Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 5  (Read 964906 times)

Offline graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 773
Yep, think the heart of the thing is common componentry, but controlled stuff for space apps? It would indeed be restricted I'll bet. And guess what? There's no way for me to test for cosmic radation in my humble house ;)
Okay we can negotiate : no neutron reactor in your garage  ;) ;), we would just be happy to see installed a thermal vacuum chamber.  :) :).

Darn.  Say - do you know if Ebay will allow me to list my neutron reactor?   It warms up the garage very nicely in winter heh heh.

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

Offline graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 773
Thought stream alert - 20 years ago I would help specify filter designs for use in radar applications where group time delay distortion of pulses were unacceptable. These were LC filters, mainly IF range. Gaussian topologies were the best, not for shape factors but for lack of pulse distortion called ringing and overshoot.

Time domain distortion...ringing...never once considered any kinetic energy associated with this type of em pulse distortion. Who would have? Indeed.

Who would have ever noticed or measured for KE? Not me, for sure. Too bad, I might have been on to something.

/end thought stream alert

Keep up the thought streams.   This is fascinating.   Never considered this (KE) either.   and have built, tested, rebuilt, retested ad nauseum more filters than I care to remember.   Controlling time distortion of pulses was a bitch.

Now I have something else to think about all day.  Those chickens keep running by. ;)   Darned ADD chickens.   :)
EMdrive - finally - microwaves are good for something other than heating ramen noodles and leftover pizza ;-)

Offline VAXHeadroom

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 206
  • Whereever you go, there you are. -- BB
  • Baltimore MD
  • Liked: 285
  • Likes Given: 168
...

I consider the EMDrive issue to be on the cusp of moving from Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 1 to 2. 
Herman

It is my belief the em-drive is not yet at TRL1.   The science has not been demonstrated.   No consistently repeatable results have occurred.

Concepts start at TRL 1, so yes, EMDrive is TRL 1 or maybe 2 since there have been devices built.
(I deal with this every day - this is my professional - and informed - opinion)

The NIAC program solicits proposals that are at the TRL1 or TRL2 level at the time of awarding a phase 1 study.   However one of the eliminating criteria for a proposal is:

"6. Not technically credible. Conflicts with established physics or engineering principles, without acknowledging this and offering a sufficiently plausible defense."

So it might be possible to consider any new concept to be at TRL1.   But this is just semantics.   If someone invents a device "A" that they claim has certain properties, despite violating generally accepted laws of physics, and this device "A" is assigned a TRL1 what happens after "A" is proven to be null, beyond any reasonable doubt?    Is it still at TRL1?   If so what is the value of using this TRL system if it continues to assign promise to a device that has been proven null?    At this point device "A" should be at TRL0, or at least not considered to be at TRL1.   And device "A", of course, has never been at TRL1.   The inventor only wanted to believe it was at TRL1.

The NIAC solicitation allows an organization to propose very speculative ideas and they very generously assign any idea a TRL1 but the reality is that any proposed investigation that appears to violate generally accepted laws of physics, for which no credible defense is offered, is rejected and therefore not considered to be at TRL1.

OK, but there is no "TRL 0".  What you're describing is a non-viable idea.  Any 'viable' idea is TRL 1. Any non-viable idea is simply not credible.

Edit: Add NASA TRL definitions: http://esto.nasa.gov/files/trl_definitions.pdf
And PLEASE let's not argue about this stuff, it's right here and pretty unambiguous.
« Last Edit: 10/15/2015 12:09 PM by VAXHeadroom »
Emory Stagmer
  Executive Producer, Public Speaker UnTied Music - www.untiedmusic.com

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3101
  • Likes Given: 2668
That's a good idea and time permitting I might do one. Here is another from MIT that reconstructs acoustics wave patterns from an object through glass with video of that remote object. Video patterns are simply vibrations and movement of a surface. I was thinking it would be a great way to monitor movement of not only movements in air, but through a vacuum chamber window.

Fascinating video, they did a beautiful job.
 


Shell


Possibly an actual constructive contribution to make.  ::)
I wonder if an image-based method for measuring distance might be an easy way to get some cheap precision?

Perhaps a highish-megapixel digital camera, maybe 16MP+, coupled to a macro lens whose optical properties were well described. Combined with an optical scale for reference this can easily provide inexpensive, relatively high precision (1:3000) linear movement measurement.

Optionally, and way more precise, you could use the linear optical sensor array bar off a flatbed scanner. These typically provide a purely linear resolution of 300+ pixels per inch, up to a claimed 1200 ppi non-interpolated (!) and a very high sampling rate, well over 1khz.
Here are some examples of this sort of thing.


http://spritesmods.com/?art=lineccdts



Some folks make a nifty spectrometer out of one.


Just throwing this out there. Hope it helps.

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1385
  • United States
  • Liked: 1535
  • Likes Given: 2262
None the less if NASA cannot replicate the experiment then they cannot nullify it with credibility. So Podkeltnov may be wrong. But NASA's replication effort was not sufficient to prove it one way or another.

True, but this does underline the importance of DIY efforts.  Each new EMDrive unit being tested out there brings us closer to a definitive answer on whether the thrust effect is real and how it's being generated if it is real.
Bring the thunder!

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3101
  • Likes Given: 2668
None the less if NASA cannot replicate the experiment then they cannot nullify it with credibility. So Podkeltnov may be wrong. But NASA's replication effort was not sufficient to prove it one way or another.

True, but this does underline the importance of DIY efforts.  Each new EMDrive unit being tested out there brings us closer to a definitive answer on whether the thrust effect is real and how it's being generated if it is real.

Not my discussion but I'd like to add something.

By luck or planning, na it's luck  ::) that builders who are posting here each have a little different design. Mr. t's follows Shawyers guidance in a rotary device and self contained, rfmwguy does a little of NASA's EagleWorks with a modified mesh screen and I'm going a little of Shawyer, EagleWorks and the Chinese and my own.

Each will add to the gestalt of pooled data that has went before. It's all good data.

Shell


Offline SeeShells

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

I believe we are at a cusp of our growth on this ball of mud and if we don't evolve from this tiny seed called earth we may perish and never know the glorious heights that await us, or the true challenges of a universe that has no bounds. Yes, I dream, for humanity. -Michelle Broyles

It might look as if someone else had do something like this, way before us. This is just one small step, isn't it?
Little off topic but it's the driving reason we are all here.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/
« Last Edit: 10/15/2015 02:36 PM by SeeShells »

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1385
  • United States
  • Liked: 1535
  • Likes Given: 2262
It might look as if someone else had do something like this, way before us. This is just one small step, isn't it?
Little off topic but it's the driving reason we are all here.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

Cross-referenced to the last few pages of this thread:  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=16581.0  One of the authors of the paper being cited in The Atlantic is actively discussing the Kepler team findings on the thread, so hit him up with questions (read the paper first please!!! http://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.03622v1.pdf).
Bring the thunder!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9707
  • UK
  • Liked: 1850
  • Likes Given: 183
Because I choose to dream.

I believe we are at a cusp of our growth on this ball of mud and if we don't evolve from this tiny seed called earth we may perish and never know the glorious heights that await us, or the true challenges of a universe that has no bounds. Yes, I dream, for humanity. -Michelle Broyles

It might look as if someone else had do something like this, way before us. This is just one small step, isn't it?
Little off topic but it's the driving reason we are all here.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

You do realise if the EM drive pans out someone on here is going need to volunteer for a trip out there too see what they are building.:)
« Last Edit: 10/15/2015 03:12 PM by Star One »

Offline SeeShells

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

I believe we are at a cusp of our growth on this ball of mud and if we don't evolve from this tiny seed called earth we may perish and never know the glorious heights that await us, or the true challenges of a universe that has no bounds. Yes, I dream, for humanity. -Michelle Broyles

It might look as if someone else had do something like this, way before us. This is just one small step, isn't it?
Little off topic but it's the driving reason we are all here.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

You do realise if the EM drive pans out someone on here is going need to volunteer for a trip out there too see what they are building.:)
And you think that's a problem?  ::)

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2367
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3101
  • Likes Given: 2668
It might look as if someone else had do something like this, way before us. This is just one small step, isn't it?
Little off topic but it's the driving reason we are all here.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

Cross-referenced to the last few pages of this thread:  http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=16581.0  One of the authors of the paper being cited in The Atlantic is actively discussing the Kepler team findings on the thread, so hit him up with questions (read the paper first please!!! http://arxiv.org/pdf/1509.03622v1.pdf).
Just read it. Very nice work. Thank you very much for linking it!
Shell

Offline tchernik

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 634
None the less if NASA cannot replicate the experiment then they cannot nullify it with credibility. So Podkeltnov may be wrong. But NASA's replication effort was not sufficient to prove it one way or another.

True, but this does underline the importance of DIY efforts.  Each new EMDrive unit being tested out there brings us closer to a definitive answer on whether the thrust effect is real and how it's being generated if it is real.

At least for me, it's an ontological question. That is, a quest towards truth and reality definition. As such, it is not free from doubt.

The more people replicate the effect in ways that go against trivial explanations, for example, showing downwards thrust against thermal buoyancy or nearly instantaneous horizontal thrust, the more I feel we are betting on reality and not just wishes.

Because the participation of many several independent experimentalists reduces the probability this is a concerted lie to zero (I know more now about the DIYers and I know they are incredible trustworthy people, but for a external observer that is new, this is also very important to realize).

Also, the fact they act independently only sharing the knowledge how to do it, ensures there is something real behind it. The question whether that reality is what we believe or hope or not is still pending to be closed, but it is undeniable there is something real there.

That's the value I see in the work of these people, risking money and probably some of their personal safety (magnetrons and such aren't innocuous toys) for elucidating the truth. My respect and admiration for them, because you work for all of humanity.

Offline Kit

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Laconic
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
...

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

SeeShells may have beat me to announcing this wonderful piece of information (in fact, just I registered to post this, I've been silently following this since Thread #2), but I feel I have some salient implications to point out for the casual reader.

This (assuming it is* a Dyson Sphere being built) strongly implies** at the very least a fusion or antimatter rocket (or an RF cavity drive, given the topic of this thread wink wink nudge nudge), either in terms of thrust mechanism (such as a direct fusion drive) or power source (such as an indirectly fusion-powered ion drive). Nuclear impulse may be less practical, but it is still a possibility. It is important to note that this would not just be affirmation of the viability of that class of technology, but that it also would have become cheap enough as to mass produce them on the scale required to construct a Dyson Sphere ;D It would be severe a blow to the pessimistic view that a post-scarcity civilization is 'impossible'.

I may be stating the obvious, but with enough observation we may be able to detect a drive signature, and it would strongly help such detection if activity were present further away from the star as it would be less drowned-out by the brightness of the star. A Dyson Sphere under construction has long been proposed as a target for identifying an alien civilization, and given that an RF cavity drive would have a specific impulse approaching infinity (which is exactly why we want one), it would be a very strong candidate for choice of propulsion for constructing one, if the effect both exists and is of magnitude as to be of practical use. If we had better architecture for space construction, we'd have far more powerful imaging capabilities (such as a system-wide radio telescope) and would be able to discern a lot more. Cue my complaints about the lack of permanent space bases, etc. As for now, hurry up James Webb (and HDST)!

*It probably isn't
**Granted you could achieve a Dyson sphere with von Neumann (self-replicating) chemical thrusters that harvest fuel from the mass that they are moving, but I'd argue that that is unreasonably inefficient given the low specific impulse (Isp) of chemical rockets. The timescales for constructing a Dyson Sphere mean that the instantaneous thrust advantage provided by chemical rockets is not very helpful.
« Last Edit: 10/15/2015 05:59 PM by Kit »
Observe often. Speak infrequently.

Offline phaseshift

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Seattle, WA
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 97
This article on Slate gives probably the most information and a nice analysis of what has been reported.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/10/14/weird_star_strange_dips_in_brightness_are_a_bit_baffling.html
"It doesn't have to be a brain storm, a drizzle will often do" - phaseshift

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
This article on Slate gives probably the most information and a nice analysis of what has been reported.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/10/14/weird_star_strange_dips_in_brightness_are_a_bit_baffling.html
First thought is a massive oort cloud/debris far away and inline with the star and us. Not dust, but chunks.

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2993
  • 92129
  • Liked: 797
  • Likes Given: 282
Maybe we've found a target for the Gravitational Focus telescope? I wonder what the resolution would be for the star at 1500 ly distance. But isn't this a different thread?
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline graybeardsyseng

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Texas, USA
  • Liked: 199
  • Likes Given: 773
Because I choose to dream.

I believe we are at a cusp of our growth on this ball of mud and if we don't evolve from this tiny seed called earth we may perish and never know the glorious heights that await us, or the true challenges of a universe that has no bounds. Yes, I dream, for humanity. -Michelle Broyles

It might look as if someone else had do something like this, way before us. This is just one small step, isn't it?
Little off topic but it's the driving reason we are all here.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2015/10/the-most-interesting-star-in-our-galaxy/410023/

You do realise if the EM drive pans out someone on here is going need to volunteer for a trip out there too see what they are building.:)

Where's the signup sheet - I volunteer.   One way you say?  No problem.  They will probably either be friendly  or tasty or looking to practice their new homo sapien with alfradeo sauce. . 

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

Offline Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 92
This article on Slate gives probably the most information and a nice analysis of what has been reported.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/10/14/weird_star_strange_dips_in_brightness_are_a_bit_baffling.html
First thought is a massive oort cloud/debris far away and inline with the star and us. Not dust, but chunks.

It's probably something mundane like that.

:D But it is also remotely possible it is a Dyson swarm. (a modification of the idea of a Dyson sphere where instead of a solid artificial shell around a star; a multitude of independently flying solar power absorber satellites are used in either a spherical configuration or a band configuration around a star by an advanced Kardashev type I civilization)
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Offline Blaine

  • Member
  • Posts: 58
  • Spring Hill, KS
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 122
This article on Slate gives probably the most information and a nice analysis of what has been reported.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/10/14/weird_star_strange_dips_in_brightness_are_a_bit_baffling.html
First thought is a massive oort cloud/debris far away and inline with the star and us. Not dust, but chunks.

It's probably something mundane like that.

:D But it is also remotely possible it is a Dyson swarm. (a modification of the idea of a Dyson sphere where instead of a solid artificial shell around a star; a multitude of independently flying solar power absorber satellites are used in either a spherical configuration or a band configuration around a star by an advanced Kardashev type I civilization)
Indeed, and if they are, that makes them superior to us.  We are type 0 civilization.  If there is something there they would easily kick our butts.
Weird Science!

Offline Tellmeagain

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 252
  • maryland
  • Liked: 153
  • Likes Given: 34
This article on Slate gives probably the most information and a nice analysis of what has been reported.


http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/10/14/weird_star_strange_dips_in_brightness_are_a_bit_baffling.html
First thought is a massive oort cloud/debris far away and inline with the star and us. Not dust, but chunks.

It's probably something mundane like that.

:D But it is also remotely possible it is a Dyson swarm. (a modification of the idea of a Dyson sphere where instead of a solid artificial shell around a star; a multitude of independently flying solar power absorber satellites are used in either a spherical configuration or a band configuration around a star by an advanced Kardashev type I civilization)

No it is not Dyson swarm. A Dyson swarm is periodic.

Tags: