-
#1240
by
Mulletron
on 04 Jan, 2016 18:38
-
Is there something similar that works for inside surfaces? It's the inside that counts ;-)
-
#1241
by
X_RaY
on 04 Jan, 2016 19:22
-
Is there something similar that works for inside surfaces? It's the inside that counts ;-)
For the inner surface: Equal if one cavity or two of them directly connected to each other, topologically the fundamental form would be a hollow ball (i.e. more general, a form with a cavity inside).
-
#1242
by
Mulletron
on 04 Jan, 2016 19:37
-
Good, because if we can prove the inside topology to be equivalent to the diametric drive, it could be a first step towards solving the conservation of momentum problem.
-
#1243
by
X_RaY
on 04 Jan, 2016 19:45
-
Good, because if we can prove the inside topology to be equivalent to the diametric drive, it could be a first step towards solving the conservation of momentum problem.
Sorry can't follow your thoughts at the moment.
Why is this important for the CoM "problem"? Please explain what you are thinking about..
-
#1244
by
rfmwguy
on 04 Jan, 2016 19:59
-
-
#1245
by
Mulletron
on 04 Jan, 2016 20:15
-
Good, because if we can prove the inside topology to be equivalent to the diametric drive, it could be a first step towards solving the conservation of momentum problem.
Sorry can't follow your thoughts at the moment. Why is this important for the CoM "problem"? Please explain
A diametric drive appears to self accelerate, but momentum is conserved. Negative mass, in this case negative effective mass, violates action reaction symmetry in the sense that there is nothing shot out the back like a rocket.
Emphasis on could be a first step. No negative effective mass has been proven present.
I have links to articles and the full paper back a ways.
-
#1246
by
X_RaY
on 04 Jan, 2016 20:21
-
Good, because if we can prove the inside topology to be equivalent to the diametric drive, it could be a first step towards solving the conservation of momentum problem.
Sorry can't follow your thoughts at the moment. Why is this important for the CoM "problem"? Please explain
A diametric drive appears to self accelerate, but momentum is conserved. Negative mass, in this case negative effective mass, violates action reaction symmetry in the sense that there is nothing shot out the back like a rocket.
Emphasis on could be a first step. No negative effective mass has been proven present.
Like effective negative permeability and permittivity(aka metamaterial)? Interesting especially by addition to gravitomagnetism,OK this effect would be extreme small, nevertheless cool thoughts!
Is an effective negative refractive index related to some kind of negative effective mass generation?
-
#1247
by
oliverio
on 04 Jan, 2016 20:39
-
There is a varying (downward) mass-energy in any powered drive. Under various notable theories where a background reference frame exists, this can also explain the "CoE" issue. (Especially if there is no "principle of equivalence" [but still translation between energy and mass] for the gravitational effects in said system.)
-
#1248
by
FinalFrontier
on 04 Jan, 2016 20:58
-
Random question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go.
That is my plan.
1) build a flat end plate S band (2.45 GHz) frustum to test out various options and get rough scale based quasi static thrust data.
2) build a high performance S band spherical end plate frustum with all the bells & whistles to obtain optimum thrust while continually accelerating on a rotary test rig.
3) convert that proven design into a X band 1U CubeSat thruster and prove it in a high vac chamber.
4) fly it in space in a 2U form factor with 0.1 m^2 of 39% efficiency 3J solar cells, generating 40-45W dc, 15W Rf and 6mN thrust. At 2kg total mass, should get 3 mm/s/s acceleration. Have been advised that size CubeSat can be tracked from Earth and the acceleration measured / confirmed. I say confirmed as the expected continual thrust will have been confirmed in a high vac chamber.
Intend to fund steps 1 thru 3 from my own funds. Achieving step 4 should be very interesting as many folks will have a commercial interest in success.
1st build Mark 3.6 frustum design is attached. Waiting on frustum forming hoops and VNA to arrive, plus furniture to depart my workshop. Then we ENGAGE!
Once I have confirmed thrust, anyone wishing to buy this frustum will be able to do so. Frustum will have antenna and coax connector fitted. Just need to feed it with Rf at the correct freq to obtain thrust. Will provide Specific Thrust (N/kW) for each frustum sold plus video of the test data.
Excellent. Not sure who will give you the best price for a microsat bus, might be Sierra Nevada, as for launch provider I would say Spacex very conservatively but by the time you are ready blue origin may have some small class LV flying. Somehow doubt it though since they seem interested in HSF only/suborbital not full up LVs.
Spyx would be your best bet (flying as a secondary payload ofc), but EVERYBODY and their brother wants to fly with them so the manifests out for the next three years are quite chaotic. But I really can't think of too many others that will give you a low price, and I don't want to suggest ILS because of failure rates/internal issues at present.
The bus would be the hard part though IMO not getting a flight space. You mentioned cubesat for the bus? If that will work there are a variety of societies/nonprofit that might fork over for the cost. I suppose it would be worth asking spyx if they'd throw any money at it as well, doubt they will though. I think for step 4 you will be in good shape raising capital you just have to be aggressive. Don't take a back seat and "Wait and see for a few years" once you are up to step 4, the more you push for it the faster it happens.
-
#1249
by
FinalFrontier
on 04 Jan, 2016 21:20
-
Random question time. While this concept is still in the conceptual/theory proving stage, and idea has occurred to me. It seems to me having read through some/skimmed other/followed parts of this so far since it was first announced, that a big contention here with regard to this device has to do with accurate testing in hard vacuum/ruling out instrument contamination. Since results so far have been at least somewhat consistently in favor of the device producing thrust, why not consider building say a microsat sized demonstrator and trying to get it flown on something/raising capital to do so?
Or is it still far too soon to consider flying even the current laboratory experiment sized device? Seems to me if you could simply build a space worthy version of the lab experiment and fly it you might be able to get a better idea of whether its producing even minute thrust or not (depending on orbit/altitude ect ofc).
Perhaps this is off the wall but there you go.
That is my plan.
1) build a flat end plate S band (2.45 GHz) frustum to test out various options and get rough scale based quasi static thrust data.
2) build a high performance S band spherical end plate frustum with all the bells & whistles to obtain optimum thrust while continually accelerating on a rotary test rig.
3) convert that proven design into a X band 1U CubeSat thruster and prove it in a high vac chamber.
4) fly it in space in a 2U form factor with 0.1 m^2 of 39% efficiency 3J solar cells, generating 40-45W dc, 15W Rf and 6mN thrust. At 2kg total mass, should get 3 mm/s/s acceleration. Have been advised that size CubeSat can be tracked from Earth and the acceleration measured / confirmed. I say confirmed as the expected continual thrust will have been confirmed in a high vac chamber.
Intend to fund steps 1 thru 3 from my own funds. Achieving step 4 should be very interesting as many folks will have a commercial interest in success.
1st build Mark 3.6 frustum design is attached. Waiting on frustum forming hoops and VNA to arrive, plus furniture to depart my workshop. Then we ENGAGE!
Once I have confirmed thrust, anyone wishing to buy this frustum will be able to do so. Frustum will have antenna and coax connector fitted. Just need to feed it with Rf at the correct freq to obtain thrust. Will provide Specific Thrust (N/kW) for each frustum sold plus video of the test data.
OH and almost forgot:
then anyone wishing to buy this frustrum could do so
Count me in sometime in the next couple years would gladly fork over for one of these things.
-
#1250
by
rq3
on 04 Jan, 2016 21:23
-
Is there something similar that works for inside surfaces? It's the inside that counts ;-)
A magnetron in a klein bottle?
-
#1251
by
birchoff
on 04 Jan, 2016 21:32
-
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/2015_nasa_technology_roadmaps_ta_2_in-space_propulsion_final.pdf
This is old news but I had not seen it linked here. It is nasa's technology roadmap updated this past summer.
Emdrive enthusiasts might want to download the report, paying particular attention to section 2.3.7.
To my knowledge, the formal mention of quantum vacuum (thruster aka emdrive) is the first overall agency mention of it...at least I've not seen it at this high a level before.
Subtle mention to avoid hoopla makes sense. Regardless, it appears to be on the table...
*blink * *blink*
Am I reading this right??? I must be reading this wrong.
Technology State of the Art: Advanced vacuum thrusters:
demonstrated thrust in the 100 micro-Newton range using high-
fidelity torsion pendula, and in the 1 to 100 milli-Newton range with
strain gauge force measurement systems. Applied scientific research
(using interferometry approaches) to detect an indication of changes
in optical properties associated with the presence of energy density
distributions is being pursued at multiple labs in industry, government,
and academia to demonstrate microscopic instance of space warp or
worm hole.
Is that an admission that they have successfully measured 100uN thrust. If memory serves when StarDrive last posted he didn't divulge how much thrust they measured.
[edit]
This is definitely new news. because I do not believe we had acknowledgement of EW or a NASA lab getting 100uM of thrust.
-
#1252
by
rfmwguy
on 04 Jan, 2016 22:54
-
FYI Only -
With discussions last year speculating that EW might have emdrive related news in 2016 Q1, we might need to brush up on their acronyms, specifically TRL or Technology Readiness Level. This nasa page gives a good summary of how a technology progresses through their system. If we do hear something within the next 90 days, it will probably contain TRL staging information is my guess:
https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/scan/engineering/technology/txt_accordion1.html
-
#1253
by
rfmwguy
on 04 Jan, 2016 22:59
-
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/2015_nasa_technology_roadmaps_ta_2_in-space_propulsion_final.pdf
This is old news but I had not seen it linked here. It is nasa's technology roadmap updated this past summer.
Emdrive enthusiasts might want to download the report, paying particular attention to section 2.3.7.
To my knowledge, the formal mention of quantum vacuum (thruster aka emdrive) is the first overall agency mention of it...at least I've not seen it at this high a level before.
Subtle mention to avoid hoopla makes sense. Regardless, it appears to be on the table...
*blink * *blink*
Am I reading this right??? I must be reading this wrong.
Technology State of the Art: Advanced vacuum thrusters:
demonstrated thrust in the 100 micro-Newton range using high-
fidelity torsion pendula, and in the 1 to 100 milli-Newton range with
strain gauge force measurement systems. Applied scientific research
(using interferometry approaches) to detect an indication of changes
in optical properties associated with the presence of energy density
distributions is being pursued at multiple labs in industry, government,
and academia to demonstrate microscopic instance of space warp or
worm hole.
Is that an admission that they have successfully measured 100uN thrust. If memory serves when StarDrive last posted he didn't divulge how much thrust they measured.
[edit]
This is definitely new news. because I do not believe we had acknowledgement of EW or a NASA lab getting 100uM of thrust.
Pretty sure this is non-vacuum data. Think everyone awaits the vacuum numbers if I'm recalling correctly.
Edit - yep, its TRL1 which is the stage it was in in 2014...pretty sure anyway.
-
#1254
by
tchernik
on 04 Jan, 2016 23:38
-
Just a New Year reflection: it's thanks to reports like this from NASA and to the work of the DIYers that I keep an eye on the Emdrive.
Nevertheless, if NASA recants their results or stops pursuing them, that would give a serious blow to my confidence on the results. Because we have seen similar things in the past.
Anyone remembers Lifters? nearly nobody took them seriously, but a few capable people did and replicated them, and they found out they do work and even can lift themselves off the ground.
They are nonetheless, not what some people believed they are (just ionic wind toys). And they aren't scalable.
Something similar happening would bring a sad ending to this saga, but nevertheless, I won't regret having followed it one bit, because all the things we learned by reading so many interesting an informed people.
And I feel this year will bring the conclusion of this affair, in one sense or another.
Belated Happy New Year wishes.
-
#1255
by
TheTraveller
on 05 Jan, 2016 00:44
-
Technology State of the Art:
Advanced vacuum thrusters:
demonstrated thrust in the 100 micro-Newton range using high fidelity torsion pendula, and in the 1 to 100 milli-Newton range with strain gauge force measurement systems.
Ok the 100uN vac results are as Paul reported earlier.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38577.msg1440938#msg1440938But
1-100mN using strain gauges. Where did that come from?
-
#1256
by
SeeShells
on 05 Jan, 2016 00:47
-
http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/2015_nasa_technology_roadmaps_ta_2_in-space_propulsion_final.pdf
This is old news but I had not seen it linked here. It is nasa's technology roadmap updated this past summer.
Emdrive enthusiasts might want to download the report, paying particular attention to section 2.3.7.
To my knowledge, the formal mention of quantum vacuum (thruster aka emdrive) is the first overall agency mention of it...at least I've not seen it at this high a level before.
Subtle mention to avoid hoopla makes sense. Regardless, it appears to be on the table...
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/2015_nasa_technology_roadmaps_ta_2_in-space_propulsion_final.pdf2.2 Non-Chemical Propulsion Propulsion systems that use electrostatic, electromagnetic, field interactions, fission reactions, photon interactions, or externally supplied energy to accelerate a spacecraft are grouped together under NonChemical Propulsion. These technologies can be further grouped into the following categories:
Snip...
2 .3 .7 Breakthrough Propulsion: Breakthrough propulsion is an area of technology development that seeks to explore and develop a deeper understanding of the nature of space-time, gravitation, inertial frames, quantum vacuum, and other fundamental physical phenomena, with the overall objective of developing advanced propulsion applications and systems that will revolutionize how NASA explores space.
-
#1257
by
TheTraveller
on 05 Jan, 2016 00:58
-
Nice that bit:
with the overall objective of developing advanced propulsion applications and systems that will revolutionize how NASA explores space.
Maybe the penny has dropped?
-
#1258
by
rfmwguy
on 05 Jan, 2016 01:01
-
Technology State of the Art:
Advanced vacuum thrusters:
demonstrated thrust in the 100 micro-Newton range using high fidelity torsion pendula, and in the 1 to 100 milli-Newton range with strain gauge force measurement systems.
Ok the 100uN vac results are as Paul reported earlier.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38577.msg1440938#msg1440938
But 1-100mN using strain gauges. Where did that come from?
Good eye Phil, he did confirm 100 micros in vacuum, but with unpublished results as of yet. No idea on the strain guage. The roadmap seemed to be at TRL1 which is where they first started out. I was just glad to see the tech listed on a corporate roadmap...think it was first time I saw this.
-
#1259
by
oyzw
on 05 Jan, 2016 01:03
-
Technology State of the Art:
Advanced vacuum thrusters:
demonstrated thrust in the 100 micro-Newton range using high fidelity torsion pendula, and in the 1 to 100 milli-Newton range with strain gauge force measurement systems.
Ok the 100uN vac results are as Paul reported earlier.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=38577.msg1440938#msg1440938
But 1-100mN using strain gauges. Where did that come from?
Good eye Phil, he did confirm 100 micros in vacuum, but with unpublished results as of yet. No idea on the strain guage. The roadmap seemed to be at TRL1 which is where they first started out. I was just glad to see the tech listed on a corporate roadmap...think it was first time I saw this.
I have a suggestion: you can directly product a superconducting cavity (cone bucket is copper, end plate is YBCO thin films), using liquid nitrogen, thrust reaches 1 N/KW, it is enough to convince the majority of the doubters. This will help to attract more research and development funds.
Why is this important for the CoM "problem"? Please explain what you are thinking about.. 
