-
#160
by
oliverio
on 14 Dec, 2015 18:31
-
This somewhat disingenuously ignores the several well-formulated descriptions of a spacetime medium which can receive and impart momentum (see any number of superfluidic theories about spacetime with which we are all familiar; I'm not saying any of these are correct but they are reasonable given further evidence, which is enough to lend them credibility for discussion in speculative physics).
-
#161
by
rfmwguy
on 14 Dec, 2015 18:40
-
OK, Aether, the immutable vacuum of space, the zero point field, quantum vacuum, the ground state...all these terms are floating around. However, the LHC discovery of the higgs-boson is regenerating some Aether talk...this one mathematician calls it "Electron Jelly" and puts it in layman's terms. Log this hypothesis as a 21st century Aether discussion:
"In the parts of space where the jelly is calm, we measure a vacuum. But where there are ripples in the jelly, we measure an electron."
https://plus.maths.org/content/particle-hunting-lhc-particlesPerhaps a "ghostly" medium (quantum fields) exists all around us as a natural part of nature. Perhaps the LHC is the best experimental platform to provide this evidence.
-
#162
by
SeeShells
on 14 Dec, 2015 18:47
-
added: I once said give me a hole and I'll give you thrust but I've finally settled on that this is truly a enclosed frame and there is no hole.
There is no hole in the 3 dimensions you can see. Perhaps the hole is where you are not looking? Gee, I hope this does not involve m-branes. All we need is string-theorists getting involved. 
The only thing from the outside that's also inside of the frustum is...
-
#163
by
Rodal
on 14 Dec, 2015 18:49
-
You have not provided any
experimental evidence that any object (particularly a self-enclosed acoustic cavity) can experience self-acceleration in contradiction with the principle of conservation of momentum (without relying on external fields, forces or expelling mass or energy).
Astrophysical observations have not revealed any object in the Cosmos who experience such self-acceleration in contradiction to the principle of conservation of momentum (particularly a self-enclosed acoustic cavity).
________
PS: Your accusation of being "somewhat disingeneous" is out of place. Characterizing somebody else's remarks is uncalled for. Just discussion of the facts will do.
I was simply answering rfmwguy's call for discussion.
-
#164
by
OnlyMe
on 14 Dec, 2015 18:58
-
added: I once said give me a hole and I'll give you thrust but I've finally settled on that this is truly a enclosed frame and there is no hole.
There is no hole in the 3 dimensions you can see. Perhaps the hole is where you are not looking? Gee, I hope this does not involve m-branes. All we need is string-theorists getting involved.
The only thing from the outside that's also inside of the frustum is...
Gravity... Because the ground state of the vacuum inside is not determined by the ground state outside, just as the EM modes between two plates is not determined by the modes outside the gap.
PS. Once you turn the EMDrive on there is no longer a vacuum ground state inside.
-
#165
by
Rodal
on 14 Dec, 2015 18:59
-
added: I once said give me a hole and I'll give you thrust but I've finally settled on that this is truly a enclosed frame and there is no hole.
There is no hole in the 3 dimensions you can see. Perhaps the hole is where you are not looking? Gee, I hope this does not involve m-branes. All we need is string-theorists getting involved.
The only thing from the outside that's also inside of the frustum is...
Gravity... Because the ground state of the vacuum inside is not determined by the ground state outside, just as the EM modes between two plates is not determined by the modes outside the gap.
That is one of the possibilities (using a particular version of GR) discussed by Notsosureofit who is Ph.D. in physics that has worked in this domain some time ago (and we are lucky to have in these threads from time to time).
Analysis of the EM Drive using standard General Relativity (GR) (
not the version discussed by Notsosureofit) in a previous thread revealed effects that are several orders of magnitude smaller than what is claimed by EM Drive experimenters
-
#166
by
OnlyMe
on 14 Dec, 2015 19:05
-
added: I once said give me a hole and I'll give you thrust but I've finally settled on that this is truly a enclosed frame and there is no hole.
There is no hole in the 3 dimensions you can see. Perhaps the hole is where you are not looking? Gee, I hope this does not involve m-branes. All we need is string-theorists getting involved.
The only thing from the outside that's also inside of the frustum is...
Gravity... Because the ground state of the vacuum inside is not determined by the ground state outside, just as the EM modes between two plates is not determined by the modes outside the gap.
That is one of the possibilities (using a particular version of GR) discussed by Notsosureofit who is Ph.D. in physics that has worked in this domain (and we are lucky to have in these threads from time to time).
Analysis of the EM Drive using standard General Relativity (GR) (not the version discussed by Notsosureofit) in a previous thread revealed effects that are several orders of magnitude smaller than what is claimed by EM Drive experimenters
Even if gravity or inertia is involved, I see no way that it can begin from the macroscopic approach of GR. It really seems to me that if there is a persistently confirmed thrust, it has to originate as a quantum effect, or quasi-classical quantum effect.
-
#167
by
oliverio
on 14 Dec, 2015 19:06
-
I'm not sure why you're hammering this in. My point goes like this:
Acoustic resonance can, steady-state-like, push against a solid medium and accelerate.
There may be a spacetime continuum against which objects can push.
Therefore there may be an EMDrive that, in similar steadystate fashion, pushes against some spacetime.
(If you disagree with the validity of this argument, you're plainly mistaken. If you disagree with its content, I agree with you on some levels. I'm skeptical.)
I'm not saying that's what the EMDrive does or that any acoustic resonating chamber violates the conservation of momentum. I think you might have me confused with someone whose posts don't need to be read, because I clearly specified that I wasn't suggesting any such thing.
-
#168
by
dustinthewind
on 14 Dec, 2015 19:09
-
I found particularly interesting one mode posted by Shell before that had what appeared to be a traveling mode. It had dual input wave-guides and a mode that appeared at the bottom and then traveled up. I was wondering if a mode such as that might be difficult to generate with an antenna. I am not sure if it was but I suspected an asymmetry. What would be desired is an asymmetry of force on the cavity. Warptech pointed out to me in a video
that David states if they used a dielectric between the elements that it wouldn't get propulsion unless it was water. If water would be pushed in the opposite direction as propulsion via the electro-magnetic fields and water has a dielectric constant then I believe space also has a permittivity. One could then possibly think of space as being the water and it is being pushed in the opposite direction as propulsion. If space as a dielectric was indeed being pushed one would have to ask if it could be pushed through the cavity walls. I also question if a stable mode is what is really desired to be generated. Maybe that is why some success has been achieved with magnetrons. I think one can think of a gradient in the dielectric constant of free space as an effect of gravity leading to gravitational lensing. A gap between two plates with the casimir force, where radiation is lacking, may also possibly be thought of as differences in the dielectric constant of space between and outside the plates which would correspond to energy density.
Some ideas that come to mind are the Dynamical Casimir Effect:
https://goo.gl/A5jUd6Something interesting I found on the effect of gravity on the dielectric constant of space and gravity slowing down light and or dragging space:
https://goo.gl/oZxyvB P.S. I don't think we can detect locally this change in the speed of light because distance contracts with light slowing down so effectively it dosn't change speed locally, only non-locally). One of the reasons why I am not sure LIGO will be able to detect gravity waves but maybe I don't know enough about it.Here is a paper I found on (asymmetric, anti-symmetric, symmetric modes) generated by light on cavities:
https://goo.gl/tTf0ApI'll attach an image of one of my hope in generating such an asymmetry. The idea behind it is normally the electric and magnetic force oppose each other in a phased array antenna but with counter-winding of the phased array antennas the interaction of the magnetic field can be reversed so that the effect of charge separation works with the magnetic effects. The only problem being how to achieve such currents in wires at microwave wavelengths. Maybe why Transverse electric effects are so successful in the frustum is because (if it works) it avoids charge separation in the frustum so that the magnetic effects don't work against the electric charge separation in the cavity walls.
If we can say the cavity is some how pushing on space time then maybe we can avoid the whole CoM issue.
-
#169
by
SeeShells
on 14 Dec, 2015 19:09
-
Let's think about it differently (you know me... kinda of weird thinking) from a different perspective.
What would it take to move a object from one point in space to another without changing it's mass by increasing or decreasing it. I can't do it? Why not? Nature did it very easy during the inflationary period of the universe.
Yes this is like the Alcubierre warp drive.
If we take away everything that doesn't make sense in this being a very closed system and what your left with is this thought.
-
#170
by
SeeShells
on 14 Dec, 2015 19:49
-
Where EW got themselves hammered last year was a claim made in the press that their thruster violated newton's laws (of conservation). For us regular folk, this is akin to saying there is no supreme being. A lot of people will come after you frothing at the mouth with pitchforks and torches.
As best we know right now, there has been no experimental evidence of CoM violations...ever. On the other hand, there is no evidence that all of the emdrive tests are system-wide measurement errors. Its speculation from afar...rather safe and mundane analysis.
For me personally, tho I cannot yet put forward a theory, I think there is something being repulsed or expelled (or a combination of both). Non-detectable matter or fields are the usual suspects, and that's fine, but somewhere down the road we're going to have to call it what we think it is.
p.s. There "ain't no way" I'm going to speculate on what it is...not yet. We either believe it works or we don't...or better yet...keep our minds open.
This is no theory but just looking at things that stand out from some simple questions and facts we know.
I'm moving operations into the area I've set aside in my home. I'll post more later.
-
#171
by
Rodal
on 14 Dec, 2015 20:02
-
...
I'm not sure why you're hammering this in. My point goes like this:
Acoustic resonance can, steady-state-like, push against a solid medium and accelerate.
There may be a spacetime continuum against which objects can push.
Therefore there may be an EMDrive that, in similar steadystate fashion, pushes against some spacetime.
(If you disagree with the validity of this argument, you're plainly mistaken. If you disagree with its content, I agree with you on some levels. I'm skeptical.)
I'm not saying that's what the EMDrive does or that any acoustic resonating chamber violates the conservation of momentum. I think you might have me confused with someone whose posts don't need to be read, because I clearly specified that I wasn't suggesting any such thing.
OK, point well taken . If the argument is "pushing against spacetime", the counter-arguments, instead, then deal with frame-indifference and conservation of energy, previously discussed by Frobnicat and DeltaMass.
-
#172
by
Rodal
on 14 Dec, 2015 20:10
-
...I found particularly interesting one mode posted by Shell before that had what appeared to be a traveling mode. It had dual input wave-guides and a mode that appeared at the bottom and then traveled up. I was wondering if a mode such as that might be difficult to generate with an antenna. I am not sure if it was but I suspected an asymmetry. What would be desired is an asymmetry of force on the cavity. Warptech pointed out to me in a video that David states if they used a dielectric between the elements that it wouldn't get propulsion unless it was water. If water would be pushed in the opposite direction as propulsion via the electro-magnetic fields and water has a dielectric constant then I believe space also has a permittivity. One could then possibly think of space as being the water and it is being pushed in the opposite direction as propulsion. If space as a dielectric was indeed being pushed one would have to ask if it could be pushed through the cavity walls. I also question if a stable mode is what is really desired to be generated. Maybe that is why some success has been achieved with magnetrons. I think one can think of a gradient in the dielectric constant of free space as an effect of gravity leading to gravitational lensing. A gap between two plates with the casimir force, where radiation is lacking, may also possibly be thought of as differences in the dielectric constant of space between and outside the plates which would correspond to energy density.
Some ideas that come to mind are the Dynamical Casimir Effect: https://goo.gl/A5jUd6
Something interesting I found on the effect of gravity on the dielectric constant of space and gravity slowing down light and or dragging space: https://goo.gl/oZxyvB P.S. I don't think we can detect locally this change in the speed of light because distance contracts with light slowing down so effectively it dosn't change speed locally, only non-locally). One of the reasons why I am not sure LIGO will be able to detect gravity waves but maybe I don't know enough about it.
Here is a paper I found on (asymmetric, anti-symmetric, symmetric modes) generated by light on cavities: https://goo.gl/tTf0Ap
I'll attach an image of one of my hope in generating such an asymmetry. The idea behind it is normally the electric and magnetic force oppose each other in a phased array antenna but with counter-winding of the phased array antennas the interaction of the magnetic field can be reversed so that the effect of charge separation works with the magnetic effects. The only problem being how to achieve such currents in wires at microwave wavelengths. Maybe why Transverse electric effects are so successful in the frustum is because (if it works) it avoids charge separation in the frustum so that the magnetic effects don't work against the electric charge separation in the cavity walls.
If we can say the cavity is some how pushing on space time then maybe we can avoid the whole CoM issue.
OK, but then the proponents need to address the objections based on frame-indifference (is there a privileged frame? which frame? and why?) and conservation of energy, previously discussed by Frobnicat and DeltaMass.
-
#173
by
qraal
on 14 Dec, 2015 20:46
-
The question of how the Drive works is interesting, but there's one concern I have. If the EM-Drive or Q-Thruster works as Sonny White imagines, as a vacuum plasma thruster, then it's a "space propeller" or "space-jet", which treats the vacuum as a propulsive medium. When the medium is water or air, both have speed limitations because of drag against the medium they're interacting with. What's the equivalent for a space-time propeller/jet? What kind of drag will such a drive encounter?
-
#174
by
oliverio
on 14 Dec, 2015 20:52
-
...
OK, but then the proponents need to address the objections based on frame-indifference (is there a privileged frame? which frame? and why?) and conservation of energy, previously discussed by Frobnicat and DeltaMass.
We already know that frame-dragging exists, and it is a very small effect (i.e. if spacetime is a fluid of some sort, it is necessarily very slippery), but famous experiments like the GP-B give a lot of weight to the idea that spacetime can be warped in more ways than we yet quite understand, given that the hypothetical medium is fundamentally difficult to quantify and observe.
As far as a privileged frame of reference goes, I think Bohmian mechanics does a good job of biting that bullet. You can reconstruct relativistic physics just fine inside of a system that does have a privileged frame of reference, and if this is the case, Einstein still wasn't wrong. He didn't deny the idea that there could be a privileged frame of reference, actually.
"The aether of the general theory of relativity is a medium without mechanical and kinematic properties, but which codetermines mechanical and electromagnetic events." - Einstein (Source, Pais, "Subtle is the Lord" p 313.)
Reference
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/did-einstein-accept-the-ether.4021/
-
#175
by
oliverio
on 14 Dec, 2015 20:53
-
The question of how the Drive works is interesting, but there's one concern I have. If the EM-Drive or Q-Thruster works as Sonny White imagines, as a vacuum plasma thruster, then it's a "space propeller" or "space-jet", which treats the vacuum as a propulsive medium. When the medium is water or air, both have speed limitations because of drag against the medium they're interacting with. What's the equivalent for a space-time propeller/jet? What kind of drag will such a drive encounter?
It will encounter drag against spacetime just the same. There's a number of possible results I think.
-
#176
by
dustinthewind
on 14 Dec, 2015 21:01
-
...I found particularly interesting one mode posted by Shell before that had what appeared to be a traveling mode. It had dual input wave-guides and a mode that appeared at the bottom and then traveled up. I was wondering if a mode such as that might be difficult to generate with an antenna. I am not sure if it was but I suspected an asymmetry. What would be desired is an asymmetry of force on the cavity. Warptech pointed out to me in a video that David states if they used a dielectric between the elements that it wouldn't get propulsion unless it was water. If water would be pushed in the opposite direction as propulsion via the electro-magnetic fields and water has a dielectric constant then I believe space also has a permittivity. One could then possibly think of space as being the water and it is being pushed in the opposite direction as propulsion. If space as a dielectric was indeed being pushed one would have to ask if it could be pushed through the cavity walls. I also question if a stable mode is what is really desired to be generated. Maybe that is why some success has been achieved with magnetrons. I think one can think of a gradient in the dielectric constant of free space as an effect of gravity leading to gravitational lensing. A gap between two plates with the casimir force, where radiation is lacking, may also possibly be thought of as differences in the dielectric constant of space between and outside the plates which would correspond to energy density.
Some ideas that come to mind are the Dynamical Casimir Effect: https://goo.gl/A5jUd6
Something interesting I found on the effect of gravity on the dielectric constant of space and gravity slowing down light and or dragging space: https://goo.gl/oZxyvB P.S. I don't think we can detect locally this change in the speed of light because distance contracts with light slowing down so effectively it dosn't change speed locally, only non-locally). One of the reasons why I am not sure LIGO will be able to detect gravity waves but maybe I don't know enough about it.
Here is a paper I found on (asymmetric, anti-symmetric, symmetric modes) generated by light on cavities: https://goo.gl/tTf0Ap
I'll attach an image of one of my hope in generating such an asymmetry. The idea behind it is normally the electric and magnetic force oppose each other in a phased array antenna but with counter-winding of the phased array antennas the interaction of the magnetic field can be reversed so that the effect of charge separation works with the magnetic effects. The only problem being how to achieve such currents in wires at microwave wavelengths. Maybe why Transverse electric effects are so successful in the frustum is because (if it works) it avoids charge separation in the frustum so that the magnetic effects don't work against the electric charge separation in the cavity walls.
If we can say the cavity is some how pushing on space time then maybe we can avoid the whole CoM issue.
OK, but then the proponents need to address the objections based on frame-indifference (is there a privileged frame? which frame? and why?) and conservation of energy, previously discussed by Frobnicat and DeltaMass.
I am not sure it would work but one might consider the preferred frame at the edge of an event horzion as moving at the speed of light and as such light can't escape. That is if gravity actually drags space time for some reason. Problem is that suggests light going into the black hole could non-locally exceed the speed of light. I would think rather light should slow down near the event horizon till it comes to a stand-still. Maybe this makes sense if the non-local space is moving at the speed of light into the event horizon and that the light in that space, as a result, is time dilated and there fore, stands still. Maybe then away from gravity the space time is at rest with respect to the universe as a whole and contained in our sphere of the CMB? I am just guessing here.
-
#177
by
glennfish
on 14 Dec, 2015 21:22
-
I might be able to spend some time over the holidays putting together the library section of the rfdriven website, if anyone is interested.
YES Please. Let me know what you need. I'll be in somewhat computer brain damaged mode from the 21st thru 3rd, so needs / demands prior please.
-
#178
by
glennfish
on 14 Dec, 2015 21:39
-
All we need is string-theorists getting involved.
Well I'll be a Calibi-Yau...
You know, falling off the cusps of manifolds was one of my favorite pass-times in grad school.
Whilst I'm in no position to propose a theory, you got my brain thinking about cascading bifurcations and wondering if any of the current accepted EM physics could be accurately described in a cusp catastrophe equivalent form... IF so, then there would be some interesting instabilities.
Challenge for those less impaired than I: Convert Maxwell's Equations to an ADS manifold, then identify boundary conditions and look for cases where they no longer result in the same solution. I see one master's thesis that almost got there...
http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10289/6526/thesis.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
-
#179
by
rq3
on 14 Dec, 2015 21:40
-
...pretend there is a gif here
Got my extra class in 1981 but inactive since the 90s. Trouble is, a connector will make frustum at rf ground potential with a single center conductor. To isolate frustum from signal source, you'll need a triax connector or a dual center conductor if you want rf ground isolation.
Watch out for these and make sure they can handle the power and freq. Also, the triax will need a metal case on the outside of the frustum to minimize rf leakage.
Since the body of the magnetron is live with RF any balanced drive would need a balun (to drive the fustrum with a dipole). It would have to be pretty beefy and maybe fed coaxially from the magnetron. This intuitively seem wrong because you really want the fustrum to be at ground potential instead of floating. The magnetron already has a very good 1/4 λ drive (or maybe smaller) sticking out of the business end. The problem is one of matching the impedance of the magnetron drive with the fustrum, no matter what drive is used -balanced or unbalanced. But I think the balanced drive is a lot of trouble and would not work. It should be possible to calculate the impedance of the magnetron drive then design an inline matching network that would match the cavity impedance when 1/4 λ driven. Similar idea as calculating stripline impedances. For example reducing the diameter of the feed increases the impedance. The dielectric surrounding the center conductor would also be a factor. There of course has to be a very good gap-free shield around the center conductor and connecting the magnetron body with the Copper shell of the fustrum.
zen-in, I suspect you're right on. A kitchen magnetron is very grossly "matched" via primitive wavequide transitions from the magnetron antenna (very roughly 10 ohms) to free space (roughly 370 ohms) in the cooking chamber. The mismatch provided by the introduction of a load (food) is reponsible for "tuning" the entire assembly towards a best power match. The match can only be an approximation at best. Modern magnetrons can tolerate an infinite VSWR, with all of the emitted radio frequency (RF) being reflected back into the tube, but this is only due to modern materials and manufacturing techniques, and they can't do it indefinitely.
Those attempting to tune frustums should also note that extreme Q is only attainable with the very lightest possible coupling between the energy source and the filter. In the case of a quartz oscillator, the quartz crystal is driven at a level just barely above the level necessary to sustain oscillation. It may take them many seconds to start and settle on frequency. In the case of a dielectic resonant oscillator (DRO), probably more comparable to an EM drive frustum, the input and output coupling loops are extremely high impedance antennas designed to load the resonant cavity as little as possible. It is the resonant cavity that provides the high Q filter function, and the dielectric puck that provides low Q energy storage to sustain oscillation.
The EMdrive tries to achieve both high power level while maintaining high Q. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but doing it with a splattering and noisy source like a magnetron may be problematic.
As an analogy, imagine striking a tuning fork near a guitar. IF the tuning fork AND one of the guitar strings are at the same frequency, the fork will drive the string into resonance. If you add an audio amplifier and speaker between the tuning fork and the guitar, you could probably destroy both the fork and the guitar. Think Ella Fitzgerald breaking a wine glass with a pure note.
Now try the same thing with a white noise source instead of a tuning fork. You'd have to create many watts of white noise before the guitar string would respond. A magnetron is pretty darn close to a radio frequency (RF) white noise source. Not as good as a noise diode, but pretty damn close. Think Ella Fitzgerald trying to break the wine glass by hissing at it.
