Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 5  (Read 965127 times)

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
Mark your calendars. Perhaps the next big event where our favorite topic might appear:

http://www.aiaa-scitech.org/

Quote
San Diego is beautiful in January
Haa -  January is right in the middle of the rainy season in San Diego. Bring your umbrellas.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline Eer

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 290
  • Liked: 144
  • Likes Given: 142
Here's what I think is causing the EMDrive to work: it's a bug in the functioning of the universe. 

If you have a photon bouncing between the same two points, the bug is symmetrical.  The EMDrive effect does not show up in a symmetrical resonance cavity.  Start bouncing light around a non-symmetrical cavity,and the rounding error can compound. 

I love the notion that it might work by accumulating rounding errors.  We know there are step functions in the energy levels of electron shells in atoms - and this could/would tie into them as well, wouldn't it? 

Collecting rounding errors is one of my favorite bank robbery techniques, and it would be nice to see it make an appearance in the physical/quantum world.

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
This is kind of off the wall but I find it interesting enough to share.

Most of us here know that Maxwell's equations are linear. I have recently been chasing resonance for cavities operating at higher frequency (23.87 GHz) with meep, and discovered a very interesting result from that linearity. That is:

Starting with a cavity that resonates very well at 2.48 GHz and scaling the frequency up by a factor of (23.87/2.48) while simultaneously scaling the cavity dimensions down by that same factor, I find that the resulting small cavity resonates just as well at the large cavity. That is, the meep calculated Q factors are the same within meep's limitations.

Reading McCulloch's paper posted on the previous page, and in particular starting with Equation (14), I have:

Eqn (14) from McCulloch's paper

F = -(6*P*Q*L/c) * {(1/(L+4ws)) – (1/(L+4wb))}

And from linearity of Maxwell's equations, letting the scale factor =a,

Q (f, L, ws, wb) = Q (a*f, L/a, ws/a, wb/a)

Using f ~= c/L and substituting into eqn (14) gives

F = -(6*P*Q/a*f) * {(1/(L+4ws)/a) – (1/(L+4wb)/a)}

Clearing the scale factor a, and replacing ~f with c/L gives.

F = -(6*P*Q*L/c) * {(1/(L+4ws)) – (1/(L+4wb))}

Which is exactly eqn (14). So, according to McCulloch, and a direct result of the linearity of Maxwell's equations, the force from an EM drive is constant, no matter the size of the device.

I'll let someone else check Shawyer's and other force equations. If McCulloch and my conclusions are correct there are a couple of ramifications.

    1) The force from a single EM drive is fixed, but the force from an array of EM drives is linear in the number of drives per given area of big bases of the drives.
    2) Square bases have a better form factor per given area, so someone needs to look at a Square Pyramid frustum for an EM drive effect.
 
 Is there significant mutual interference between EM drives packed closely together? Layered?
« Last Edit: 10/05/2015 06:22 PM by aero »
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline Notsosureofit

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 667
  • Liked: 717
  • Likes Given: 1407
"Appendix 1

Proof that scaling dimensions inversely proportional to frequency keeps the thrust invariant:

Suppose that the thrust at frequency f1, and dimensions L1, Ds1, and Db1 is

NT1=2PQL1(2πf1)3(cX)2(1Ds21−1Db21)

then, at frequency f2 a multiple of frequency f1

f2=nf1

where the frequency ratio

n=f2f1

can be any irrational number (not equal to zero). Scaling dimensions to be inversely proportional to the frequency ration n:

L2=L1n

Ds2=Ds1n

Db2=Db1n

and substituting, we get the thrust for frequency f2 and dimensions L2, Ds2, and Db2 to be:

NT2=2PQL1(2πf1n)3(cX)2(1(Ds1n)2−1(Db1n)2)

and since the factor of n3 occurs both in the numerator and the denominator, it cancels out, leaving

NT2=NT1

If the mode shape is kept invariant, for constant quality factor and input power, the thrust force is invariant, independent of frequency when the diameter and the length of the cavity are both scaled to change inversely proportional to the frequency ratio n."

As Rodal noted for the notsosureofit Hypotheses


Offline tchernik

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 634
...
Which is exactly eqn (14). So, according to McCulloch, and a direct result of the linearity of Maxwell's equations, the force from an EM drive is constant, no matter the size of the device.

I'll let someone else check Shawyer's and other force equations. If McCulloch and my conclusions are correct there are a couple of ramifications.

    1) The force from a single EM drive is fixed, but the force from an array of EM drives is linear in the number of drives per given area of big bases of the drives.
    2) Square bases have a better form factor per given area, so someone needs to look at a Square Pyramid frustum for an EM drive effect.
 
 Is there significant mutual interference between EM drives packed closely together? Layered?

Interesting bit of data. Raise the frequency, make it inverse proportionally smaller and get the same thrust per power (if it really exists, which seem more likely experiment after experiment). That would certainly help to make them into arrays, for multiplying the thrust.

Could we have infrared cavities (up to 1 mm sized)?

I imagine visible light cavities would be quite microscopic and possibly unfeasible (visible light having a wavelength in the few hundred nanometers).

Offline glennfish

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
  • Liked: 283
  • Likes Given: 177
...
Which is exactly eqn (14). So, according to McCulloch, and a direct result of the linearity of Maxwell's equations, the force from an EM drive is constant, no matter the size of the device.

I'll let someone else check Shawyer's and other force equations. If McCulloch and my conclusions are correct there are a couple of ramifications.

    1) The force from a single EM drive is fixed, but the force from an array of EM drives is linear in the number of drives per given area of big bases of the drives.
    2) Square bases have a better form factor per given area, so someone needs to look at a Square Pyramid frustum for an EM drive effect.
 
 Is there significant mutual interference between EM drives packed closely together? Layered?

Interesting bit of data. Raise the frequency, make it inverse proportionally smaller and get the same thrust per power (if it really exists, which seem more likely experiment after experiment). That would certainly help to make them into arrays, for multiplying the thrust.

Could we have infrared cavities (up to 1 mm sized)?

I imagine visible light cavities would be quite microscopic and possibly unfeasible (visible light having a wavelength in the few hundred nanometers).

It's well within the range of MEMS technology.  Just for jollies, taking an arbitrary EM specification and scaling it for a commercial laser bar made by OSRAM at 802 nm, with each frustrum at about 1 x 2 micro meters, the bar sized at 10mm x .125 mm, 25 emitters at a total of 60w per bar... you could build a 1 meter x 1 meter array that would (assuming any of this is real and scales) generate about 978 newtons.  The minor gotcha, besides cost, is you'd be pumping about 3 megawatts into that one square meter.  You'd have to dissapate 2.5 million kilocalories per hour from that 1 square meter.

« Last Edit: 10/05/2015 08:57 PM by glennfish »

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
Ok - Now that we have confirmation that McCulloch's equation satisfies that constraint, what is the Figure of Merit, FM?

F = -(6*P*Q*L/c) * {(1/(L+4ws)) – (1/(L+4wb))}  McCulloch - eqn (14)

F is proportional to FM = L/(L+4ws) - L/(L+4wb)

For lack of better math skills, I threw this into my spreadsheet program with the constraints that wb =<2, ws =< 1 and L=1. The results are plotted in the attached image.

There was a discussion on thread 3 about the thrust of the cavity increasing as the frustum became more pointy. I think this data just illustrates the same thing. Difference is that in this case, L is constrained to a constant, =1, not allowed to go to infinity, and wb is constrained to be less than or equal to 2 L. Of course ws is constrained to be less than wb.

This gives me hope for the Yang-Shell 6 degree model.

Edit - I suppose I should mention that the horizontal axis is wb, and the colored lines are ws, with the figure of merit on the vertical axis.
« Last Edit: 10/05/2015 08:54 PM by aero »
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
...
Which is exactly eqn (14). So, according to McCulloch, and a direct result of the linearity of Maxwell's equations, the force from an EM drive is constant, no matter the size of the device.

I'll let someone else check Shawyer's and other force equations. If McCulloch and my conclusions are correct there are a couple of ramifications.

    1) The force from a single EM drive is fixed, but the force from an array of EM drives is linear in the number of drives per given area of big bases of the drives.
    2) Square bases have a better form factor per given area, so someone needs to look at a Square Pyramid frustum for an EM drive effect.
 
 Is there significant mutual interference between EM drives packed closely together? Layered?

Interesting bit of data. Raise the frequency, make it inverse proportionally smaller and get the same thrust per power (if it really exists, which seem more likely experiment after experiment). That would certainly help to make them into arrays, for multiplying the thrust.

Could we have infrared cavities (up to 1 mm sized)?

I imagine visible light cavities would be quite microscopic and possibly unfeasible (visible light having a wavelength in the few hundred nanometers).
Interesting...from a practicality standpoint, huge amounts of RF energy are more easily generated and understood up to UHF bands, or about 450 MHz. From there, the stuff gets more "exotic" and cumbersome to work with (the magic of microwaves). I know there are 100kW mags out there, but from a realistic standpoint, I believe arrays should be as low a frequency as practical in your sims.

If there is a way to scale down the frustum dimensions, using a lower frequency, I think this would not need as many "discoveries" as microwave freqs and above.

Another way to visualize this is with a single RF source, with multiple frequency multipliers along the array, so the source power could be low freq and delivered to each individual element (frustum) multiplied up; its sort of like a sprinkler system, where the nozzles feed higher freqs off the main feed.

Weird? Yep, I think so... :o

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
But why stop now, I'm on a roll ... We have all of these different cavities already. Here:
                                                                Normalized
                        Length      Big dia     Small dia.    L      wb          ws      ~FM
  Shawyer Demo      0.187       0.28       0.14921       1      1.5         0.8     -0.095
  Shawyer flt.         0.1386      0.2314     0.1257        1      1.67        0.92    -0.088
  rfmwguy              9.91 in.   11.01 in.ID 6.25 in ID    1      1.11        0.63    -0.1
  Yang-Shell           0.24        0.201      0.1492        1      0.8375      0.62    -0.052
  SeeShell CE2      0.1634      0.2950     0.1600        1      1.8         0.98    -0.08

Well now - isn't that interesting? While the normalized cavity dimensions are all over the grid, the figure of merit is very clustered. And yes, the Yang-Shell model is an outlier, unfortunately, not to the high side.

The highest FM calculated in the grid is -0.6 for L=1, wb = 2 and ws = 0.1, but there are other candidates. For example,
L = 1, wb = 1.0, ws = 0.1 gives FM = -0.5, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.2 gives FM = -0.4, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.3 gives FM = -0.3.

There are other candidates, I'll just attach my spreadsheet for those interested.
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
But why stop now, I'm on a roll ... We have all of these different cavities already. Here:
                                                                Normalized
                        Length      Big dia     Small dia.    L      wb          ws      ~FM
  Shawyer Demo      0.187       0.28       0.14921       1      1.5         0.8     -0.095
  Shawyer flt.         0.1386      0.2314     0.1257        1      1.67        0.92    -0.088
  rfmwguy              9.91 in.   11.01 in.ID 6.25 in ID    1      1.11        0.63    -0.1
  Yang-Shell           0.24        0.201      0.1492        1      0.8375      0.62    -0.052
  SeeShell CE2      0.1634      0.2950     0.1600        1      1.8         0.98    -0.08

Well now - isn't that interesting? While the normalized cavity dimensions are all over the grid, the figure of merit is very clustered. And yes, the Yang-Shell model is an outlier, unfortunately, not to the high side.

The highest FM calculated in the grid is -0.6 for L=1, wb = 2 and ws = 0.1, but there are other candidates. For example,
L = 1, wb = 1.0, ws = 0.1 gives FM = -0.5, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.2 gives FM = -0.4, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.3 gives FM = -0.3.

There are other candidates, I'll just attach my spreadsheet for those interested.

Actually mine moved up to 10.2 in. Length from 9.91


Offline graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 773
Here's what I think is causing the EMDrive to work: it's a bug in the functioning of the universe. 

If you have a photon bouncing between the same two points, the bug is symmetrical.  The EMDrive effect does not show up in a symmetrical resonance cavity.  Start bouncing light around a non-symmetrical cavity,and the rounding error can compound. 

I love the notion that it might work by accumulating rounding errors.  We know there are step functions in the energy levels of electron shells in atoms - and this could/would tie into them as well, wouldn't it? 

Collecting rounding errors is one of my favorite bank robbery techniques, and it would be nice to see it make an appearance in the physical/quantum world.

Not to diminish the Eer idea or SteveD response at all (seriously - I think that might be interesting to examine) but I can also see some excellent science fiction plotlines developing out of this concept.    "Cap'n - We canna go to warp - we have a rounding error in the dilithium crystals and the emdrive thrusters won't ignite". 

Sorry  - long day dealing with in-laws - so my thinking cap is about 20 degrees off reality.

Herman
EMdrive - finally - microwaves are good for something other than heating ramen noodles and leftover pizza ;-)

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
But why stop now, I'm on a roll ... We have all of these different cavities already. Here:
                                                                Normalized
                        Length      Big dia     Small dia.    L      wb          ws      ~FM
  Shawyer Demo      0.187       0.28       0.14921       1      1.5         0.8     -0.095
  Shawyer flt.         0.1386      0.2314     0.1257        1      1.67        0.92    -0.088
  rfmwguy              9.91 in.   11.01 in.ID 6.25 in ID    1      1.11        0.63    -0.1
  Yang-Shell           0.24        0.201      0.1492        1      0.8375      0.62    -0.052
  SeeShell CE2      0.1634      0.2950     0.1600        1      1.8         0.98    -0.08

Well now - isn't that interesting? While the normalized cavity dimensions are all over the grid, the figure of merit is very clustered. And yes, the Yang-Shell model is an outlier, unfortunately, not to the high side.

The highest FM calculated in the grid is -0.6 for L=1, wb = 2 and ws = 0.1, but there are other candidates. For example,
L = 1, wb = 1.0, ws = 0.1 gives FM = -0.5, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.2 gives FM = -0.4, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.3 gives FM = -0.3.

There are other candidates, I'll just attach my spreadsheet for those interested.

Actually mine moved up to 10.2 in. Length from 9.91

Ok - I remember that now. Just an older data list not totally updated.

 NSF-1701              10.2 in.   11.01 in.ID 6.25 in ID    1      1.08       0.613    -0.1-

That did increase the magnitude of FM a little bit but I need a better method of interpreting the data in order to read it more closely. Maybe  10 times as many rows and columns ... Or a more efficient presentation. 

The point I get from the data table is that the FM is quite sensitive to bw, not so much to sw. FM is just very small when sw/L gets into the range we have been working with. It seems to show that the frustums need to be more pointy. Didn't we already conclude that?
Retired, working interesting problems

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3101
  • Likes Given: 2668
But why stop now, I'm on a roll ... We have all of these different cavities already. Here:
                                                                Normalized
                        Length      Big dia     Small dia.    L      wb          ws      ~FM
  Shawyer Demo      0.187       0.28       0.14921       1      1.5         0.8     -0.095
  Shawyer flt.         0.1386      0.2314     0.1257        1      1.67        0.92    -0.088
  rfmwguy              9.91 in.   11.01 in.ID 6.25 in ID    1      1.11        0.63    -0.1
  Yang-Shell           0.24        0.201      0.1492        1      0.8375      0.62    -0.052
  SeeShell CE2      0.1634      0.2950     0.1600        1      1.8         0.98    -0.08

Well now - isn't that interesting? While the normalized cavity dimensions are all over the grid, the figure of merit is very clustered. And yes, the Yang-Shell model is an outlier, unfortunately, not to the high side.

The highest FM calculated in the grid is -0.6 for L=1, wb = 2 and ws = 0.1, but there are other candidates. For example,
L = 1, wb = 1.0, ws = 0.1 gives FM = -0.5, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.2 gives FM = -0.4, and
L = 1, wb = 1.4, ws = 0.3 gives FM = -0.3.

There are other candidates, I'll just attach my spreadsheet for those interested.

Actually mine moved up to 10.2 in. Length from 9.91

Ok - I remember that now. Just an older data list not totally updated.

 NSF-1701              10.2 in.   11.01 in.ID 6.25 in ID    1      1.08       0.613    -0.1-

That did increase the magnitude of FM a little bit but I need a better method of interpreting the data in order to read it more closely. Maybe  10 times as many rows and columns ... Or a more efficient presentation. 

The point I get from the data table is that the FM is quite sensitive to bw, not so much to sw. FM is just very small when sw/L gets into the range we have been working with. It seems to show that the frustums need to be more pointy. Didn't we already conclude that?

Not sure if it was a conclusion rather that it may be an interesting thing to look at, I remember some of it but not all my search function is about as bad as this sites. It was one reason that lead me to make the Yang-Shell so that I could test the theory with different inserts down the cavity.

Was in-town today working with the water jet cutters getting the final pieces cut and to make sure that they got the curf cut correctly this time for the DXF file.

Other than that I'm working to get some PC-Lab200 Software installed and working on my XP system so I can have a Oscope to monitor the frequency for the power on the inverter driving the magnetron.

I just may get a cookie and a cup of decaf instead. ;)

Shell

Offline JonathanD

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 219
  • Liked: 190
  • Likes Given: 73
Go ahead and pollute my punch bowl but it better be something tasty.

I think he was referring how to get the heat generated by the magnetron away from the frustum.

If the power supply and the magnetron are lets say 1 meter away and the RF is fed via coax to either antennas or a waveguide the only heat you would be dealing with would be the heat from the actions in the frustum.

You are correct Shell, I was only trying to think of ways to remove as much heat from the immediate site of the test as possible.  Frustum will obviously still get hot, but presumably not as hot as the magnetron itself?  I put a question mark because I honestly have no idea and am not qualified to make any remark on the topic.  I also was wondering then if you do move the magnetron away and you transfer the output via conduit, at that point you'd have the magnetron fixed stationary on to something, but then there would be some weight to the conduit itself, do you suspend that some way to prevent that from interfering with these very minute measurements of movement?

Thanks again for entertaining the layman questions.
« Last Edit: 10/06/2015 02:20 AM by JonathanD »

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3101
  • Likes Given: 2668
Go ahead and pollute my punch bowl but it better be something tasty.

I think he was referring how to get the heat generated by the magnetron away from the frustum.

If the power supply and the magnetron are lets say 1 meter away and the RF is fed via coax to either antennas or a waveguide the only heat you would be dealing with would be the heat from the actions in the frustum.

You are correct Shell, I was only trying to think of ways to remove as much heat from the immediate site of the test as possible.  Frustum will obviously still get hot, but presumably not as hot as the magnetron itself?  I put a question mark because I honestly have no idea and am not qualified to make any remark on the topic.  I also was wondering then if you do move the magnetron away and you transfer the output via conduit, at that point you'd have the magnetron fixed stationary on to something, but then there would be some weight to the conduit itself, do you suspend that some way to prevent that from interfering with these very minute measurements of movement?

Thanks again for entertaining the layman questions.
???
You are far from a layman. Anyone here disagree? No? See. ;)

One time I entertained of putting the magnetron onto the top of the frustum  with dual waveguide injectors although the weight, costs and the logistics of doing so killed that idea. Now I'm doing a magnetron into a waveguide to antenna in the center section of the test stand and then run coax out to antennas on the top small plate. Or I can do antennas to waveguide into the frustum. Mainly I'm looking to remove as much heat from the frustum and allow two methods to test. Controlled TE xx mode through the top small plate with antennas or highly symmetrical waveguides injecting into the side walls. I'm building for both options.

I believe I can ramp up the inverter to run the magnetron up to 2 KW although that will be further down the line. If it doesn't all sync and give me a great SWR it will kill the test with heat. That process will be a slower one but could allow for a respectable input of power into the frustum after it's "tuned up".

I so wanted to have this fired up this week for a birthday present to me but I don't think I'll make it. dang!

Shell
« Last Edit: 10/06/2015 02:48 AM by SeeShells »

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
Go ahead and pollute my punch bowl but it better be something tasty.

I think he was referring how to get the heat generated by the magnetron away from the frustum.

If the power supply and the magnetron are lets say 1 meter away and the RF is fed via coax to either antennas or a waveguide the only heat you would be dealing with would be the heat from the actions in the frustum.

You are correct Shell, I was only trying to think of ways to remove as much heat from the immediate site of the test as possible.  Frustum will obviously still get hot, but presumably not as hot as the magnetron itself?  I put a question mark because I honestly have no idea and am not qualified to make any remark on the topic.  I also was wondering then if you do move the magnetron away and you transfer the output via conduit, at that point you'd have the magnetron fixed stationary on to something, but then there would be some weight to the conduit itself, do you suspend that some way to prevent that from interfering with these very minute measurements of movement?

Thanks again for entertaining the layman questions.
???
You are far from a layman. Anyone here disagree? No? See. ;)

One time I entertained of putting the magnetron onto the top of the frustum  with dual waveguide injectors although the weight, costs and the logistics of doing so killed that idea. Now I'm doing a magnetron into a waveguide to antenna in the center section of the test stand and then run coax out to antennas on the top small plate. Or I can do antennas to waveguide into the frustum. Mainly I'm looking to remove as much heat from the frustum and allow two methods to test. Controlled TE xx mode through the top small plate with antennas or highly symmetrical waveguides injecting into the side walls. I'm building for both options.

I believe I can ramp up the inverter to run the magnetron up to 2 KW although that will be further down the line. If it doesn't all sync and give me a great SWR it will kill the test with heat. That process will be a slower one but could allow for a respectable input of power into the frustum after it's "tuned up".

I so wanted to have this fired up this week for a birthday present to me but I don't think I'll make it. dang!

Shell

Good luck with your schedule Shell, just don't over do. Next week will be soon enough and belated birthday gifts are as common as mud.
Retired, working interesting problems

Online SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3101
  • Likes Given: 2668

Offline Silversheep2011

  • Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Austraila
  • Liked: 40
  • Likes Given: 257
Forgot to mention a caution

Consider FIRE HAZARD if gets to hot!
Interesting...ok, now for the big question...interested in building one for me to test?

You know what funny enough I am,
need to do a size up first on time and effort, verses other commitments of course.
I think I can find a microwave at the junk yard or sacrifice the old one in the kitchen in the 'name of science and the common good for mankind' and argue its almost due for replacing although it works just fine.
It's going to be the digital logging gear parts -thatís the killer $ís isn't it?
Going to be thinking the next few days about it, and see if there is a simpler and better work around?

rfmwguy  most or us would probably like to know how much time and effort have you spent on project so far?
100, 500, maybe a 1000 hours?
First time builds I imagine lots of setup time and fiddling, and if you had to do a repeat and a second time now the build 1/2 that time?



Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
Forgot to mention a caution

Consider FIRE HAZARD if gets to hot!
Interesting...ok, now for the big question...interested in building one for me to test?

You know what funny enough I am,
need to do a size up first on time and effort, verses other commitments of course.
I think I can find a microwave at the junk yard or sacrifice the old one in the kitchen in the 'name of science and the common good for mankind' and argue its almost due for replacing although it works just fine.
It's going to be the digital logging gear parts -thatís the killer $ís isn't it?
Going to be thinking the next few days about it, and see if there is a simpler and better work around?

rfmwguy  most or us would probably like to know how much time and effort have you spent on project so far?
100, 500, maybe a 1000 hours?
First time builds I imagine lots of setup time and fiddling, and if you had to do a repeat and a second time now the build 1/2 that time?
Build/test/study hours would be closer to 500 rather than 1000 is my estimation. Test time about 10%, build time about 30%, the rest is research and parts chasing (rough guess).

Phase II will be about the same ratio I think. A (perhaps too) lofty goal of 100X force improvement to get it out of the noise wile require some real inventions...not outside my expertise, but right at the edge.
 

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
"Kinetic energy is conveyed from one object to another in the form of electromagnetic waves (photons)."

http://processmodeling.org/theory/physics/kinetic.htm

So, theories are emerging that support the notion that EM and KE have a direct relationship, not requiring  separate mechanisms to affect one another. This is a very interesting concept and we might be seeing this in our experiments.

Breaking this down simply, there would be no CoE violation considering the EM energy potential is injected. By this theory, it is not without a KE component. The trick would be to have the KE applied asymmetrically along an axis, thereby imbalancing the energy and generating movement due to the kinetic component.

A frustum is asymetric. The small diameter presents less surface area compared to the large diameter. The direction of movement is apparent in the direction of the small end.  This is counter-intuitive if you consider higher EM/KE on the large end. Or is it? Is the EM/KE density per square cm much higher on the small end, thereby producing movement? Shouldn't they balance? Or should they?

Pardon my theory musings...not my normal wheelhouse.
« Last Edit: 10/06/2015 02:23 PM by rfmwguy »

Tags: