when the mode collapses (they all have in every simulation) to form another mode. That switch decaying produces evanescent waves that push into the copper ~5um imparting momentum and force on the still decaying magnetic component left from the last mode.
It could be argued that the sum of the forces with mode changes and induced magnetic components in the side walls are zero with no net force using Maxwell's equations and be correct, although when one adds in the evanescent decaying waves that have four distinct momenta and three distinct spins things begin to look a little different and more complicated. As to how a standard propagating wave with a single momentum and single spin inducing in the walls a normal magnetic Dc component induced into the walls can be acted upon from a evanescent decaying wave with an extraordinary grouping of forces? I stumble.
My math falls short here and I've reached my limit with my first cup of coffee anyway.
Shell -
#439 by SeeShells on 13 Aug, 2015 15:15
-
LATE NITE, past my bedtime.
Yes, PDT, 3 hours behind ESTWill be talking NSF-1701 on art bells dark matters digital radio network tomorrow at midnight PST.
PST? Did you mean midnight Pacific Daylight Time?
