Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 5  (Read 973153 times)

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
(...)
Bingo!  If Dr. White is correct in arguing that 4D+ spacetime IS the quantum vacuum and visa versa, and if gravity is an emergent force generated by the forced hydrodynamic flow of the quantum vacuum, then what these EM-Drives are, is a directional "gravity" flow generator powered by E&M fields.  The trick now is to prove this conjecture, which at a minimum will take the final marriage of Quantum Mechanics (QM) and General Relativity Theory (GRT)...
(...)
Best, Paul M.

Proving this conjecture can be done by experiment alone, I think. Just put a working thruster on a testbench in high vacuum and use accelerometers in front and in the back of the thruster. In front, you should then measure a 'suction effect', and in the back, a repulsion effect from an enclosed device in vacuum. QED.
8)
I think that was one of the first questions I asked joining here by using smoke, someone even said to use cassette tapes. I like yours.

I wonder if EW followed through using a laser interferometer in a vacuum setting?

Shell
I'm counting on you to be able to find smoke in Colorado, Shell  8)

Offline glennfish

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
  • Liked: 283
  • Likes Given: 177
(...)
Bingo!  If Dr. White is correct in arguing that 4D+ spacetime IS the quantum vacuum and visa versa, and if gravity is an emergent force generated by the forced hydrodynamic flow of the quantum vacuum, then what these EM-Drives are, is a directional "gravity" flow generator powered by E&M fields.  The trick now is to prove this conjecture, which at a minimum will take the final marriage of Quantum Mechanics (QM) and General Relativity Theory (GRT)...
(...)
Best, Paul M.

Proving this conjecture can be done by experiment alone, I think. Just put a working thruster on a testbench in high vacuum and use accelerometers in front and in the back of the thruster. In front, you should then measure a 'suction effect', and in the back, a repulsion effect from an enclosed device in vacuum. QED.
8)
I think that was one of the first questions I asked joining here by using smoke, someone even said to use cassette tapes. I like yours.

I wonder if EW followed through using a laser interferometer in a vacuum setting?

Shell

Gasp!

1.  Smoke in a vacuum means it isn't a vacuum
2.  Observed directional flow of smoke means there is observed directional flow of smoke.  Doesn't point to cause.

I think there is no disagreement that thrust is observed.  They debate focuses on why.  Smoking will only increase your risk of heart disease, cancer and stroke.

Offline SeeShells

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2380
  • Every action there's a reaction we try to grasp.
  • United States
  • Liked: 3109
  • Likes Given: 2671
(...)
Bingo!  If Dr. White is correct in arguing that 4D+ spacetime IS the quantum vacuum and visa versa, and if gravity is an emergent force generated by the forced hydrodynamic flow of the quantum vacuum, then what these EM-Drives are, is a directional "gravity" flow generator powered by E&M fields.  The trick now is to prove this conjecture, which at a minimum will take the final marriage of Quantum Mechanics (QM) and General Relativity Theory (GRT)...
(...)
Best, Paul M.

Proving this conjecture can be done by experiment alone, I think. Just put a working thruster on a testbench in high vacuum and use accelerometers in front and in the back of the thruster. In front, you should then measure a 'suction effect', and in the back, a repulsion effect from an enclosed device in vacuum. QED.
8)
I think that was one of the first questions I asked joining here by using smoke, someone even said to use cassette tapes. I like yours.

I wonder if EW followed through using a laser interferometer in a vacuum setting?

Shell

Gasp!

1.  Smoke in a vacuum means it isn't a vacuum
2.  Observed directional flow of smoke means there is observed directional flow of smoke.  Doesn't point to cause.

I think there is no disagreement that thrust is observed.  They debate focuses on why.  Smoking will only increase your risk of heart disease, cancer and stroke.

It may end up with multiple interferometer tests by rotating the frustum and measuring not only through the centerline of the frustum but across ends and sides to profile.

I remember where the gentleman on Hackaday https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive/log/26824-juday-white-experiment  measured something with their interferometer. setup and I mentioned they should position the mirror calibrated distances from the frustum to see it they can define and profile the effect.

Back to the contact cement tar-baby effect of hanging up insulation in the shop.

Shell

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3004
  • 92129
  • Liked: 801
  • Likes Given: 285
On the accelerometer space acceleration test idea, Would vacuum really be necessary?

Secured accelerometer isn't going to accelerate by conventional means, after all.

And does the basic idea under test apply to the significant difference in forces detected in air and in vacuum? That is, air filled space accelerated vs. vacuum filled space accelerated? Maybe something to do with the reach of the effect?
« Last Edit: 11/02/2015 07:04 PM by aero »
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline CW

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 188
  • Germany
  • Liked: 141
  • Likes Given: 51
On the accelerometer space acceleration test idea, Would vacuum really be necessary?

Secured accelerometer isn't going to accelerate by conventional means, after all.

And does the basic idea under test apply to the significant difference in forces detected in air and in vacuum? That is, air filled space accelerated vs. vacuum filled space accelerated? Maybe something to do with the reach of the effect?

Vacuum isn't necessary at all for testing for a possible 'space shift' going on in front and in the back of the drive. I think there should be some detectable air current, if that's what's happening. Falling steam from a liquid nitrogen vessel would do nicely for illustrative purposes and be completely harmless for bystanders to breathe in. Or maybe use ultrasonic for vaporizing water and use that. Probably easier to handle for DIYers ;) .
« Last Edit: 11/02/2015 07:58 PM by CW »
Reality is weirder than fiction

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9793
  • UK
  • Liked: 1887
  • Likes Given: 183
Summation article. Useful for those new posters who don't want to plough back all the way through this thread.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/nasa-eagleworks-has-tested-upgraded.html?m=1


Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • California
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 371
Summation article. Useful for those new posters who don't want to plough back all the way through this thread.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/nasa-eagleworks-has-tested-upgraded.html?m=1

I'm still waiting for someone to just heat the fustrum and compare the response to that with what is observed when RF is the driving force.    Paraphrasing Djikstra, "Testing proves the presence, not the absence of measurement errors".

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
I really hope Paul doesn't get in trouble.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nasa-latest-tests-show-physics-230112770.html
I would say they are well into peer review or it may already be completed (guessing). Wouldn't worry about the nature of this article. It lacks click-bait, grandiose titles like the first round and appears to be a balanced update only. Thanks for posting it, just some more encouraging news about this emerging technology. Hoping it can be taken seriously by many more out there. The payoff could be significant.

Offline rfmwguy

  • EmDrive Builder (retired)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2166
  • Liked: 2684
  • Likes Given: 1124
Summation article. Useful for those new posters who don't want to plough back all the way through this thread.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/11/nasa-eagleworks-has-tested-upgraded.html?m=1

I'm still waiting for someone to just heat the fustrum and compare the response to that with what is observed when RF is the driving force.    Paraphrasing Djikstra, "Testing proves the presence, not the absence of measurement errors".
Ambient heating would just cause a rise on horizontal balance beam test stands, the trick would be to simulate a mag on/off condition without actually filling it with MW energy. I suppose a suitable replacement for the frustum could be a round, cylindrical cavity, tuned for resonance but the wrong shape and firing the mag into it.

Whatever the effect is, it is not easily identifiable. Lorentz forces are simply too small to make a difference on a setup like mine. The noise floor is way over the forces potomacneuron reported in his paper, which I thought was very useful.

Offline Prober

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10313
  • Save the spin....I'm keeping you honest!
  • Nevada
  • Liked: 702
  • Likes Given: 728
Congratts to Chris & NSF

NASA institutes strict press release restrictions on the Eagleworks lab these days, engineer Paul March took to the NASA Spaceflight forum to explain the group’s findings. In essence, by utilizing an improved experimental procedure, the team managed to mitigate some of the errors from prior tests — yet still found signals of unexplained thrust.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nasa-latest-tests-show-physics-230112770.html

2017 - Everything Old is New Again.
I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. ~ by Thomas Alva Edison

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • California
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 371

...

I'm still waiting for someone to just heat the fustrum and compare the response to that with what is observed when RF is the driving force.    Paraphrasing Djikstra, "Testing proves the presence, not the absence of measurement errors".
Ambient heating would just cause a rise on horizontal balance beam test stands, the trick would be to simulate a mag on/off condition without actually filling it with MW energy. I suppose a suitable replacement for the frustum could be a round, cylindrical cavity, tuned for resonance but the wrong shape and firing the mag into it.

Whatever the effect is, it is not easily identifiable. Lorentz forces are simply too small to make a difference on a setup like mine. The noise floor is way over the forces potomacneuron reported in his paper, which I thought was very useful.

I'm thinking about heating tests that can done in a vacuum chamber.   Thermal camera imaging has shown what part of the fustrum heats up the most.   So apply some mylar heating elements to that surface and run a test with the same power level.   There also might be heating of the feedline from reflected power.   If the response of the system from heating is known it can be subtracted from the test results, just like the Lorentz force error was subtracted out a year ago.   Any heat applied to the fustrum will cause movement that is at present not distinguished from a force produced by RF energy.   When it is quantified the em-drive force will be known to a higher precision.

Offline ThinkerX

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 335
  • Alaska
  • Liked: 126
  • Likes Given: 63
Quote
I'm thinking about heating tests that can done in a vacuum chamber.   Thermal camera imaging has shown what part of the fustrum heats up the most.   So apply some mylar heating elements to that surface and run a test with the same power level.   There also might be heating of the feedline from reflected power.   If the response of the system from heating is known it can be subtracted from the test results, just like the Lorentz force error was subtracted out a year ago.   Any heat applied to the fustrum will cause movement that is at present not distinguished from a force produced by RF energy.   When it is quantified the em-drive force will be known to a higher precision.

Rotary test in a vacuum chamber.  Thermal effects are unlikely to result in rotary motion.

Offline TheTraveller

Rotary test in a vacuum chamber.  Thermal effects are unlikely to result in rotary motion.

Ditto
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Online Bob Woods

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Salem, Oregon USA
  • Liked: 427
  • Likes Given: 1337
Rotary test in a vacuum chamber.  Thermal effects are unlikely to result in rotary motion.

Ditto

Offline Chrochne

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 197
  • Liked: 133
  • Likes Given: 281
Yet another article written about recent news on the EmDrive.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/researchers-conduct-successful-new-tests-of-emdrive/

What I like about those new articles is that when you compare them to the first news about the EmDrive, these new are more calm and less "hype". They are also trying to explain what is currently going on in a language that "normal" readers will understand.

What this means to us? It means that thanks to people like Rfmwguy, Paul March, Dr. Rodal, See-Shell, moderators of the NSF and many others here the EmDrive is starting to get step by step on its credibility.

See-Shells and TTs coming tests may yet push us further. Of course same goes for the NASA EW.

I hope this restores some of your motivation and hope for further testing.

Of course when offical NASA paper is out, there will be a lot of criticism as usual. My advice is, that it is good listen to it as they provide some interesting "mirrior", but I also advice ignore offensive criticism as we see from some people at the reddit forum.

NSF forum is a shining example that a debate and share of knowledge can be civil :). It also means that this little forum can get into the books as one of the places where scientists, engineers and critics pushed forward the technology that may help us reach the stars.

« Last Edit: 11/03/2015 05:37 AM by Chrochne »

Offline zen-in

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • California
  • Liked: 472
  • Likes Given: 371
Quote
I'm thinking about heating tests that can done in a vacuum chamber.   Thermal camera imaging has shown what part of the fustrum heats up the most.   So apply some mylar heating elements to that surface and run a test with the same power level.   There also might be heating of the feedline from reflected power.   If the response of the system from heating is known it can be subtracted from the test results, just like the Lorentz force error was subtracted out a year ago.   Any heat applied to the fustrum will cause movement that is at present not distinguished from a force produced by RF energy.   When it is quantified the em-drive force will be known to a higher precision.

Rotary test in a vacuum chamber.  Thermal effects are unlikely to result in rotary motion.

You have my blessing to build a rotary test system and test it in a vacuum.  No one has done that yet.    I'm sure if you built it you would attract the biggest crowds at a Makers Faire.   

I am more interested in Science and finding answers.   Herein lies the crux of my reasoning:   Let's say you have two bells, one made of bronze and the other of Lead.   You will always know from the sound which bell was struck no matter what you hit it with or how hard you hit it.   Each bell has a distinctive sound.   

The same concept applies to the EW test article on their torsion pendulum, or whatever apparatus they are now using.   If momentum is transferred to the fustrum by lightly tapping it, energizing the capacitive thrust calibrator, etc, the graph of it's movement wrt time will have the same shape.   It doesn't matter what caused the increase in momentum, the impulse response will have the same shape.   It will only differ in its peak value, according to the magnitude of the momentum added.   And this phenomena is reversable.  If you hit it from the opposite direction the system response is inverted but otherwise the same.

In real world mechanical systems nothing is purely one thing or the other.  The em-drive being tested by EW in 2014 showed the effects of many different driving functions:  Lorentz force from the powerful NIB damping magnet, thermal effects from air currents, a force from the capacitive force calibrater, and possibly a new mysterious force.   The response to the Lorentz force has the same shape as the response seen for the capacitive force calibration device.   These responses were both underdamped step responses with a relatively fast rise time.   This is the step response of the torque pendulum / fustrum system.   When momentum is imparted to the pendulum this response will be seen.

Earlier Paul March shared the following with us:
...

However these new plus and minus thrust signatures are still contaminated by thermally induced TP center of gravity (cg) zero-thrust baseline shifts brought on by the expansion of the copper frustum and aluminum RF amp and its heat sink when heated by the RF, even though these copper and aluminum cg shifts are now fighting each other.  (Sadly these TP cg baseline shifts are ~3X larger in-vacuum than in-air due to the better insulating qualities of the vacuum, so the in-vacuum thrust runs look very thermally contaminated whereas the in-air run look very impulsive.)

...

Best, Paul March

The EW team have recognized there are thermal effects in their data which may be from the change of CG of the fustrum.    These thermal effects are identified by their slow rise time and by the fact they continue climbing after the RF power is switched off.    So it would make sense to measure the response of the pendulum and fustrum as their temperature rises and without an RF input. 

There are two different thermal effects.  At atmospheric pressure heat is shed quickly from the fustrum, amplifier and other metal parts by convective air currents.  In a vacuum no convective cooling occurs so the metal parts get hotter and expand more.   Any attempt to model these effects or to cancel them without taking actual measurements first would just be a wild guess.   A lot of times complex effects cannot be characterized emperically unless measurements are done first.  For example the Wright brothers were the first to build a wind tunnel.   Their early achievements in flight prove the value of this step.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2015 06:20 AM by zen-in »

Offline TheTraveller

Yet another article written about recent news on the EmDrive.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/researchers-conduct-successful-new-tests-of-emdrive/

What I like about those new articles is that when you compare them to the first news about the EmDrive, these new are more calm and less "hype". They are also trying to explain what is currently going on in a language that "normal" readers will understand.

What this means to us? It means that thanks to people like Rfmwguy, Paul March, Dr. Rodal, See-Shell, moderators of the NSF and many others here the EmDrive is starting to get step by step on its credibility.

See-Shells and TTs coming tests may yet push us further. Of course same goes for the NASA EW.

I hope this restores some of your motivation and hope for further testing.

Of course when offical NASA paper is out, there will be a lot of criticism as usual. My advice is, that it is good listen to it as they provide some interesting "mirrior", but I also advice ignore offensive criticism as we see from some people at the reddit forum.

NSF forum is a shining example that a debate and share of knowledge can be civil :). It also means that this little forum can get into the books as one of the places where scientists, engineers and critics pushed forward the technology that may help us reach the stars.

Least we forget

None of this would be happening without Roger Shawyer's pioneering work, starting before his 1st EMDrive patent (attached) in 1988, and dedication to survive the shite that was heaped on him personally and his experimental data.

"Off with his head, this is IMPOSSIBLE" was the cry heard far and wide. A cry that still echoes today despite multiple replications, 4 UK patents and positive experimental results.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2015 06:22 AM by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9793
  • UK
  • Liked: 1887
  • Likes Given: 183
I am hoping these recent articles represent the beginning of a sober headed analysis in the wider public realm, rather than the more sensationalist aspect that has often bedevilled the topic's wider coverage so far.
« Last Edit: 11/03/2015 06:25 AM by Star One »

Offline mwvp

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 263
  • Coincidence? I think Not!
  • Liked: 173
  • Likes Given: 31
Any/all:

... If it were possible to actually impart those particle pairs with a unidirectional impulse while they exist.. what would happen to the impulse...at the moment when the borrowed energy is returned to the quantum vacuum?
...
...it seems likely that this would lead to spacetime locally gaining momentum itself...accelerated...A body in front of the thruster nozzle would then feel a repulsive force coming from the nozzle, caused by the spacetime volume that's being moved by the thruster. Since matter is embedded in spacetime, the moving spacetime would then act like a volume of water that's flowing down a river, as seen by the embedded matter.
...
BTW, IF QV spacetime flow is the root cause of the phenomenon we call gravity generated by mass, IMO there has to be at least one more spatial dimension beyond our normally perceived 3D universe to provide this QV gravity flow a "drain" back into the universal QV reservoir.

Could the QV plasma frequency/temperature gradient be the spacetime "flow", the result of an increase in space permitivity/permiability? Similar to Hal Puthoff's PV theory. No additional dimensions are required. Although, perhaps the QV energy/temperature could be described as "spin noise" of the "inner dimensions" Sach's refers to in his quaternion theory?

Some interesting papers:

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/221665621_Fluidic_Electrodynamics_On_parallels_between_electromagnetic_andfluidic_inertia
Fluidic Electrodynamics: On parallels between electromagnetic and fluidic inertia
Alexandre A. Martins

"Maxwell (1861) was the first to suggest that the magnetic vector potential A, behaves like a moving
medium, playing the velocity of a space flow around a magnetic field line (Siegel, 2002). Thus, a vector
potential circular “velocity” pattern around a solenoid can be seen (compare Figure 1.(a) with Figure 1.(b)
) to be equivalent to the water velocity in Fizeau’s experiment of dragging light (Cook, Fearn and
Millonni, 1995). The Aharonov-Bohm (AB) effect (1959) is the corresponding effect in electromagnetism
consisting in the production of the phase shift between two electron waves."

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/226985601_Ether_drift_experiments_and_electromagnetic_momentum
Ether drift experiments and electromagnetic momentum
G. Spavieri1,a , V. Guerra2,3,b, R. De Abreu2 , and G.T. Gillies4,c

Abstract. Propagation of Aharonov-Bohm matter waves and light waves in moving media is characterized by the interaction electromagnetic momentum. Thus, recent models of light propagation in moving rarefied media justify and call for an optical experiment of the Mascart-Jamin type, capable of testing the modern interpretations of ether drift experiments.

Tags: