-
#2200 by rq3 on 25 Jan, 2016 01:03
-
As is my wont, I follow lots of "weird science", and found the paper regarding Woodward's latest attempts with the Mach Effect interesting. Apparently they pull 3 micronewton measurements out of the noise with some confidence.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283007333_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster_II
Just food for thought, especially the treatment of thermal effects, which seems to be a bug-a-bear here.
Thank you so much for pointing towards this paper, which I had not previously seen.
I am impressed that Fearn is using Wolfram Mathematica (
) and that she writes about QuoteWe are currently modeling the device with COMSOL and ANSYS software
ANSYS is among the best Finite Element Analysis multiphysics programs.
Fearn/Woodward have a much more sophisticated theory than Shawyer's and they are using more sophisticated analysis tools. Fearn has had a very invigorating effect on Woodward's theory, not just continuing it but in further developing its foundations and in using analysis tools (previous experimental results by Woodward were lacking in numerical analysis with COMSOL and ANSYS to understand thermal and other effects).
I had previously placed for comparison with the EM Drive experimental data http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results the previous experimental results by Fearn/Woodward, of only 2 microNewtons, with force/power barely 3.5 times of a photon rocket
Any reactionless propellant-less scheme is interesting, particularly if it beats a perfectly collimated photon rocket
Dr. Rodal, my interest is more as a "synthesist" than a believer or denier. I enjoy looking for the strange corelations in the physical world that, at first glance, seem to have no relation to one another.
An example (and one that I verified to my own satisfaction years ago): the length of a human eyelash is directly related to the muscle reaction time of the subject. -
#2201 by oliverio on 25 Jan, 2016 01:49
-
@Rodal:
By no means is this anything other than a friendly challenge, but regarding your spring-mass analogy, what would you think about the following:
http://web.mit.edu/wisdom/www/swimming.pdfQuoteAbstract: Cyclic changes in the shape of a quasi-rigid body on a curved manifold can lead
to net translation and/or rotation of the body. The amount of translation
depends on the intrinsic curvature of the manifold. Presuming spacetime is a
curved manifold as portrayed by general relativity, translation in space can be
accomplished simply by cyclic changes in the shape of a body, without any
external forces.
I'm not suggesting this is necessarily correct, but I do think that the "science isn't in" quite yet about how momentum interacts with relativity, as we haven't had quite enough of a chance to really study all this spacetime stuff yet. We're only recently developing tools that I'd say have the fidelity to inquire about such topics. -
#2202 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 01:58
-
@Rodal:
By no means is this anything other than a friendly challenge, but regarding your spring-mass analogy, what would you think about the following:
http://web.mit.edu/wisdom/www/swimming.pdfQuoteAbstract: Cyclic changes in the shape of a quasi-rigid body on a curved manifold can lead
to net translation and/or rotation of the body. The amount of translation
depends on the intrinsic curvature of the manifold. Presuming spacetime is a
curved manifold as portrayed by general relativity, translation in space can be
accomplished simply by cyclic changes in the shape of a body, without any
external forces.
I'm not suggesting this is necessarily correct, but I do think that the "science isn't in" quite yet about how momentum interacts with relativity, as we haven't had quite enough of a chance to really study all this spacetime stuff yet. We're only recently developing tools that I'd say have the fidelity to inquire about such topics.
That is outside Shawyer's explanation, because Shawyer's "explanation" only uses Maxwell's equations and Special Relativity.
The "swimming effect" you are describing needs General Relativity's curved geometry of space-time. It cannot occur in the flat space-time of Shaywer's Special Relavity.
Einstein's General Relativity is certainly a possible explanation, but as Dr. Marco Frasca (user StrongGR) discussed in these threads in great exchanges in prior threads the shape of the experimenters EM Drive has been so close to a cylinder and so far from the apex of a cone and the power is so small that the GR effect is like 20 orders of magnitude smaller than what is claimed as a measurement. (The swimming "stroke" of Prof. Wisdom's is also extremely small)
Dr. Notsosureofit has been pursuing other GR theories that may be promising...as I understand making slow progress on the entropy aspect of the problem concerning the conservation of energy issues
Prof Woodward Mach's Effect theory is a General Relativity theory as well, and Paul March sees the EM Drive dielectric at NASA as explainable by Woodward's theory as another side of the coin of White's QV.
________
Good explanation by Eduardo Gueron:Quote from: Eduardo Guéron Scientific American articleThough surprising at first, swimming is a direct
consequence of basic conservation laws, not a
violation of them. Swimming works because the
very concept of a center of mass is not well
defined in a curved space. Suppose we have
three one-kilogram balls located at the vertices
of an equilateral triangle. On a flat surface, their
center of mass is the geometric center of the triangle.
You can calculate where the center of
mass is located in a number of different ways,
and each method gives the same result. You can
find the point that is an equal distance from all
three balls.
...On a curved surface, however, different computations
may not give the same result. Consider
a triangle formed by three equal-mass balls
in Singapore, Dakar and Tahiti—all near the
equator. A point equidistant to the three balls is
near the North Pole. But if you replace the balls
in Singapore and Dakar with a heavier one in
between them and then calculate the position
that is one third of the way along the great circle
from that ball to the one in Tahiti, your answer
will lie close to the equator. Thus, the “center of
mass” on a curved surface is ambiguous. This
geometric fact ensures that a system in a curved
space can move even when it is isolated from any
outside infl uences -
#2203 by birchoff on 25 Jan, 2016 03:15
-
As is my wont, I follow lots of "weird science", and found the paper regarding Woodward's latest attempts with the Mach Effect interesting. Apparently they pull 3 micronewton measurements out of the noise with some confidence.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283007333_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster_II
Just food for thought, especially the treatment of thermal effects, which seems to be a bug-a-bear here.
Thank you so much for pointing towards this paper, which I had not previously seen.
I am impressed that Fearn is using Wolfram Mathematica () and that she writes about QuoteWe are currently modeling the device with COMSOL and ANSYS software
ANSYS is among the best Finite Element Analysis multiphysics programs.
Fearn/Woodward have a much more sophisticated theory than Shawyer's and they are using more sophisticated analysis tools. Fearn has had a very invigorating effect on Woodward's theory, not just continuing it but in further developing its foundations and in using analysis tools (previous experimental results by Woodward were lacking in numerical analysis with COMSOL and ANSYS to understand thermal and other effects).
I had previously placed for comparison with the EM Drive experimental data http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results the previous experimental results by Fearn/Woodward, of only 2 microNewtons, with force/power barely 3.5 times of a photon rocket
Any reactionless propellant-less scheme is interesting, particularly if it beats a perfectly collimated photon rocket
First there were two papers. Here is the first one
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269207998_Theory_of_a_Mach_Effect_Thruster_I
Also While I agree that Woodward's previous work lacked numerical analysis. He has provided a solid treatment of thermal effects. If memory serves they have shown in previous published papers they have shown the same thing as far as the experiments are concerned. Once you have depoled the device it stops displaying the effect. I could be wrong but it looks like the only thing new is showing a complete argument for using HN Theory instead of starting from GR. Woodwards theory started from GR but I believe the problem he ran into was while he could make a good historical argument that Einstein thought GR was machian, GR lacked a radiative component to explain the "communication" with the rest of the mass in the distant universe. This radiative component is apart of HN Theory of Gravitation, while also reducing to GR....Quote from: Theory of A Mach Effect Thruster I (pg 6)...
The Hoyle-Narlikar theory reduces to Einstein's theory of gravitation in the limit of matter density being distributed as a smooth fluid. It is a fully Machian theory, by which we mean that the mass of a particle is due solely to its interaction with the rest of the universe. In HN-theory there is no empty universe, that would correspond to no universe, a minimal universe would need at least two particles in it. HN-theory allows for both retarded and advanced waves. The C- field (a scalar field used to create matter) is dropped, particle density can be allowed to change as the universe expands. The C-field was a way of creating mass to keep the matter density of the universe a constant as the universe expanded. A detailed discussion would extend this paper beyond reasonable lengths so we offer a broad overview and give the technical details elsewhere.
...
Improving their theoretical thrust predictions. With some preliminary work that hints at an agreement between theoretical prediction and their experiments to date. -
#2204 by glennfish on 25 Jan, 2016 04:11
-
Prof Woodward Mach's Effect theory is a General Relativity theory as well, and Paul March sees the EM Drive dielectric at NASA as explainable by Woodward's theory as another side of the coin of White's QV.
I'm way beyond my pay-grade with this question and hope any answer will be gentle in reflecting my obvious ignorance.
Looking at the Woodward hypothesis, it seems to depend upon a dielectric with both mass and volume.
It seems to depend, somehow, upon the charge applied to the dielectric.
Looking at the EM drive constructions, there seems to be hypothetical consideration of the dielectric that maybe it's important, or maybe it's not.
Assuming these are related hypotheses, and EM drive theory seems to be shallow compared to Woodward, can anyone come up with a relationship between the conical structure of an EM drive device saturated with resonance and RF stuff and the dielectrics described by Woodward?
I'm not sure if I know how to ask this question... so maybe another way would be, how would a dielectric tie Woodward & EM drive together as a related or similar phenomenon? -
#2205 by dustinthewind on 25 Jan, 2016 08:05
-
I have a question for Rodal or anyone else who can answer this question. It concerns greater than photon propulsion but uses the analogy of a phased array.
I take it that a "normal" phased array can get propulsion due to the emitted photons. When a phased array is investigated it appears there are magnetic forces and capacitative forces at work. I made a diagram to take into account the time retarded behavior of a phased array which is attached below. It illustrates how this capacitative time retarded force works against the magnetic force. It must be if one works out the math that one force is greater than the other and the result should be photon propulsion.
If this is so then I have a problem understanding a modification of a phased array I call a "reversed magnetic phased array". I wound the coil of the "reversed magnetic phased array" so that now the time retarded magnetic forces work with the time retarded static electric or capacitiative forces.
Here is where I am stuck. If counteracting, time retarded, capacitative and magnetic forces that oppose each other [standard phased array] can give the photon emission force then how does one explain the "reversed magnetic phased array" as also having only photon force when both forces are now working together? Maybe I am overlooking something. It bothers me. Any help is appreciated.
-
#2206 by SeeShells on 25 Jan, 2016 11:41
-
I'll post my worksheet drawing and later this week pictures when I finish building. I've kept the same basic layout but because I don't have the area in my home like the shop (which is way too cold right now even with insulation). I had to rebuild most everything and downsize for it all to fit and to make sure that I could use the waveguide next go around.
Shell
-
#2207 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 11:54
-
Yes, good question, with a positive answer: the Notsosureofit hypothesis (see: http://emdrive.wiki/@notsosureofit_Hypothesis ) predicts that:
Prof Woodward Mach's Effect theory is a General Relativity theory as well, and Paul March sees the EM Drive dielectric at NASA as explainable by Woodward's theory as another side of the coin of White's QV.
...
Looking at the EM drive constructions, there seems to be hypothetical consideration of the dielectric that maybe it's important, or maybe it's not.
Assuming these are related hypotheses, and EM drive theory seems to be shallow compared to Woodward, can anyone come up with a relationship between the conical structure of an EM drive device saturated with resonance and RF stuff and the dielectrics described by Woodward?
...
1) A resonant electromagnetic cylindrical cavity with constant circular cross section:
● self-accelerates under resonance if there is a dielectric asymmetrically located in the cylindrical cavity
● does not self-accelerate if the dielectric is symmetrically placed in the cavity
● does not self-accelerate if there is no dielectric asymmetrically placed in the cavity
2) A resonant electromagnetic tapered cavity, like a truncated cone:
● self-accelerates under resonance if there is no dielectric in the tapered cavity
● experiences greater acceleration under resonance if a dielectric is also asymmetrically located in the tapered cavity
The Notsosureofit hypothesis (see: http://emdrive.wiki/@notsosureofit_Hypothesis ) is a proposition that dispersion caused by an accelerating frame of reference implies that a dispersive cavity resonator will self-accelerate. A dispersive cavity resonator can be produced by either:
● a geometrically asymmetric cavity, like a tapered cavity: a truncated cone
or
● a cavity with a constant cross-section, like a cylindrical cavity that has a dielectric asymmetrically placed in the cavity
either one can result in self-acceleration.
Problem: it has not been shown yet how the Notsosureofit hypothesis reconciles with
● conservation of momentum
● conservation of energy
Appeal is made to versions of General Relativity, since conservation of energy-momentum (they are both tied in together in GR) in General Relativity is much more nuanced than in classical physics (in General Relativity even the definition of center of mass is ambiguous).
-
#2208 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 12:25
-
Continued from https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1482521#msg1482521 and from https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1482668#msg1482668
More information from TheTraveller ( https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/42eyum/we_have_thrust/ ):
● TheTraveller to publish when force generation reaches 20mN (present force: force measurement: 2.2 mN) as "that is far out of any thermal and/or Lorentz force noise as to stop any skeptics. 20mN is 50% of what Roger predicts the frustum can do (at 100W inside the frustum). So gives me enough breathing / head room to pull this off. When I reach that goal is when I publish plans, schematics, photos and videos but not before."
______________________________________________________________________
Analysis:
Previous statement:
force measurement: 2.2 mN @ Power= 63 W; Force/Power = 35 mN/kW; predicted 389 mN/kW
so 2.2 mN is 35/389 = 9% of predicted by Shawyer at 63 W
and
20 mN is (20/2.2)(35/389)= 82% of predicted by Shawyer at 63 W
While at 100 Watts:
20 mN is (20/2.2)(35/389)(63/100)= 52% of predicted by Shawyer at 100 W
Conclusion: plans to go up to maximum power (100 Watts) although he admits that at present he has problems with the power supply even at 63 Watts. (May need to change the power supply, etc.). Going up in power may result in 100/63=59% increase in theoretical force, so he will still need to increase his Q substantially (from present Q=8,700 to planned Q=50,000), by ~6 times in order to get to 20 mN (if and only if Shawyer's equation really is able to predict the anomalous force measurement ).
______________________________________________________________________
Explanation as to why he claims he is not publishing photographs or further information: "Why? As any earlier photos and video will go viral all over the globe and the skeptics / deniers will attack with everything they have as otherwise their fun is gone."
When OPERA experimental results on faster than light neutrinos were announced early, the researchers announced the results of the experiment with the stated intent of promoting further inquiry and debate. Here, instead, experimenter is concerned with criticism of his experimental method, sees criticism of experimental methods as destructive attacks by what he calls "deniers" instead of as constructive criticism which is traditional in R&D and an integral part of the scientific method.
● "Current frustum is held together via gravity with the frustum sitting on the small end plate and the big end plate sitting on the frustum. Did flatten the frustum ends using a few rotations over fine metal finishing paper. So thermal effect guys, the frustum is not sealed and any internally heated air will leave via the not air tight joints. Please note the end plates are 40mm bigger in diameter than the frustum ends, so any heated air than leaves the frustum at the end plate to frustum joint will not go straight up. 1st will go out axially, then move past a 20mm wide lip before going vertical. Enjoy calculating the very small buoyancy force that will be generated. Please note that any heated air that leaves at the top should be replaced with air drawn in at the bottom."
● "The existing scale tops out at 1.5kg and will soon be exceeded. With 0.5mm thick end plates, the frustum weighs ~1.1kg and the 300mm dia double sided copper pcb EMI shield weighs ~0.25kg, All up ~1.35kg so close to the limit. Adding on the flange and using 1mm thick end plates will bump weight to ~1.6kg and with the EMI shield to 1.85kg. So replacing the current 1.5kg digital scale with a 2.1kg scale. Both have +- 0.01g resolution."
● "Will add a Red led in front of the scale display to show Rf on and off periods. Can then video the entire frustum and scale display with my phone to show weight changes that occur as the Red led goes on and off.
Plan to run progressively longer and longer Rf on to off times as my confidence in not blowing the Rf amp increases. Not blowing the Rf amp is VERY IMPORTANT to me as other EmDrive experimenters have done just that and it is not a nice event to occur. Currently at 2.2mN force with a bad PSU. Need to achieve 20mN to publish. "
● TheTraveller apparently plans to synchronize release of convincing data together, more or less, with Shawyer's BBC program release: "will go viral, as it will, all around the world. Should be out before end Feb 2016, which was my earlier stated date. The BBC Horizons EmDrive episode should also be shown in the UK, in Feb 2016." -
#2209 by TheUberOverLord on 25 Jan, 2016 12:38
-
TT also made a another point as well. I quote from:
https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/comments/42eyum/we_have_thrust/
"Prof Yang wrote 5 peer reviewed EmDrive papers, yet as far as I know there is not one photo of her work. She also never stated the build dinensions nor the excited mode of the frustums she measured thrust from.
Do you accept her data?
What you seek will be revealed when I'm ready for it to go viral, as it will, all around the world. Should be out before end Feb 2016, which was my earlier stated date.
The BBC Horizons EmDrive episode should also be shown in the UK, in Feb 2016. Might want to watch out for that as well."
Don -
#2210 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 13:03
-
It has been stated (several weeks ago) in these threads (by others) that Prof. Yang is retired, and that her EM Drive project was terminated by the academicians at her University because they did not accept the anomalous force EM Drive data and explanations as convincing enough to continue funding the EM Drive project.
So, no, the information is that the academicians at Prof. Yang's University did not accept to continue funding her EM Drive work.
TheTraveller said that he was going to check with Roger Shawyer the veracity of this information. To this date nobody has provided factual information denying the veracity of this information, to my knowledge. -
#2211 by SeeShells on 25 Jan, 2016 13:14
-
In reading "again" the posts on the NSF thread I am gobsmacked at the amount of detail and science data presented here. This is a gold rush goldmine of information.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.640 -
#2212 by TheUberOverLord on 25 Jan, 2016 13:20
-
It has been stated (several weeks ago) in these threads (by others) that Prof. Yang is retired, and that her EM Drive project was terminated by the academicians at her University because they did not accept the anomalous force EM Drive data and explanations as convincing enough to continue funding the EM Drive project.
So, no, the information is that the academicians at Prof. Yang's University did not accept to continue funding her EM Drive work.
TheTraveller said that he was going to check with Roger Shawyer the veracity of this information. To this date nobody has provided factual information denying the veracity of this information, to my knowledge.
Do we have any names of anyone involved in the peer reviews of Prof. Yang's papers? Or are you also saying that any/all of the peer reviews, are also in doubt to have ever taken place, as well?
If you're not saying that? Does anyone know the status/contact details of anyone involved in those peer reviews of Prof. Yang's papers?
Don -
#2213 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 13:24
-
It has been stated (several weeks ago) in these threads (by others) that Prof. Yang is retired, and that her EM Drive project was terminated by the academicians at her University because they did not accept the anomalous force EM Drive data and explanations as convincing enough to continue funding the EM Drive project.
So, no, the information is that the academicians at Prof. Yang's University did not accept to continue funding her EM Drive work.
TheTraveller said that he was going to check with Roger Shawyer the veracity of this information. To this date nobody has provided factual information denying the veracity of this information, to my knowledge.
Do we have any names of anyone who did the peer reviews on Prof. Yang's papers or are you also saying that any/all of the peer reviews are also in doubt to have taken place, as well?
Don
Several of Prof. Yang's papers that I am aware of, were published in the Journal of her own University (Journal of Northwestern Polytechnical University), hence the editorial reviewers were academicians at her own University (Northwestern Polytechnical University). It was academicians at her own University (Northwestern Polytechnical University) that reportedly decided to stop the EM Drive project funding.
I know of one of Prof. Yang's paper in Chin. Phys. B. I am not aware of Prof. Yang publishing any papers in non-Chinese journals.
Citation index ranking of Northwestern Polytechnical University and of Chin. Phys. B. are known, and so are the names of the peer reviewers. -
#2214 by TheUberOverLord on 25 Jan, 2016 13:27
-
It has been stated (several weeks ago) in these threads (by others) that Prof. Yang is retired, and that her EM Drive project was terminated by the academicians at her University because they did not accept the anomalous force EM Drive data and explanations as convincing enough to continue funding the EM Drive project.
So, no, the information is that the academicians at Prof. Yang's University did not accept to continue funding her EM Drive work.
TheTraveller said that he was going to check with Roger Shawyer the veracity of this information. To this date nobody has provided factual information denying the veracity of this information, to my knowledge.
Do we have any names of anyone who did the peer reviews on Prof. Yang's papers or are you also saying that any/all of the peer reviews are also in doubt to have taken place, as well?
Don
Several of Prof. Yang's papers that I am aware of, were published in the Journal of her own University, hence the editorial reviewers were academicians at her own University. It was academicians at her own University that decided to stop her funding.
I am not aware of Prof. Yang publishing any papers in non-Chinese journals.
Has anyone attempted to contact ("others") currently at the University? To see if names/contact information is available for those editorial reviewers?
Would seem like a prudent thing to try? I don't have a clue on how to go about that. Maybe you do?
Don -
#2215 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 13:43
-
It has been stated (several weeks ago) in these threads (by others) that Prof. Yang is retired, and that her EM Drive project was terminated by the academicians at her University because they did not accept the anomalous force EM Drive data and explanations as convincing enough to continue funding the EM Drive project.
So, no, the information is that the academicians at Prof. Yang's University did not accept to continue funding her EM Drive work.
TheTraveller said that he was going to check with Roger Shawyer the veracity of this information. To this date nobody has provided factual information denying the veracity of this information, to my knowledge.
Do we have any names of anyone who did the peer reviews on Prof. Yang's papers or are you also saying that any/all of the peer reviews are also in doubt to have taken place, as well?
Don
Several of Prof. Yang's papers that I am aware of, were published in the Journal of her own University, hence the editorial reviewers were academicians at her own University. It was academicians at her own University that decided to stop her funding.
I am not aware of Prof. Yang publishing any papers in non-Chinese journals.
Has anyone attempted to contact ("others") currently at the University? To see if names/contact information is available for those editorial reviewers?
Would seem like a prudent thing to try? I don't have a clue on how to go about that. Maybe you do?
Don
This
http://www.scitechnol.com/universities/Northwestern_Polytechnical_University/
lists:
http://www.scitechnol.com/editor-profile/Lihong_Su/
as an editor of the Journal of the University
While:
https://publons.com/institution/11294/QuoteUnranked
We've not yet verified this institution's record. Get in touch with us to request an audit if you would like to see Northwestern Polytechnical University's ranking on Publons
https://www.researchgate.net/journal/1000-2758_Xibei_Gongye_Daxue_Xuebao_Journal_of_Northwestern_Polytechnical_University
http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=15242&tip=sid
-
#2216 by TheUberOverLord on 25 Jan, 2016 13:53
-
It has been stated (several weeks ago) in these threads (by others) that Prof. Yang is retired, and that her EM Drive project was terminated by the academicians at her University because they did not accept the anomalous force EM Drive data and explanations as convincing enough to continue funding the EM Drive project.
So, no, the information is that the academicians at Prof. Yang's University did not accept to continue funding her EM Drive work.
TheTraveller said that he was going to check with Roger Shawyer the veracity of this information. To this date nobody has provided factual information denying the veracity of this information, to my knowledge.
Do we have any names of anyone who did the peer reviews on Prof. Yang's papers or are you also saying that any/all of the peer reviews are also in doubt to have taken place, as well?
Don
Several of Prof. Yang's papers that I am aware of, were published in the Journal of her own University, hence the editorial reviewers were academicians at her own University. It was academicians at her own University that decided to stop her funding.
I am not aware of Prof. Yang publishing any papers in non-Chinese journals.
Has anyone attempted to contact ("others") currently at the University? To see if names/contact information is available for those editorial reviewers?
Would seem like a prudent thing to try? I don't have a clue on how to go about that. Maybe you do?
Don
This
http://www.scitechnol.com/universities/Northwestern_Polytechnical_University/
lists:
http://www.scitechnol.com/editor-profile/Lihong_Su/
as an editor of the Journal of the University
While:
https://publons.com/institution/11294/QuoteUnranked
We've not yet verified this institution's record. Get in touch with us to request an audit if you would like to see Northwestern Polytechnical University's ranking on Publons
https://www.researchgate.net/journal/1000-2758_Xibei_Gongye_Daxue_Xuebao_Journal_of_Northwestern_Polytechnical_University
http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=15242&tip=sid
Probably the best thing to do is to contact the University directly:
see: http://hangkong.nwpu.edu.cn/home/fs/Professor.htm
Notice that Prof. Juan Yang was listed as a Prof. in Aeronautics in the last listing (a few years old) while I could not find her listed in this latest listing http://hangkong.nwpu.edu.cn/home/fs/Professor.htm
Do you have any Chinese speaking academic friends? This is way out of my field and I think if I tried I could easily fail more than others that understand University politics?
What bugs me, is if some feel that Prof. Yang's papers are less than accurate and/or truthful? Why have those same folks not taken the time to get more details vs. taking the word of non official staff at the University in question and calling it confirmation that what they have been told by a few, is fact?
Don -
#2217 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 13:59
-
...
Do you have any Chinese speaking academic friends? This is way out of my field and I think if I tried I could easily fail more than others that understand University politics?
What bugs me, is if some feel that Prof. Yang's papers are less than accurate and/or truthful? Why have those same folks not taken the time to get more details vs. taking the word of others and calling it confirmation that what they think is fact?
Don
Several people that have been in this thread since thread 1, have methodically and periodically tried to reach Prof. Yang through the years, by e-mail. She has never answered, to my knowledge.
Some of the people that have tried to reach her are fluent in Chinese language.
The NSF poster posted that she is now writing poetry and that his/her conclusions are that the only way to attract interest in the EM Drive will be to demonstrate functionality of superconducting EM Drives, which he is trying to do, in China. -
#2218 by TheUberOverLord on 25 Jan, 2016 14:03
-
...
Do you have any Chinese speaking academic friends? This is way out of my field and I think if I tried I could easily fail more than others that understand University politics?
What bugs me, is if some feel that Prof. Yang's papers are less than accurate and/or truthful? Why have those same folks not taken the time to get more details vs. taking the word of others and calling it confirmation that what they think is fact?
Don
Several people that have been in this thread since thread 1, have methodically and periodically tried to reach Prof. Yang through the years, by e-mail. She has never answered, to my knowledge. Some of the people that have tried to reach her are fluent in Chinese language.
From all the information previously addressed, plus the latest university listing of Professors at the University , it looks like the information provided by the Chinese user at NSF is correct, as she is no longer listed as a Professor. The NSF poster posted that she is now writing poetry and that his/her conclusions are that the only way to attract interest in the EM Drive will be to demonstrate functionality of superconducting EM Drives.
I have always understood that Prof. Yang herself has not responded to queries but I have heard little if anything about attempted contact to current University staff on locating others and their contact information that were involved in the editorial reviews of Prof. Yang's papers.
I would think that others, like yourself, would have good odds in getting some response from staff at this University? Whereas I think I would most likely fail at trying the same thing because I have no Chinese academic friends that might better understand the politics of going about this correctly.
Don -
#2219 by Rodal on 25 Jan, 2016 14:12
-
...
My experience at Universities and at corporate R&D is that curtailing of project funding decisions is confidential and therefore such decisions would not be willingly discussed. To know the truthful details of the decision making would require personally knowing the decision makers, and even in that case the information (if it were ever confidentially shared, which is not a given) would be bound by confidentiality (whether covered by explicit or implicit agreement, there is a tradition to keep such decisions confidential) and would not be able to be shared in public.
I have always understood that Prof. Yang herself has not responded to queries but I have heard little if anything about attempted contact to current University staff on locating others and their contact information that were involved in the editorial reviews of Prof. Yang's papers.
I would think that others, like yourself, would have good odds in getting some response from staff at this University? Whereas I think I would most likely fail at trying the same thing because I have no Chinese academic friends that might better understand the politics of going about this correctly.
Don
We have a similar situation in the US with the curtailing by Boeing of the project with Shawyer, where Boeing is not releasing the reasons or details about the project decisions.
) and that she writes about 