-
#3400 by Rodal on 05 Mar, 2016 17:46
-
Nope, I do not argue with ladies. I learned that at home.
...
However, we are not in the Victorian age anymore , women deserve to be treated as equals, and that goes for arguments as well
-
#3401 by SeeShells on 05 Mar, 2016 17:57
-
Nope, I do not argue with ladies. I learned that at home.
Nice coax feed to the frustum, BTW.
Thanks. Don't laugh but I am thinking of hanging my very first frustum, the one with the octagonal perforated sides and putting a light socket into it but that's not in the least bit scientific.
Even though the frustum should be grounded through the coaxial N connector it's not truly a ground. -
#3402 by SeeShells on 05 Mar, 2016 18:02
-
On men and women...Nope, I do not argue with ladies. I learned that at home.
...
However, we are not in the Victorian age anymore , women deserve to be treated as equals, and that goes for arguments as well
That goes right along with the advise my dad told me on not getting the first model when it was made. Get the next one, because that's when they worked the bugs out.
Shell -
#3403 by mwvp on 05 Mar, 2016 21:45
-
A few thoughts -
If any energy was somehow - evanescence, magnetic fields, et., was somehow escaping the cavity, I believe it would surely have been noticed. Some of references and papers, for instance the reference to a book on high-Q resonators, describe extremely sensitive optical and microwave detectors. Detectors for gravity waves, and the heroic efforts to integrate signals out of quantum noise. Surely, if Maxwell's equations were somehow deficient, it would have been found out. And if it turns out there's some CPT symmetry issues, or photons have some mass, it's like (don't you love that word, "like"? So scientific) 20 orders of magnitude and more out of the realm of practical experience and practical utility.
Having studied prof. Rumpf's http://emlab.utep.edu/ee5390fdtd.htm course, and half-way through the CEM course, I've acquired an appreciation for the limitations and application of several methods; FDTD, FDFD, transfer and scattering matrix.
There all more and less crude approximations. The Yee grid used is an approximation. Taking discrete differences, interpolating data points and the geometry of the Yee grid all result in distortions. Finding trivial energy leaking out of a simulation wouldn't be at all surprising to me. It's a rather disappointing and sobering dose of reality to understand significant simplifications such as dimension reduction with symmetry, et. may be necessary to get results in reasonable time on a PC, wrt field plotting group velocity over milliseconds.
From what I know of plasma, unless sharp points are present inside the frustrum no ion-wind will be leaking currents. If any significant current were to start leaking, it would quickly become a noisy, hot, glowing diffuse arc. Ions, especially energetic ions, have short mean free paths and lifetimes at atmospheric pressure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paschen%27s_law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Townsend_discharge
If anti-matter were somehow being generated, the annihilation gammas would surely have been noticed. And people would have been lobbing kiloton-yield hand-grenades danger-close on their favorite playgrounds by now.
It sounds to me, in my present level of ignorance, like some are hoping something they don't understand will produce a hoped-for effect.
I believe the EM drive is an open system, with dispersion causing anisotropic radiation pressure resulting from anisotropic dissipation of acceleration induced Doppler spreading. Perhaps the method of lines may be useful for simulation. I'll find out next week. -
#3404 by Monomorphic on 05 Mar, 2016 22:03
-
I think the image I posted of the H field extending out of the frustum was inaccurate. I pulled the file again and get contradictory results. I can only get the H field to show up outside if I click "Instantaneous Magnitude." And then only for a tiny fraction of the phase (wt). This image is the typical fields. E field on left, H field on right. You will notice the huge difference between the original image, also below.
-
#3405 by Monomorphic on 05 Mar, 2016 22:45
-
And because of the way the FEKO solver dices up a near field (number of field points), there can be both E and H field "aliasing" outside the frustum. Aliasing is an approximation error.
-
#3406 by rfmwguy on 05 Mar, 2016 22:55
-
Sorry shell, I let this post slip by and meant to comment...in my simple mind, its all about anchoring. If an astronaut or a car driver were anchored to their vehicle, throwing rocks or pushing windshields would be fruitless. If either one became anchored to a another point in spacetime, physically separate from their vehicle, then their vehicles will move by their actions.New EMDrive Theory - Yes, I'm prepared to go out on a limb with the "Distler Theory" (wish me luck
)
(clip)
As I said on the sticky post (page 1) of these last couple of emdrive threads, I am speaking for myself with this post, not for NSF, any other users and definitely not as Moderator. I could be totally incorrect and can live with that.
- Dave
Help me understand how we can get around the conservation laws. Help me evolve this theory so Maxwell, Lorentz and the laws of causality don't haunt me. I've had this similar chat with a very sharp and dear friend and after sleepless nights thinking about it. I only can think of one way out of and around to side step these basic laws. I'm not negating these laws but bending them just a little.
A thought experiment, an astronaut in the cargo bay of the space shuttle with a box of rocks that she is throwing at the far wall. The conservation of momentum takes over. With every throw from the box of rocks equal reactionary forces are generated and conservation is met. But what if you made her counter reaction force to throwing the rock disappear or change?
Could her counter reactionary force to throwing the rock decay into evanescent waves? We know they carry extraordinary spin and momentum and don't interact the same as a standing or traveling wave but they can extract the counter reactionary forces and channel them away in different vectored forces and then decay into nothing. This would show up as excess heat patterns in the walls of the cavity.
So instead of a pure 1800 opposite reactionary force to throwing the rock the counter force is vectored to the side walls of the shuttle by the actions of the evanescent wave actions? Simple visualization, would be every time she throws a rock instead of traveling backwards she tries to travel to the sides.
I can visualize it and some of the maths work out on first look but I've got way too much on my plate right now, getting excited to finish off my re-build.
Shell
Maybe I should just focus on building to test this theory as well as several others which I'm doing.
If spooky action at a distance were real, there is a possible anchor. If the driver or astronaut had independent propulsion, there is another. Its all about anchoring to a field, force or particle outside of the vehicles reference frame...a bond, if you will. Emdrive must be an open system.
The bond could be elastic, it could be fragile...a rigid bond or anchor would maximize the result. Reading classical em will not provide an answer, imho. Recent discoveries or possibly new ones are my focal point. We know what we know...it the new possibilities that stoke the fires, for me anyway. -
#3407 by Notsosureofit on 05 Mar, 2016 23:07
-
I believe the EM drive is an open system, with dispersion causing anisotropic radiation pressure resulting from anisotropic dissipation of acceleration induced Doppler spreading. Perhaps the method of lines may be useful for simulation. I'll find out next week.
Glad to hear it ... -
#3408 by rfmwguy on 06 Mar, 2016 00:46
-
For those considering quantum theory in their emdrive musings, there is some legitimate considerations for quantum entanglement:
"The electron shell of multi-electron atoms always consists of entangled electrons. The correct ionization energy can be calculated only by consideration of electron entanglement." - Frank Jensen: Introduction to Computational Chemistry. Wiley, 2007, ISBN 978-0-470-01187-4
Copper has 29 electrons, in its ionized state, there are 28 electrons in Cu+ and 27 in Cu2+. It is almost a certainty that the frustum contains ionized copper atoms and therefore entangled electrons. Quantum entanglement is a deep rabbit hole in itself. See my earlier post and initial theory. Copper ions jumping to higher energy states certainly involved entangled electrons.
The question being, is the entanglement nonlocal...thus being another possibility for the emdrive to be an open system or is entanglement localized within each ion's electron cloud? Are exchanged electrons entangled or perpetually free? Braintrust commentary welcomed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement -
#3409 by ThinkerX on 06 Mar, 2016 02:26
-
A variation of a problem we have considered here before - more than once.
You have an astronaut inside a fair sized compartment in high earth orbit. Astronaut is in zero G. So are a multitude of other objects inside the compartment, pretty much 'floating in place.' This Astronaut has the sort of pitching arm that makes coaches drool. He'd also make a dang good pool shark. (billiards)
Version One:
Astronaut is floating in the center of this space. He chucks a ball at the one wall. His action propels him backward. Object hits the one wall at the same time the astronaut strikes the other. The actions cancel each other out.
Version Two:
Astronaut is in the center of the room again. This time he hurls a ball at a 'floating object.' His act propels him backward, he strikes the wall, and the craft moves a nudge in that direction. The ball he threw, though, hits the floating object and expends the full force of its momentum on it. The floater is nudged 'sideways,' (hit the edge, not the center) strikes the wall, and imparts a bit of momentum in that direction. The ball itself might actually bounce back more or less in the astronauts direction. -
#3410 by RotoSequence on 06 Mar, 2016 02:37
-
Usually cartoons or images without commentary tend to be frowned upon by nsf as I've been told. I'll defer to them.
The aformentioned comment does make a good point, though. Quantum Mechanics is a strictly mathematical and experimental construct, and is probably not all that useful when applied outside of those contexts. -
#3411 by SeeShells on 06 Mar, 2016 03:08
-
For those considering quantum theory in their emdrive musings, there is some legitimate considerations for quantum entanglement:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DZ2N-ZioaCs/TaOtxn96DOI/AAAAAAAAAEg/BNTyIt8rcSg/s1600/farside.gif
"The electron shell of multi-electron atoms always consists of entangled electrons. The correct ionization energy can be calculated only by consideration of electron entanglement." - Frank Jensen: Introduction to Computational Chemistry. Wiley, 2007, ISBN 978-0-470-01187-4
Copper has 29 electrons, in its ionized state, there are 28 electrons in Cu+ and 27 in Cu2+. It is almost a certainty that the frustum contains ionized copper atoms and therefore entangled electrons. Quantum entanglement is a deep rabbit hole in itself. See my earlier post and initial theory. Copper ions jumping to higher energy states certainly involved entangled electrons.
The question being, is the entanglement nonlocal...thus being another possibility for the emdrive to be an open system or is entanglement localized within each ion's electron cloud? Are exchanged electrons entangled or perpetually free? Braintrust commentary welcomed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
Quantum Mechanics is one of the most successful theories we have and I've read lots of papers, several books and even watched many higher educational videos, but honestly like you I sometimes feel like the dog and defer to the powers that be to answer that one. I have no doubt that it's occurring within the drive, but the how and why and when and what effects it causes I just don't know.
Added:
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/2/e1501466.full
Shell -
#3412 by SteveD on 06 Mar, 2016 06:05
-
Building off my question of what happens if a photon rocket effect accelerates one end of the frustum but reflects before the acceleration enters into the light cone of the reflector.
Some numbers. A 1kg frustum moving at a velocity of 460 m/s (the speed of the earth's rotation at the equator) and a photo emitter putting out 299792458 joules at one end.
The frustum is moving at 460 m/s so has a KE of 105800 joules.
The photon emitter fires, movement is now 461 m/s and so has a KE of 106260.5 joules, and increase 460.5 joules.
The photon's travel to the other end of the frustum. Not taking into account any form of redshift or blueshift they decelerate the end of the frustum from 460 to 459 m/s. KE of this end is now 105340.5 joules for a net decrease of 459.5 joules.
This means the device has seen a net increase of one joule of kinetic energy. Enough to accelerate it to 460.0021739 m/s.
I'm going to take a wild guess, based on the interferometer data, and say that when the light cones for the two conditions meet some form of gravity wave is produced.
-
#3413 by X_RaY on 06 Mar, 2016 08:31
-
For those considering quantum theory in their emdrive musings, there is some legitimate considerations for quantum entanglement:
Entanglement is crazy stuff and hard to understand but the idea of copper ion-electron entanglement is really interesting.
"The electron shell of multi-electron atoms always consists of entangled electrons. The correct ionization energy can be calculated only by consideration of electron entanglement." - Frank Jensen: Introduction to Computational Chemistry. Wiley, 2007, ISBN 978-0-470-01187-4
Copper has 29 electrons, in its ionized state, there are 28 electrons in Cu+ and 27 in Cu2+. It is almost a certainty that the frustum contains ionized copper atoms and therefore entangled electrons. Quantum entanglement is a deep rabbit hole in itself. See my earlier post and initial theory. Copper ions jumping to higher energy states certainly involved entangled electrons.
The question being, is the entanglement nonlocal...thus being another possibility for the emdrive to be an open system or is entanglement localized within each ion's electron cloud? Are exchanged electrons entangled or perpetually free? Braintrust commentary welcomed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
One of the most important researcher in this field is anton zeilinger, maybe start there.
http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups/zeilinger-group/publications
http://vcq.quantum.at/publications/all-publications.html
http://vcq.quantum.at/fileadmin/Publications/Zeilinger_Force-Free_Gravitational_redshift.pdf
(Some of the publications are also available on arxiv.org)
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1401/1401.4318.pdf
EDIT
Did you have an idea how long such entangled state would be exist at this high energy levels(temperature) before it will be destroyed due to decoherence?
In the past I was focused on the squeezed quantum states of the photons inside the cavity but never think about the ions in this context.. https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39004.msg1493813#msg1493813
-
#3414 by CW on 06 Mar, 2016 10:41
-
For those considering quantum theory in their emdrive musings, there is some legitimate considerations for quantum entanglement:
"The electron shell of multi-electron atoms always consists of entangled electrons. The correct ionization energy can be calculated only by consideration of electron entanglement." - Frank Jensen: Introduction to Computational Chemistry. Wiley, 2007, ISBN 978-0-470-01187-4
Copper has 29 electrons, in its ionized state, there are 28 electrons in Cu+ and 27 in Cu2+. It is almost a certainty that the frustum contains ionized copper atoms and therefore entangled electrons. Quantum entanglement is a deep rabbit hole in itself. See my earlier post and initial theory. Copper ions jumping to higher energy states certainly involved entangled electrons.
The question being, is the entanglement nonlocal...thus being another possibility for the emdrive to be an open system or is entanglement localized within each ion's electron cloud? Are exchanged electrons entangled or perpetually free? Braintrust commentary welcomed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
If we live (according to Wheeler's postulate) in a one-electron-universe, and all apparently existing electrons are just one particle jumping across all of time and space (or existence, for that matter), then appropriately interacting with these 'after-images' might actually provide for a mechanism to equally spread out momentum across all of time and space. Which could then seem to us observers, as if momentum could 'mysteriously' disappear on one side of an technological artifact like the EM drive, while it is actually being distributed statistically to all matter in the universe by the one electron jumping back and forth through space-time, heating it up, creating noise and entropy. Heating objects tend to expand.. and what does the universe do? It expands .
(EDIT: Improved grammar. ) -
#3415 by rfmwguy on 06 Mar, 2016 12:10
-
thanks x-ray, no...don't have an idea yet on the high energy, self sputtering state based on Dr Anders lab work and theory. He mentioned the lack of modeling in this area and I suspect the plasma chaos makes it hard to answer quantitatively. I'm focusing on this with my theory so perhaps I'll find something soon. The runaway state is fascinating (eyebrow lift)
-
#3416 by X_RaY on 06 Mar, 2016 12:31
-
thanks x-ray, no...don't have an idea yet on the high energy, self sputtering state based on Dr Anders lab work and theory. He mentioned the lack of modeling in this area and I suspect the plasma chaos makes it hard to answer quantitatively. I'm focusing on this with my theory so perhaps I'll find something soon. The runaway state is fascinating (eyebrow lift)
I just found an approximation formula in a german text.
Point 6. fomula (10).
https://www.tu-braunschweig.de/Medien-DB/ifdn-physik/decoher.pdf
The decoherence-time will be smaller the higher the temperature and the larger the distances of the entangled system(s) is. -
#3417 by rfmwguy on 06 Mar, 2016 12:58
-
My german tends to decay at the technical level, so I will need time for this paper, but thank you. Decoherence time did lead me to this:
"The decoherence rate depends on a number of factors including temperature, or uncertainty in position, and many experiments have tried to measure it depending on the external environment.
The process of a quantum superposition gradually obliterated by decoherence was quantitatively measured for the first time by Serge Haroche and his co-workers at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris in 1996. Their approach involved sending individual rubidium atoms, each in a superposition of two states, through a microwave-filled cavity. The two quantum states both cause shifts in the phase of the microwave field, but by different amounts, so that the field itself is also put into a superposition of two states. Due to photon scattering on cavity mirror imperfection, the cavity field losses phase coherence to the environment.
Haroche and his colleagues measured the resulting decoherence via correlations between the states of pairs of atoms sent through the cavity with various time delays between the atoms."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence
So experimentally, microwaves in a cavity have been utilized to demonstrate decoherence. Translating decoherence into kinetic energy or motion relative to localized spacetime outside the system does not appear to be discussed. -
#3418 by Rodal on 06 Mar, 2016 14:00
-
My german tends to decay at the technical level, so I will need time for this paper, but thank you. Decoherence time did lead me to this:
"The decoherence rate depends on a number of factors including temperature, or uncertainty in position, and many experiments have tried to measure it depending on the external environment.
The process of a quantum superposition gradually obliterated by decoherence was quantitatively measured for the first time by Serge Haroche and his co-workers at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris in 1996. Their approach involved sending individual rubidium atoms, each in a superposition of two states, through a microwave-filled cavity. The two quantum states both cause shifts in the phase of the microwave field, but by different amounts, so that the field itself is also put into a superposition of two states. Due to photon scattering on cavity mirror imperfection, the cavity field losses phase coherence to the environment.
Haroche and his colleagues measured the resulting decoherence via correlations between the states of pairs of atoms sent through the cavity with various time delays between the atoms."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence
So experimentally, microwaves in a cavity have been utilized to demonstrate decoherence. Translating decoherence into kinetic energy or motion relative to localized spacetime outside the system does not appear to be discussed.
1) Notwithstanding the fact that rfmwguy has not shown any reason that there should be nonlocal quantum entanglement of an EM Drive cavity with the exterior, I'll try to put this in simple terms: nonlocal quantum entanglement at macro physical distances is something very delicate that requires careful, precise preparation with extreme care. Nothing like this has been done in any EM Drive experiment. On the contrary: the EM Drive experiments have been conducted in such a way that it is highly unlikely that there would be any nonlocal quantum entanglement with anything on the exterior of the EM Drive. Just about everything that the EM Drive testers have done would result in decoherence of any entangled nonlocal state: the fact that the experiments are conducted at room temperature, the fact that the EM Drive gets heated in an uncontrolled manner by induction heating. The very poor control of the EM Drive experiments: with very poor control of experimental variables. This proposal is backwards: what we know after 6 long threads of discussing the EM Drive is that thermal effects are the big problem in all these experiments. Uncontrolled induction heating thermal effects and poor experimental preparation methods of EM Drive experiments argue the fact that there is no way that nonlocal quantum entanglement would exist in EM Drive experiments.
How can one argue for nonlocal quantum entanglement in EM Drive experiments where the experimenters cannot even get the EM Drive Q (quality factor of resonance) to stay constant within the test ?
And take a look at the experimental data: the variability of EM Drive experimental results is...ahem...should I say...horrible?
http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results
No coherence in results...
2) The fact that << microwaves in a cavity have been utilized to demonstrate decoherence>> is not directly relevant to the issue of self-acceleration of a cavity.
For example, microwaves in a cavity are used in your and my cell phones as well, but that does not mean that the EM Drive is a cell phone or that the experiments conducted by NASA, Shawyer, Yang, Tajmar and DIY people like yourself are experiments in a new form of cell phone communication.
Nonlocal quantum coherence and decoherence are not related to breakdown of conservation of momentum or breakdown of conservation of energy.
3) <<Translating decoherence into kinetic energy or motion relative to localized spacetime outside the system does not appear to be discussed>> because there is no compelling reason for such discussion. There is no physical reason that decoherence should translate into self-acceleration of a cavity.
4) If one wants to ponder some science fiction scenarios related to nonlocal quantum entanglement, one could instead engage in science-fiction discussion of teleportation. But even such teleportation would not involve any self-acceleration of anything. It is completely different from physically moving an object to that distant site.
Quantum teleportation is a process by which quantum information (e.g. the exact state of an atom or photon) can be transmitted from one location to another, with the help of classical communication and previously shared quantum entanglement between the sending and receiving location. It cannot be used for faster-than-light transport or communication of classical bits. Please notice: information can be transmitted by classical communication methods, not the object itself.
Quantum teleportation also cannot be used to make (separable, identical) copies of a system (the EM Drive is a very large "system"), as this violates the no-cloning theorem.
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-cloning_theorem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cloningQuoteIn physics, the no-cloning theorem states that it is impossible to create an identical copy of an arbitrary unknown quantum state. This no-go theorem of quantum mechanics was articulated by Wootters and Zurek and Dieks[2] in 1982, and has profound implications in quantum computing and related fields.
The state of one system can be entangled with the state of another system. For instance, one can use the controlled NOT gate and the Walsh–Hadamard gate to entangle two qubits. This is not cloning. No well-defined state can be attributed to a subsystem of an entangled state. Cloning is a process whose result is a separable state with identical factors....
The no-cloning theorem is normally stated and proven for pure states; the no-broadcast theorem generalizes this result to mixed states.
The no-cloning theorem has a time-reversed dual, the no-deleting theorem. Together, these underpin the interpretation of quantum mechanics in terms of category theory, and, in particular, as a dagger compact category.[6][7] This formulation, known as categorical quantum mechanics, allows, in turn, a connection to be made from quantum mechanics to linear logic as the logic of quantum information theory (in the same sense that classical logic arises from Cartesian closed categories).
-
#3419 by Monomorphic on 06 Mar, 2016 16:51
-
Some more sims of the torus-shaped frustum talked about a while back. Also did a frequency sweep of the helix-shaped frustum. The torus was very easy to get resonating. The helix is wrapped too tightly I believe, which leads to interference. That's why it looks so chaotic. Will try a helix with a larger radius.
)