-
#2880 by zellerium on 16 Feb, 2016 04:00
-
Hello all,
Quick recap for those just tuning in:
Over the summer a classmate and I designed, constructed, and tested a microwave-oven magnetron powered cylindrical resonant cavity partially loaded with a 1 inch thick HDPE dielectric. This cylinder was suspended as a pendulum and a mirror was mounted so that a laser and position sensing detector could be used to determine pendulum movement in both the transverse and axial direction.
The tests were plagued by several key issues that were never resolved over the summer:
1. Arcing between the movable plate and the inside of the cylinder due to a lack of electrical connection (~.1 inch gap between the two surfaces).
2. Melting of the Nylon screws used to secure the dielectric
3. Arcing between the waveguide and cylinder
4. Resonances measured with a VNA hooked up to our homemade magnetron antenna were not always consistent on a day to day basis.
The tests concluded prematurely (we ran out of time) and ended up with a (~2mN) anomalous force in the transverse direction that we didn't know how to explain.
However, Mr. Li pointed out that the force observed was most likely a Lorentz force caused by the current running through the ground wire
(see http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1475977#msg1475977)
We set out at the beginning of this quarter to address all of these issues and finish up our experiment:
1 & 2. A new movable plate was manufactured to provide a press-fit for the HDPE dielectric. This plate also allowed us to pinch a copper cloth/mesh to provide an electrical connection on the inside of the cylinder.
3. The same copper mesh was layered in between this junction.
4. After corresponding with an industry expert we were able to gain some valuable insight as well as borrow a professionally made magnetron antenna to replace our homemade one.
Initial VNA sweeps looked promising:
However upon returning two weeks later the same resonance was nowhere to be found. We spent a great deal of time trying to replicate the initial resonance to no avail. We brought the plate to its marked location and attempted to test it anyway and observed no significant deflection. The small amount of deflection seen in this picture indicated slight movement toward the magnetron (away from the dielectric) which is easily attributed to air escaping the cylinder [the magnetron side is well sealed compared to the movable plate side].
In conclusion:
Our attempt to create a symmetric EM Drive was a fantastic learning experience but not a very successful endeavor. Although we may keep testing our cylinder, there are several major issues we don't have a way around:
1. How do we know how well the professionally made magnetron antenna matches the actual magnetron?
2. The sensitivity of every resonance observed required ~0.001 inch tolerance, meaning when you tap the table the resonance often disappeared or diminished. EVERY test was done after transporting the test article to another building.
3. The wires powering the magnetron have always been an area of concern and were never appropriately addressed. Running current through them and heating them up probably has an impact on the position of the pendulum.
-
#2881 by RotoSequence on 16 Feb, 2016 05:28
-
So, what went wrong? Is it possible that the modifications resulted in a cavity with no stable resonance modes, despite the VNA sweep?
-
#2882 by CW on 16 Feb, 2016 11:22
-
I am not sure how our different DIYers here on the forum are designing their systems, but I would highly recommend to always go fully self-contained. High-energy battery packs are available, so that one experimental run of several minutes at one or two kilowatts electrical should be doable.
For instance, I have now finished building a control and power electronics PCB for a different kind of experimental propulsion approach (which I will not talk about at the moment). I use an 8000mAh LiPo battery pack, which easily gives me 1000W of power for several minutes, per full charge. Battery protection and thermal emergency-off are integrated. The whole self-contained system is remotely controlled by a bluetooth-to-RS232 module. So, there is no way that e.g. an external power supply could create magnetic forces, acting on the test article, in any way through self-interaction. A functioning propulsion system of the EM drive kind would have to be self-contained anyways.. why test something, that is not the supposed genuine article? I think that there are just too many ways to introduce subtle self-interactions, that stay undiscovered and that can systemically emulate the desired outcome through its subtle coupling to the environment.
Regards and best to all other DIYers
CW -
#2883 by rfmwguy on 16 Feb, 2016 12:53
-
Congratulations Kurt on a well thought out revision to your original test. The vna swept resonance disappearing I think indicates a grounding or launching issue. I've seen resonance go away with slight mechanical changes. Be sure your radome cap is above ground. It looks much larger than others I've seen.
Also, don't think the mag is 50 ohms which is why I launched mine into the cavity directly. Take apart the mag mount on the microwave. Notice the tubular launcher...i'd suggest using this to fire into the cavity.
Also, when I experimented this winter with aluminum, anything less than about 9 inches diameter on the large end pushed resonance to above 2.5 ghz. Do a wide band vna sweep and see if your resonance is above 2.5ghz...just a thought.
Don't give up, but it might be time for cavity work. Mulletron also had low to no deflection with an end-loaded symetrical waveguide. He can add more I'm sure. Again, nice experiment...it all helps.
Edit - corrected resonance error -
#2884 by zellerium on 16 Feb, 2016 14:48
-
So, what went wrong? Is it possible that the modifications resulted in a cavity with no stable resonance modes, despite the VNA sweep?
The fantastic resonance seen in the picture is after the modifications were performed. After a few weeks we remeasured and coudn't replicate our results. Dave is probably right: it could definitely be a grounding issue. The antenna needs a fixture to hold it on otherwise it doesn't always have great contact with the waveguide. We also should take the rest of the non-conductive paint off of it.
I would rather start over and build a frustum at this point. I've designed a spherical end-capped TE013 resonator with a waveguide launcher and aperture that currently has -30dB reflection in simulations. I'll post more when I finish tuning it. -
#2885 by Rodal on 16 Feb, 2016 18:45
-
Microwave Oscillators Based on Nonlinear WGM Resonators
Optical signals are phase-modulated with spectrally pure microwave signals.
NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110013113.pdfQuoteOptical oscillators that exploit resonantly
enhanced four-wave mixing in nonlinear
whispering-gallery-mode (WGM)
resonators are under investigation for potential
utility as low-power, ultra-miniature
sources of stable, spectrally pure microwave
signals. There are numerous potential
uses for such oscillators in radar
systems, communication systems, and scientific
instrumentation.
The resonator in an oscillator of this
type is made of a crystalline material that
exhibits cubic Kerr nonlinearity, which
supports the four-photon parametric
process also known as four-wave mixing.
The oscillator can be characterized as all optical
in the sense that the entire process
of generation of the microwave signal
takes place within the WGM resonator.
Studying optical micro-resonators coupling for future insertion in an opto-electronic oscillator
https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00905958/documentQuoteA microwave oscillator is a device generating signals from some gigahertz up to some
tens of gigahertz frequencies. For many applications, such as radio communications, radars
or measurement it is especially important to get high spectral purity signals. However
microwave oscillators are limited by the quality factor Q of its resonant element and by the
sensitivity to temperature changes. High Q oscillator can be based on quartz resonator, but
the frequency is limited to some hundreds of MHz and signals in the microwave domain
have to be obtained by frequency multiplication leading to a decrease of the quality in term
of phase noise
....
Because it can generate high-purity RF signals with very low phase noise,
optoelectronic oscillator (OEO) is an important device in many applications such as:
Radars, communications, and metrology of time and frequency. OEO is a fundamentally
distinct approach for generating signal, both with RF and optical outputs. A conventional
OEO system which brings together component such as electrooptic modulator, laser
source, photodetector and an optical fiber loop can have an equivalent RF quality factor
greater than 106 to reduce the phase noise of the generated microwave signal. With this
OEO system, a 10 GHz signal with a performance of -163dBc/Hz at 10 kHz offset from
the carrier was achieved. The variant of configuration of the OEO is called the coupled
OEO (COEO), also generates pico-second optical pulses at its optical output. The
generated pulses exhibit the same low phase noise as the actual OEO at its RF output. In
particular, a long fiber loop in OEO results in micro-second storage times, corresponding
to a quality factor (noted Q) about a million at a 10 GHz oscillation frequency. This is a
high value compared to conventional type dielectric microwave cavities used in oscillators -
#2886 by MrJarhead on 16 Feb, 2016 22:05
-
Hey everyone (first time poster) - I've been following/lurking since Thread 2 and make this forum part of my daily reading (I fall into the open-minded-but-very-skeptical category). The work everyone does here is incredible.. even if the anomalous thrust signal turns out to be heat, out-gassing, etc., this collaboration is laying a valuable framework for future researchers investigating propellant-less propulsion systems, IMO.
On to my question (I am a Software Architect by trade, so my apologies to the physicists and the professional engineers in the room for the crudeness of the question/insight) -
Has anyone designed a test to look specifically for changes in energy within the frustrum that would indicate energy/momentum has been transferred in a manner consistent with an open system?
I ask this because it seems the majority of the tests have been designed to look for an anomalous thrust signal through movement of the frustrum.. would it make sense to design tests that also focus on the operating state within the cavity? If a test of this nature is possible, would it make the life of the DIYer easier? What would make up the profile of this test?
This is based on the following thought experiment of the operational conditions of the frustrum - Warning: Pure CONJECTURE, from a layman, follows:
- Energy and Momentum are conserved, and thermodynamics lives on - this implies the system is open
- The frustrum is working against a poorly understood medium (or else we probably wouldn't be having this discussion ha)
- My personal wild speculation is that it's operating in a manner more consistent with a "propeller", where a pressure gradient is created within the environment. It doesn't make sense that forces of the magnitude described are due to just photons being ejected from the drive..
- Additional speculation is that the frustrum operates in a "closed" manner until some unknown threshold is reached. At this point, the system "opens up", and energy is transferred. The energy within the frustrum decreases at this point, potentially "closing" the frustrum back off, resulting in an open/close cycle within the system
Since Maxwell's equations describe a closed system, when the frustrum "opens" up, a discrepancy should appear between what Maxwell predicts and the actual operating state of the frustrum.. this should indicate something "interesting" might be going on.
Thanks again to everyone for the insight into this subject, and the valuable knowledge you're sharing... now back to the shadows
- Shawn -
#2887 by Rodal on 16 Feb, 2016 23:06
-
Hey everyone (first time poster) - I've been following/lurking since Thread 2 and make this forum part of my daily reading (I fall into the open-minded-but-very-skeptical category). The work everyone does here is incredible.. even if the anomalous thrust signal turns out to be heat, out-gassing, etc., this collaboration is laying a valuable framework for future researchers investigating propellant-less propulsion systems, IMO.
On to my question (I am a Software Architect by trade, so my apologies to the physicists and the professional engineers in the room for the crudeness of the question/insight) -
Has anyone designed a test to look specifically for changes in energy within the frustrum that would indicate energy/momentum has been transferred in a manner consistent with an open system?
I ask this because it seems the majority of the tests have been designed to look for an anomalous thrust signal through movement of the frustrum.. would it make sense to design tests that also focus on the operating state within the cavity? If a test of this nature is possible, would it make the life of the DIYer easier? What would make up the profile of this test?
This is based on the following thought experiment of the operational conditions of the frustrum - Warning: Pure CONJECTURE, from a layman, follows:
- Energy and Momentum are conserved, and thermodynamics lives on - this implies the system is open
- The frustrum is working against a poorly understood medium (or else we probably wouldn't be having this discussion ha)
- My personal wild speculation is that it's operating in a manner more consistent with a "propeller", where a pressure gradient is created within the environment. It doesn't make sense that forces of the magnitude described are due to just photons being ejected from the drive..
- Additional speculation is that the frustrum operates in a "closed" manner until some unknown threshold is reached. At this point, the system "opens up", and energy is transferred. The energy within the frustrum decreases at this point, potentially "closing" the frustrum back off, resulting in an open/close cycle within the system
Since Maxwell's equations describe a closed system, when the frustrum "opens" up, a discrepancy should appear between what Maxwell predicts and the actual operating state of the frustrum.. this should indicate something "interesting" might be going on.
Thanks again to everyone for the insight into this subject, and the valuable knowledge you're sharing... now back to the shadows
- Shawn
Welcome to the thread and thank you for your input
The problem with making such a measurement is that the proposed outside fields:
* Quantum Vacuum of particle/antiparticle pairs (Dr. White)
* Coupled electromagnetism with General Relativity (Minotti, Trunov)
* Unruth effect (McCulloch)
* Negative energy (Dr. White, Minotti)
* Dark energy (Trunov?)
* Dark Mass (Axions with strong coupling at ~2 GHz)
"action" are supposed (by proponents) to take place inside the resonant cavity, they are very controversial to take place in a resonant cavity operating at frequency and power similar to the one in a home kitchen microwave oven at room temperature, and they have not been observed in other experiments (we have not measured dark mass even at CERN, nobody is close to know what is behind "dark energy", we have not measured the Unruth effect or even the Hawking radiation in black holes, etc.) so, the experimenters are left to measure the external variable that is anomalous: self-acceleration and its anomalous force effect on the measuring equipment (which could be due to experimental artifacts: thermal and electromagnetic artifacts).
Heck, experimenters have not even measured up to now easier to define things like: the effect of ferromagnetic ends (instead of diamagnetic copper at the ends), the effect of using thicker vs thinner copper, the effect of also using DC fields, a full study of the effect of dielectric polymer inserts, the effect of ignoring Shawyer's "strange" prescription forbidding small end smaller than the cutoff for an open cylindrical waveguide, etc. etc. -
#2888 by rfmwguy on 16 Feb, 2016 23:16
-
Welcome shawn. Open or closed is the big debate. Most I think believe it has to be open to conserve energy or momentum...a pull, push, attraction, repulsion or perhaps twisting on a medium we have not identified yet. Some call it quantum vacuum, dark matter or energy, a localized gravity effect, etc.
We try to point to a variety of papers published, some good, some bad, some new and some older. There is no review board for posts, most here understand it has to be related to the emdrive effect.
From my perspective, no one has the answers yet. Skeptics here actually help design better experiments and improve theoretical discussions. To my knowledge, they are open minded without an agenda.
Thanks for following along, don't be a stranger. Invite other reasonable folks to visit and study the wealth of info in T1-T6. -
#2889 by spupeng7 on 16 Feb, 2016 23:58
-
A quick question. How accurate is this statement?
This explains it: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39214.msg1474347#msg1474347QuoteQ values are generally on the order of magnitude of the volume - to - surface ratio divided by the skin depth
Addressing the quality factor of a resonator of course.
Q=(2/SkinDepth)( ∫Electromagnetic Energy Density dV/ ∫ Electromagnetic Energy Density dA)
Thank you Dr. Rodal. I believe that confirms the rule of thumb as quoted. Missing the factor of 2, but still the same order.
Q Question: Dr Rodal, does Q relate directly to the number of reflections that any one cycle of a resonant signal is likley to experience within the Frustum? A very rough but easily invisaged rule of thumbs, though I cannot remember where it came from ... -
#2890 by rfmwguy on 17 Feb, 2016 00:27
-
Q is a simple ratio of center frequency divided by a 3dB bandwidth of s11 or s21 points, iow, how well matched a cavity is at a particular frequency. A well matched cavity means less loss at that frequency meaning less energy absorption, meaning more bounces...A quick question. How accurate is this statement?
This explains it: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39214.msg1474347#msg1474347QuoteQ values are generally on the order of magnitude of the volume - to - surface ratio divided by the skin depth
Addressing the quality factor of a resonator of course.
Q=(2/SkinDepth)( ∫Electromagnetic Energy Density dV/ ∫ Electromagnetic Energy Density dA)
Thank you Dr. Rodal. I believe that confirms the rule of thumb as quoted. Missing the factor of 2, but still the same order.
Q Question: Dr Rodal, does Q relate directly to the number of reflections that any one cycle of a resonant signal is likley to experience within the Frustum? A very rough but easily invisaged rule of thumbs, though I cannot remember where it came from ... -
#2891 by MazonDel on 17 Feb, 2016 00:34
-
One thing I have admittedly been a bit curious about. We've been wondering about the possibility of the EMDrive doing some interesting things with the warping of space as a result of those tests done quite a while ago by Eagleworks. I know there was recent discussion on that which I think ended up declaring it likely to have been heating of the air? Apologies, I didn't keep up to date that well during that conversation.
Anyway, the thing I was thinking about, is if someone manages to get one of their builds in a state with reasonably consistent outputs, has anyone thought of trying to poke the LIGO people to see if they might be willing to let us set this up next to (not even inside) of one of their tunnels in various configurations to see if they could detect anything? I figure if the thing is sensitive enough to detect the collision of some black holes from many many light years away, it might be able to tell us something about the tiny effects from an EMDrive up close and personal.
Just a thought. -
#2892 by rfmwguy on 17 Feb, 2016 00:42
-
One thing I have admittedly been a bit curious about. We've been wondering about the possibility of the EMDrive doing some interesting things with the warping of space as a result of those tests done quite a while ago by Eagleworks. I know there was recent discussion on that which I think ended up declaring it likely to have been heating of the air? Apologies, I didn't keep up to date that well during that conversation.
Great idea, although their laser is in a vacuum pipe. With its sensitivity, it would probably read all em and power supply interference. Might be difficult to distinguish. Also probably not something they want to take off line for a special test. I'll bet they're in 24/7 monitoring mode.
Anyway, the thing I was thinking about, is if someone manages to get one of their builds in a state with reasonably consistent outputs, has anyone thought of trying to poke the LIGO people to see if they might be willing to let us set this up next to (not even inside) of one of their tunnels in various configurations to see if they could detect anything? I figure if the thing is sensitive enough to detect the collision of some black holes from many many light years away, it might be able to tell us something about the tiny effects from an EMDrive up close and personal.
Just a thought. -
#2893 by Rodal on 17 Feb, 2016 01:01
-
A quick question. How accurate is this statement?
This explains it: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39214.msg1474347#msg1474347QuoteQ values are generally on the order of magnitude of the volume - to - surface ratio divided by the skin depth
Addressing the quality factor of a resonator of course.
Q=(2/SkinDepth)( ∫Electromagnetic Energy Density dV/ ∫ Electromagnetic Energy Density dA)
Thank you Dr. Rodal. I believe that confirms the rule of thumb as quoted. Missing the factor of 2, but still the same order.
Q Question: Dr Rodal, does Q relate directly to the number of reflections that any one cycle of a resonant signal is likley to experience within the Frustum? A very rough but easily invisaged rule of thumbs, though I cannot remember where it came from ...
Not the "the number of reflections that any one cycle of a resonant signal is likley to experience within the Frustum" but Pi times the (mean lifetime)*frequency of resonance that the frustum will have when you turn the excitation off. Or Pi times the "mean number of cycles" of resonance after you turn the excitation off.
The definition of Quality Factor is:
it is an inverse measure of damping ζ: the lower the damping ζ of the oscillation, the higher the Q, it is used for acoustic resonance, vibrations of structures, electromagnetic resonance, etc. etc.
It is related to the damping constant ζ and the exponential time constant τ as follows:
Q=π τ frequency
=π τ/period
τ = Q / (π frequency)
= Q*period/π
so, after turning off the excitation, resonance will decay with time t exponentially:
N(t)/ No = e- t frequency π/Q
af a fixed frequency, the higher the Q, the longer the time t can be for a given ratio of N(t)/No
The time constant τ is the mean lifetime of the exponential decay
We can see that τ is the time t at which the intensity is reduced to e-1 = 0.367879441 times its initial value, since Q is proportional to the mean lifetime τ you can think of Q as a measure of Pi times the (mean lifetime)*frequency of resonance after your turn the excitation off.
At a constant frequency, Q is proportional to the mean lifetime of resonance without excitation.
.
For a fixed natural frequency of a bell's resonance, you can think of Q as a measure of the mean lifetime of a bell's vibration after you ring the bell.
Alternatively, since the period "T" of oscillation (the time duration of one cycle) is the reciprocal of the frequency
frequency=1/period
then
(mean lifetime)*frequency = (mean lifetime)/period
and defining
"mean number of cycles" = (mean lifetime)/(period of oscillation)
you can think of Q as a measure of Pi times the so-defined "mean number of cycles" of resonance after you turn the excitation off.
Here is a bell with very high Q, thanks to the magic of gif's
Also: comparing different natural frequencies with the same Q, the higher the natural frequency, the shorter the mean lifetime of resonance, conversely, the lower the natural frequency, the longer the mean lifetime of resonance, since Q is Pi times the mean lifetime of resonance times the natural frequency -
#2894 by MrJarhead on 17 Feb, 2016 01:25
-
Thanks, and I appreciate the responses Dr. Rodal and Dave - I'll do my homework and see if I can contribute something more useful. It makes perfect sense that detecting anomalies in a frustrum's predicted Q or energy is a little difficult when we really don't know what to look for, and that DIY builds constructed of home microwave magnetrons may not be reliably predictable using Meep/COMSOL/et. Al.
With that, it's awe inspiring with how little we actually know about the (currently unobservable) Universe.
PS: On a side note, let me know if you ever need some computing horse power - I have a 102 core Xeon cluster in my basement that I use for my side business, but I could take it offline for a couple of days if anyone needs some CPU time
-
#2895 by Mulletron on 17 Feb, 2016 04:01
-
Been trying to understand the EmDrive in terms of a possible gravitomagnetic effect since about September. Found lots of good references and learned a lot along the way trying to turn the EmDrive into a gravitational transformer http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.5754.
Decided to try a different way of learning new concepts by using old familiar ones.
Was watching this video while mentally substituting electric with gravitoelectric and magnetic with gravitomagentic terms, trying to gain some insight due to the analogies between electromagnetism and gravitoelectromagnetism (keeping in mind the differences). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitoelectromagnetism
Professor Lewin presented really cool demonstration on non-conservative fields at the end. It got me wondering if this analogy would transfer over to gravitoelectromagnetism? His experiment blew my mind, and then I blew my own mind....are you next? Seriously...the volt meters are connected to the same spot!!
I remember I had brought up non-conservative fields before and thought to myself, so what?
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1414138#msg1414138
-
#2896 by CW on 17 Feb, 2016 11:35
-
Been trying to understand the EmDrive in terms of a possible gravitomagnetic effect since about September. Found lots of good references and learned a lot along the way trying to turn the EmDrive into a gravitational transformer http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.5754.
Decided to try a different way of learning new concepts by using old familiar ones.
Was watching this video while mentally substituting electric with gravitoelectric and magnetic with gravitomagentic terms, trying to gain some insight due to the analogies between electromagnetism and gravitoelectromagnetism (keeping in mind the differences). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitoelectromagnetism
Professor Lewin presented really cool demonstration on non-conservative fields at the end. It got me wondering if this analogy would transfer over to gravitoelectromagnetism? His experiment blew my mind, and then I blew my own mind....are you next? Seriously...the volt meters are connected to the same spot!!
I remember I had brought up non-conservative fields before and thought to myself, so what?
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1414138#msg1414138
The funny thing is, that his 900R and 100R are simply forming a resistive voltage divider for the circular induced voltage of 1V . Students are almost always only 'programmed' to spit out standard answers to standard questions in tests. Hardly anyone actually digests and mulls over the lecture's contents and 'gets it'. Let's just take transformers. I seriously didn't meet a single fellow electrical engineering student during my studies, who could explain, how a transformer physically works. They could throw transformer equations around, but didn't even understand what all of this meant. Eddy fields, their workings and applications were a mystery to them. Studying and achieving a degree has nowadays oftentimes become an exercise in just understanding the underlying testing system, and 'hacking' it as badly as possible, to cheat one's way through this whole thing. I always rejected this kind of thinking. Good thing, that this forum is the opposite.
-
#2897 by Rodal on 17 Feb, 2016 13:08
-
CONGRATULATIONS to NSF user and contributor to the EM Drive thread "WarpTech" Todd Desiato
whose article THE ELECTROMAGNETIC QUANTUM VACUUM WARP DRIVE, has now been accepted for publication in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society !!!
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272093277_THE_ELECTROMAGNETIC_QUANTUM_VACUUM_WARP_DRIVE
JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH INTERPLANETARY SOCIETY TBD · APRIL 2016
First published in 1934, the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS) was the first to describe many aspects of space travel.
It is now produced as a 72 page volume every alternate month. JBIS features the work of individual space organisations, companies, universities and space projects, and areas of space science and space technology.
Editorial and advisory board:
http://www.jbis.org.uk/editors.php
-
#2898 by rfmwguy on 17 Feb, 2016 13:19
-
CONGRATULATIONS to NSF user and contributor the EM Drive thread "WarpTech" Todd Desiato
No wonder he's been absent for a while...good job Warptech! Onward and outwards.
whose article THE ELECTROMAGNETIC QUANTUM VACUUM WARP DRIVE, has been accepted for publication in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society !!!
First published in 1934, the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society (JBIS) was the first to describe many aspects of space travel. It is now produced as a 72 page volume every alternate month. JBIS features the work of individual space organisations, companies, universities and space projects, and areas of space science and space technology.
Editorial and advisory board:
http://www.jbis.org.uk/editors.php -
#2899 by Rodal on 17 Feb, 2016 13:39
-
...
Todd has been working on having this article published for several years, great perseverance in going through the lengthy peer-review process.
No wonder he's been absent for a while...good job Warptech! Onward and outwards.
