-
#2560
by
Rodal
on 03 Feb, 2016 23:14
-
Doc, let's assume ew saw a small stretching of ST...do you envision that as linear or nonlinear? I know its measured straight line with a laser but distortions do not have to remain just along the laser path.
If I were to speculate, it is nonlinear and decreasing exponentially with distance. I am also not certain the distortion was contained within the frustum...ideas?
We know that the trajectory of a photon is curved by a massive object like a star (the sun). Electromagnetic energy should
curve spacetime since energy and mass are equivalent. The amount of this curvature of spacetime, produced by the electromagnetic energy in an EM Drive appears that it should be extremely small
Other readers may be able to provide a more erudite answer...
-
#2561
by
watermod
on 03 Feb, 2016 23:16
-
-
#2562
by
rfmwguy
on 03 Feb, 2016 23:33
-
Could this discovery of electron eddies influencing the much larger ion stability in fusion reactors provide any useful insight to the EM situation you are grappling with?
Nice read, thanks...interesting the only particles we guessed would be within an emdrive in a vacuum are copper ions and free electrons, albeit at much lower power levels.
-
#2563
by
Rodal
on 03 Feb, 2016 23:37
-
Could this discovery of electron eddies influencing the much larger ion stability in fusion reactors provide any useful insight to the EM situation you are grappling with?
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/New_finding_may_explain_heat_loss_in_fusion_reactors_999.html
Nice read, thanks...interesting the only particles we guessed would be within an emdrive in a vacuum are copper ions and free electrons, albeit at much lower power levels.
Dark matter axions (if they exist) and any weakly interacting particles like neutrinos, and also gravitons, etc., may also be inside besides electrons and photons. Also particle-antiparticle pairs may (extremely briefly) pop in and out of existence for ephemeral amounts of time
-
#2564
by
spupeng7
on 03 Feb, 2016 23:49
-
-
#2565
by
birchoff
on 04 Feb, 2016 01:10
-
I gotta come back to these discussions about negative energy/negative matter. Why does it feel like we talk about the possibility of negative energy as if it is not a real thing. I was under the assumption that squeezed light phenomena requires the creation of negative energy. Since Squeezed light is less of a proposed experiment and more of a proved effect I would think that would immediately prove that negative energy can indeed be created. Without leaning on the Casimir effect.
-
#2566
by
Rodal
on 04 Feb, 2016 02:23
-
I gotta come back to these discussions about negative energy/negative matter. Why does it feel like we talk about the possibility of negative energy as if it is not a real thing. I was under the assumption that squeezed light phenomena requires the creation of negative energy. Since Squeezed light is less of a proposed experiment and more of a proved effect I would think that would immediately prove that negative energy can indeed be created. Without leaning on the Casimir effect.
Excellent point.
___________________________________________________
Casimir Energy of a Long Wormhole Throat
Phys. Rev. D 90, 024019 (2014)
Luke M. Butcher
1Astrophysics Group, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge,
J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0HE, UK
Kavli Institute for Cosmology Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0HA, UK
http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.1283v1
-
#2567
by
IdleMind
on 04 Feb, 2016 04:31
-
I gotta come back to these discussions about negative energy/negative matter. Why does it feel like we talk about the possibility of negative energy as if it is not a real thing. I was under the assumption that squeezed light phenomena requires the creation of negative energy. Since Squeezed light is less of a proposed experiment and more of a proved effect I would think that would immediately prove that negative energy can indeed be created. Without leaning on the Casimir effect.
Excellent point.
___________________________________________________
Casimir Energy of a Long Wormhole Throat
Phys. Rev. D 90, 024019 (2014)
Luke M. Butcher
1Astrophysics Group, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge,
J J Thomson Avenue, Cambridge, CB3 0HE, UK
Kavli Institute for Cosmology Cambridge, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 0HA, UK
http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.1283v1
I suppose this might be a strange question. Could negative energy be classified as representing time? Also has anyone thought of putting like atomic clocks inside of the EM drive cavity to measure the time differentials on either ends?
-
#2568
by
mwvp
on 04 Feb, 2016 04:47
-
I should be saying. Hey dude, you're right and trust me after decades of building using the fundamentals of our craft if it wasn't for a couple things that just bug the poo out of me I'd be off baking bread or sitting in my hot tub with something bubbly to drink.
That is a good point. There's dispute over Abraham vs. Minkowski momentum and superluminal Vp going on. Its nice to occasionally discover oneself immersed in a current controversy rather than trying to understand a 150 year old paper.
Paul March summed it up a few hundred posts ago in when he said "And yet the anomalous thrust signals remain".
There are a number of aspects intriguing me. Diminishing my ignorance about dispersion, EM, photonics, physics and ontology aside, there's the connection with the anomalous thrust from Peltier/Seebeck devices and the EM drives similarity with photonic cooling. The papers we've discussed here that compare massive particles to waveguide modes. Both posses charge/fields, energy, spin and mass. Acceleration against an inertial frame compressing counter-propagating momentum at C.
The resources we have have become incredibly powerful with meep, COMSOL, FEKO, ANSYS and a host of others all built from the fundamental building blocks of centuries of discovery, research and elbow grease. You have to wonder in what we might be seeing is something that those tools can't dig out and make that connection.
I'm afraid those tools are pretty limited to get a few milliseconds of acceleration. I'm researching reducing the symmetry of the problem to get a crude estimate to see if selective Doppler discrimination can unbalance the system under simplistic, ideal conditions, since realistic ones are intractable with my pedestrian resources.
And of course, there certainly can be new phenomena.
-
#2569
by
dustinthewind
on 04 Feb, 2016 08:34
-
Variable mass, implying the need for negative mass to self-accelerate, addresses both conservation of momentum and it also addresses conservation of energy.
Energy is conserved, and such a propulsion device is not a free-energy machine, because the greater the speed, the lower the mass. More on that later...
(The practical problem of course is that up to now, nobody has found experimental evidence of negative mass )
Something that comes to mind that stuck me as having negative mass was the space between Casimir force pressed plates. The energy between the plates is supposed to be less than that in free space so the dielectric constant of free space between the plates might be less than that of free space. Light might actually go faster than light between the plates (non-locally). This strikes me as reducing the mass of light or in a round about way adding negative mass to it to reduce its mass and preserving momentum.
I am not sure this is the same concept as negative mass that repels normal mass but rather a shedding of "relativistic" mass.
@IdleMind above I think in this context above the hypothetical negative mass added to the light between Casimir plates if it worked and sped up light could speed up time between the plates.The parallel being the dielectric constant in free space near gravity sources increases (non-locally) slowing light or increasing the mass of light. At the event horizon of a black hole it finally stops having acquired infinite mass? Or time stopping. Maybe an object rubs space stuff as it accelerates, acquiring its mass or "relativistic mass". Maybe spacestuff that accelerates drags objects along too giving them mass. It should be responsible for Lorentz contraction and time dilation. This stuff can pancake electric fields by relativity so maybe it's an electric field itself. This may make sense considering the Casimir force. Now that I think of it, I think WarpTech had a similar hypothesis that the universe EM fields were in a dance with matter but accelerating upset that dance and there was a resistance to doing that. Those are in my words from the best that I can remember. I would have to look it back up, where I read that from him.
One interesting video of a fiberoptic Michelson Interferometer It does look kinda noisy,
and later a video where they claim that the attempt to detect the drift in ether would have been unsuccessful.
. They also mention the frame of the CMB. This brings up thoughts for me about wondering if gravitational waves can be detected, using such interferometers. Frame dragging test:
Anyways, most think the static Casimir force isn't good for propulsion and I am not sure exactly how it would be yet. However, there is the "dynamical Casimir effect" and indeed it emits microwaves but that is just photon propulsion, or is it?
-
#2570
by
oliverio
on 04 Feb, 2016 11:39
-
@Dr. Rodal et al,
I am not sure why it is bring suggested here that the Casimir force is only existent with 2 plates. Experiment has demonstrated the Casimir force acting upon one (singular) moving (accelerating) reflective plate in a vacuum.
Moreover, we know that a moving boundary between the differing areas of a resonating electromagnetic cavity will act as a reflector of photons. It is a non trivial claim that such phenomena may be involved.
-
#2571
by
Rodal
on 04 Feb, 2016 11:56
-
@Dr. Rodal et al,
I am not sure why it is bring suggested here that the Casimir force is only existent with 2 plates. Experiment has demonstrated the Casimir force acting upon one (singular) moving (accelerating) reflective plate in a vacuum.
Moreover, we know that a moving boundary between the differing areas of a resonating electromagnetic cavity will act as a reflector of photons. It is a non trivial claim that such phenomena may be involved.
Oliverio, I think that I have gone out of my way to include the qualifier
"under no external fields or forces" (and other qualifiers) in all of my posts. (***)
In contrast, your statement
" Experiment has demonstrated the Casimir force acting upon one (singular) moving (accelerating) reflective plate in a vacuum."
fails to qualify itself by stating the necessary and most important modifier "with an externally applied field". (*)
The point being that to have a Casimir force on a single plate you need to have an externally applied field as well (Hoodbhoy's J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38 ). (**)
_______________
(*) Also A. Kwang-hua Chu (
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.254.8858&rep=rep1&type=pdf) points out that the single plate would be elastic (nothing in the Universe is perfectly rigid) and therefore there will be force-reducing deformations once the net (one-sided) force acting upon the plate changes the position-dependent potential imposed by Hoodbhoy [J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38 (2005) 10253-10256].
(**) As shown at MIT the force pushes the plate toward higher potential, for a single plate in vacuum without the action of external fields, the potential should be isotropic. Or do you have reasons to think that the Quantum Vacuum "wind" would push in a particular direction and if so what would that direction be ?
And what would happen then to the Relativity principle of frame-indifference ?
(***)
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1487113#msg1487113Outside forces and fields were excluded because it is trivial to show conservation of momentum and conservation of energy when the acceleration is a result of an outside force field.
That's why there are no conservation issues with:
* solar sails
* electrodynamic tethers
* magnetic field propulsion
* gravitational sling shot
and on and on and on
-
#2572
by
Mulletron
on 04 Feb, 2016 12:44
-
If the EmDrive is producing a gravitomagnetic field, I bet one could see the effect on massive particles in the vicinity with one of these.
Also this video has me in full overdrive. Not only is the magnet spontaneously rotating but look at the clear area of no fog above the magnet (The clearing is there at the beginning then goes away and comes back at around 6:50).
-
#2573
by
Rodal
on 04 Feb, 2016 13:21
-
If the EmDrive is producing a gravitomagnetic field, I bet one could see the effect on massive particles in the vicinity with one of these.
Cloud Chamber set-up designed by Luis Alvarez used between the pole pieces of the 27-inch cyclotron by Alvarez and Brobeck. Photograph taken April 1, 1937.
Same Nobel Prize winner Luis Alvarez responsible for the 40 feet long resonating cavity for his proton accelerator in the 1940's, that he put together with salvaged radar equipment from WWII.
Photo courtesy of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
-
#2574
by
Mulletron
on 04 Feb, 2016 13:24
-
Yeah I started thinking about using a cloud chamber the other day to observe if I can conserve momentum using gravitomagnetic deflection of random particles.
-
#2575
by
oliverio
on 04 Feb, 2016 13:27
-
@Dr. Rodal et al,
I am not sure why it is bring suggested here that the Casimir force is only existent with 2 plates. Experiment has demonstrated the Casimir force acting upon one (singular) moving (accelerating) reflective plate in a vacuum.
Moreover, we know that a moving boundary between the differing areas of a resonating electromagnetic cavity will act as a reflector of photons. It is a non trivial claim that such phenomena may be involved.
Oliverio, I think that I have gone out of my way to include the qualifier "under no external fields or forces" (and other qualifiers) in all of my posts. (***)
In contrast, your statement
" Experiment has demonstrated the Casimir force acting upon one (singular) moving (accelerating) reflective plate in a vacuum."
fails to qualify itself by stating the necessary and most important modifier "with an externally applied field". (*)
The point being that to have a Casimir force on a single plate you need to have an externally applied field as well (Hoodbhoy's J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38 ). (**)
Also a questionable statement (and certainly incorrect regarding me) is:
<<it is bring suggested here that the Casimir force is only existent with 2 plates>>(bring -->being ?)
who has ever suggested here that the Casimir force only exists with 2 plates?
_______________
(*) Also A. Kwang-hua Chu (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.254.8858&rep=rep1&type=pdf) points out that the single plate would be elastic (nothing in the Universe is perfectly rigid) and therefore there will be force-reducing deformations once the net (one-sided) force acting upon the plate changes the position-dependent potential imposed by Hoodbhoy [J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38 (2005) 10253-10256].
(**) As shown at MIT the force pushes the plate toward higher potential, for a single plate in vacuum without the action of external fields, the potential should be isotropic. Or do you have reasons to think that the Quantum Vacuum "wind" would push in a particular direction and if so what would that direction be ? And what would happen then to the Relativity principle of frame-indifference ?
(***) http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1487113#msg1487113
Outside forces and fields were excluded because it is trivial to show conservation of momentum and conservation of energy when the acceleration is a result of an outside force field.
That's why there are no conservation issues with:
* solar sails
* electrodynamic tethers
* magnetic field propulsion
* gravitational sling shot
and on and on and on
I apparently genuinely mistook the following:
1) You need 2 plates to generate the Casimir force between them, one would need a plate in front of the spacecraft nanometers in front of it for the spacecraft to be attracted to it. A magnet in front of the spacecraft would generate a greater force and act at a greater distance
Apologies if I misread.
-
#2576
by
Rodal
on 04 Feb, 2016 13:30
-
...
I apparently genuinely mistook the following:
1) You need 2 plates to generate the Casimir force between them, one would need a plate in front of the spacecraft nanometers in front of it for the spacecraft to be attracted to it. A magnet in front of the spacecraft would generate a greater force and act at a greater distance
Apologies if I misread.
Yes, the above statement was made under the stated restriction of
no external fields 
Understanding now, I therefore deleted (in my prior post) the question of where that came from
-
#2577
by
Mulletron
on 04 Feb, 2016 13:34
-
I think the spontaneously spinning magnet above (and the fog clearing) has to do with the magnet cooling down to some critical temperature to where the nuclear spin alignments can become parallel, at which point it can serve as a crude gravitomagnetic core and increase the strength of the extremely weak gravitomagnetic field coming from the superconducting current loop.
It has to be cold, darn cold.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/spinpol.html 
-
#2578
by
oliverio
on 04 Feb, 2016 14:11
-
...
I apparently genuinely mistook the following:
1) You need 2 plates to generate the Casimir force between them, one would need a plate in front of the spacecraft nanometers in front of it for the spacecraft to be attracted to it. A magnet in front of the spacecraft would generate a greater force and act at a greater distance
Apologies if I misread.
Yes, the above statement was made under the stated restriction of no external fields
Understanding now, I therefore deleted (in my prior post) the question of where that came from
Do you believe that a traveling wavefront in a cavity could have Casimir-effect inducing reflective properties? This is honestly just a thought I've toyed with.
The sorts of models we've seen in MEEP show a large oscillation of wavefronts through the cavity in predictable pattern. If Casimir reflections are generated by these velocities and reflective fields, it seems reasonable to presume they would not be of symmetric force.
-
#2579
by
Rodal
on 04 Feb, 2016 14:24
-
...
I apparently genuinely mistook the following:
1) You need 2 plates to generate the Casimir force between them, one would need a plate in front of the spacecraft nanometers in front of it for the spacecraft to be attracted to it. A magnet in front of the spacecraft would generate a greater force and act at a greater distance
Apologies if I misread.
Yes, the above statement was made under the stated restriction of no external fields
Understanding now, I therefore deleted (in my prior post) the question of where that came from
Do you believe that a traveling wavefront in a cavity could have Casimir-effect inducing reflective properties? This is honestly just a thought I've toyed with.
Sorry, I don't know.
What seems evident to me is that either:
1) The reported anomalous forces are the result of experimental artifacts explainable by effects like thermal and electromagnetic effects not quantitatively taken into account.
or
2) The EM Drive is not a closed system, and the anomalous force can be explained as an open system (either by ejection of mass-energy or by coupling to external forces or fields). The problem here is that the reported forces are orders of magnitude greater than a perfect photon rocket.
or
3) The EM Drive anomalous force is due to coupling with General Relativity. This also appears to involve negative mass-energy, but I am not completely sure because the spacetime location of center of mass cannot be uniquely defined and because of the complications surrounding curved spacetime. The magnitude of the claimed force also appears to be a problem (as shown by Dr. Frasca and also by the fact that Minotti's theory would require an unexplored nonlinearity to reconcile with experimental measurements of the Universe).
or
4) The EM Drive is a closed system, in which case the only way I see to conserve momentum-energy for acceleration of the EM Drive is to have creation of negative mass-energy in the EM Drive
Your thoughts are compatible with #4 above
