-
#1560 by DaCunha on 24 Apr, 2016 09:48
-
Dear all
I will hopefully manage to finish the calculation of the total momentum flux in the gravitational wave emitting cylindrical resonator model in the next weeks.
-
#1561 by rfmwguy on 24 Apr, 2016 12:28
-
Dear all
Congratulations! The forum here is not for fundraising, but we have allowed emdrive fundraising efforts to be linked to off site. For example, seeshells has her fundraising page linked in her signature.
I will hopefully manage to finish the calculation of the total momentum flux in the gravitational wave emitting cylindrical resonator model in the next weeks.
I would like to ask you for support concerning the work on EMDrive.
I was offered an experimental Ph. D. project about improving the EMDrive resonances
by Prof. Tajmar at the TU Dresden.
I live approximately 600 km away from it near Cologne and I can't move to Dresden in the next years for family reasons.
I thought about commuting with a low-budget airline but this would still
cost me about 33 € or 37 $ per flight. I would earn approximately 1200 € / m. I calculated that I could spend 600 € on commuting in order to still be able to pay all the other bills.
My question is if there is a reader here who could help me by funding the difference?
I would of course provide you with daily updates on the work.
It is suggested you start a kickstarter, indiego or gofundme home page and link to it. I used kickstarter and was fairly pleased but it is for smaller amounts and is time limited.
Humble suggestion, be sure to present documentation on your emdrive phd project for donors to inspect. Give frequent updates, sharing emdrive knowledge which the world is anxious to read.
Meine heimat ist Darmstadt im Bergstrasse. Kleiner dorf Seeheim. Geboren 1955 und nach Amerika 1957. US Air Force Brat.
Would love to do what you are planning. Also think about your wonderful trains. Good luck. Tcheuss. -
#1562 by MazonDel on 24 Apr, 2016 13:56
-
The folks in Aachen are trying to compare results with and without dielectrics: https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive/log/36484-tests-with-a-dielectric.
Unfotunately I cannot find what dielectric material they are using
Does anybody know ? Thanks
Just got a reply from Paul, the Dielectric was made using ABS, 3mm thick. I've asked for infill settings but it is probable that they just used 100%. -
#1563 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 14:22
-
Thank your for getting an answer. This is what I suspected in this message: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39772.msg1522893#msg1522893The folks in Aachen are trying to compare results with and without dielectrics: https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive/log/36484-tests-with-a-dielectric.
Unfotunately I cannot find what dielectric material they are using
Does anybody know ? Thanks
Just got a reply from Paul, the Dielectric was made using ABS, 3mm thick. I've asked for infill settings but it is probable that they just used 100%.
I wonder why did they just use any plastic they had available, instead of learning from NASA's experience. ABS is an amorphous thermoplastic, in contrast to the polymers that had the best results for NASA: PTFE and HDPE which are both semi-crystalline.
The material used by Hackaday Aachen team, ABS has no preferred alignment-the molecules are much like a bowl of spaghetti, all intertwined and randomly aligned with each other.
I also wonder why they put the ABS at the big end, instead of at the small end, like NASA. It is like they disregard NASA's experimental results, both as to material, material processing and material location in the cavity.
Crystallization of polymers is associated with partial alignment of their molecular chains. Crystallization affects optical, mechanical, thermal and chemical properties of the polymer. The properties of semicrystalline polymers are determined not only by the degree of crystallinity, but also by the size and orientation of the molecular chains.
NASA did not just use any HDPE material available: they did not use one made by injection (hence resulting in fairly random orientation of micro-crystalline regions) but instead used extruded rod (which is anisotropic due to chain alignment due to the extrusion process).
Confusion arises when people:
1) Confuse all materials as just being "dielectrics". Dielectric electrical properties are characterized by the electric permittivity. The experimental data shows that the best results were obtained with materials with low relative electric permittivity, closer to air and vacuum, like HDPE and PTFE, rather than high electric permittivity as used by Shawyer. The experimental data shows that the effect on thrust therefore is not due to the electric permittivity, yet people persist in incorrectly characterizing this effect as simply "dielectric." Dr. White's team did not use a polymer insert as a "dielectric" because of its electric pemittivity, instead they used it because of Dr. White's Quantum Vacuum theory.
2) Confuse all plastics as being the same, without distinguishing their properties, as to the difference between amorphous thermoplastics like ABS and semicrystalline thermoplastics like HDPE and PTFE.
People should instead read the following:
Transfer of linear momentum from the quantum vacuum to a magnetochiral molecule
Manuel Donaire, Bart van Tiggelen, Geert Rikken
published in the peer-reviewed journal: Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 27, 214002 (2015)
https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.5990v1QuoteIn a recent publication [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 143602] we have shown using a QED approach that, in the presence of a magnetic field, the quantum vacuum coupled to a chiral molecule provides it with a kinetic momentum directed along the magnetic field. Here we explain the physical mechanisms which operate in the transfer of momentum from the vacuum to the molecule. We show that the variation of the molecular kinetic energy is part of the magnetic energy associated with the vacuum correction to the magnetization of the molecule. We carry out a semiclassical calculation of the vacuum momentum and compare the result with the QED calculation.
* the inorganic, high permittivity dielectrics used by Shawyer are not magnetochiral molecules
* amorphous thermoplastics as used by the Aachen Hackaday team are not magnetochiral molecules
1 . arXiv:1404.5990 [pdf, ps, other]
Transfer of linear momentum from the quantum vacuum to a magnetochiral molecule
Manuel Donaire, Bart van Tiggelen, Geert Rikken
Journal-ref: J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 27 (2015) 214002
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
2. arXiv:1304.6767 [pdf, ps, other]
Casimir Momentum of a Chiral Molecule in a Magnetic Field
Manuel Donaire, Bart van Tiggelen, Geert L.J.A. Rikken
Comments: 5 pages + Supplemental material
Journal-ref: Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 143602 (2013)
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph); Chemical Physics (physics.chem-ph)
3. arXiv:1202.5278 [pdf, ps, other]
QED Corrections to the Electromagnetic Abraham Force. Casimir Momentum of the Hydrogen atom?
Bart Van Tiggelen (LPMMC), Sebastien Kawka (LPMMC), Geert L.J.A. Rikken (LNCMI, LNCMI)
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
4. arXiv:1106.3886 [pdf, ps, other]
Magneto-Electric response functions for simple atomic systems
James Babington, Bart A. van Tiggelen
Comments: 6 pages, 4 figures
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph); Atomic Physics (physics.atom-ph)
5. arXiv:0908.4390 [pdf, ps, other]
Quantum Electrodynamics of Casimir Momentum: Momentum of the Quantum Vacuum?
Sebastien Kawka (LPMMC), Bart Van Tiggelen (LPMMC)
Comments: 4,4 pages
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
6. arXiv:0706.3302 [pdf, ps, other]
Zero-point momentum in Complex media
B.A. van Tiggelen
Comments: submitted to EPJ D
Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
Direct Observation of Magnetochiral Effects through a Single Metamolecule in Microwave Regions
Satoshi Tomita, Kei Sawada, Andrey Porokhnyuk, and Tetsuya Ueda
Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 235501 – Published 3 December 2014
http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.235501 -
#1564 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 15:53
-
It is interesting that Hackaday EM Drive reports:Quote
I inserted a 3D-printed dielectric on the big end - which showed significant performance boost in another (not my) test on a 900 MHz thruster.
I wonder what test is that showing significant performance boost with a polymer (?) insert (*) at 0.9 GHz, which is 1/2 the frequency NASA used. Does anybody have any idea ?
To me it sounds like they are referring to the Cannae tests (that used PTFE as a dielectric), which were performed at 0.935 GHz according to NASA's 2014 report:
Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum
David A. Brady*, Harold G. White†, Paul March‡, James T. Lawrence§, and Frank J. Davies**
Thanks
_____
(*) I am not going to use the term "dielectric" anymore because it is misleading, as many people have been confused by this terminology. NASA's results show that the best results were obtained with materials (PTFE and HDPE) having low relative electric permittivity (~2) closer to vacuum and air (~1) rather than high electric permittivity inorganics as used by Shawyer (~38). NASA did not use the polymer insert for its "dielectric properties" but for its Q-Thruster properties. -
#1565 by SeeShells on 24 Apr, 2016 16:08
-
It is interesting that Hackaday EM Drive reports:
Quote_____
(*) I am not going to use the term "dielectric" anymore because it is misleading, as many people have been confused by this terminology. NASA's results show that the best results were obtained with materials (PTFE and HDPE) having low relative electric permittivity (~2) closer to vacuum and air (~1) rather than high electric permittivity inorganics as used by Shawyer (~38). NASA did not use the polymer insert for its "dielectric properties" but for its Q-Thruster properties.
YES! You're correct.
I believe monomorphic tried this approach, he might have some input.
Great discussions here and I'll try to keep up. Back to the lab.
Shell -
#1566 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 16:35
-
How Self-Sputtering, Chiral Molecules and the Quantum Vacuum come together to explain the EM Drive ?
*The process of self-sputtering (driven far above the runaway threshold voltage, such that energetic electrons are made available to produce “excess plasma”), discussed by Dave introduces an interesting mechanism for Cu++ ion production into the microwave cavity of the EM Drive. However, this process just by itself cannot result in momentum because of the law of conservation of momentum for a closed system
*Can the Cu++ ions, acting as a catalyst, under the electromagnetic microwave field, in air (containing Nitrogen, Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide,etc.) produce magneto-chiral molecules? see: http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.235501
if so, this would explain the huge difference between EM Drive experiments performed in air at ambient pressure and those performed in partial vacuum
*the significant performance boost experienced when using a polymer insert (*) may be due to
a) Cu++ ions forming chiral molecules upon hitting the polymer surface
b) the anisotropic, semi-crystalline nature of HDPE and PTFE resulting in chiral orientation
*then the delta V acceleration results from the Quantum Vacuum as shown by Manuel Donaire and Bart van Tiggelen
Transfer of linear momentum from the quantum vacuum to a magnetochiral molecule
Manuel Donaire, Bart van Tiggelen, Geert Rikken
published in the peer-reviewed journal: Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 27, 214002 (2015)
https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.5990v1
*TE modes like TE012 and TE013 are superior, particularly when not using a polymer insert because TE modes have a magnetic field in the longitudinal direction of the EM Drive cavity. TM212 mode used by NASA is interesting because of the quadrupole magnetic effect on the polymer insert.
_________________
(*) having nothing to do with its dielectric properties, since the best results were obtained with materials (PTFE and HDPE) having low relative electric permittivity (~2) closer to vacuum and air (~1) rather than high electric permittivity inorganics as used by Shawyer (~38). NASA did not use the polymer insert for its "dielectric properties" but for its Q-Thruster properties. -
#1567 by rfmwguy on 24 Apr, 2016 17:18
-
Well done doc. Had still been wondering what Cu++ could react with. I figured its a complex process with Cu++ initiating it but hadn't taken it further because of the build. Looks very promising! Did surmise whatever secondary reaction occured is diminished by partial vacuum.
-
#1568 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 17:22
-
Well done doc. Had still been wondering what Cu++ could react with. I figured its a complex process with Cu++ initiating it but hadn't taken it further because of the build. Looks very promising! Did surmise whatever secondary reaction occured is diminished by partial vacuum.
Question: how long can the process of self-sputtering go on for in a cavity?
is it really "propellant-less" ? how long can the Cu++ recycling go for without suffering performance?
-
#1569 by rfmwguy on 24 Apr, 2016 17:59
-
From what I understood in dr anders paper, it has no theoretical time limit but depends on its ready source of power and Cu++. In the real world, I would expect the deposition would build up on target perhaps causing a lack of availabe Cu++ elsewhere. That or the plasma byproducts could coat the other surfaces making Cu atoms less available to be freed..Well done doc. Had still been wondering what Cu++ could react with. I figured its a complex process with Cu++ initiating it but hadn't taken it further because of the build. Looks very promising! Did surmise whatever secondary reaction occured is diminished by partial vacuum.
Question: how long can the process of self-sputtering go for in a cavity?
is it really "propellant-less" ? how long can the Cu++ recycling go for without suffering performance?
Whatever stands in the way of 1 or 2 electrons attaching itself to a copper atom should be the limiting factor. Common kitchens magnetrons are about 100K hours mtbf. If I had to guess, free Cu could be rendered less available before that or run out of secondary reaction particles. -
#1570 by X_RaY on 24 Apr, 2016 18:47
-
Really Great!
Your theory is really an outstanding idea.
The only question I have is can we neglect the results of all the experiments without dielectric? Yes air is a dielectric but its molecules are floating and therefore they transfer only a tiny amount* of energy into net thrust using this theory of chiral molecules in an EM field.
On the other hand EW is the first and only lab who share all important dimensions and data. I am sympathetic with there data for this reason. They don't measure anything without dielectric.
*due to the electrostatic potential of the air molecules -
#1571 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 19:02
-
Really Great!
The idea explains the importance of air without any polymer as the Cu++ from self-sputtering may form chiral organic molecules, and amino-acids molecules when interacting with the air. Remember that air has what you need: it has Nitrogen, Oxigen and Carbon (as Carbon Dioxide). Cu++ is an excellent catalyst (actually we used Cu as a catalyst for polymer reactions for industrial purposes. Your theory is really an outstanding idea.
The only question I have is can we neglect the results of all the experiments without dielectric? Yes air is a dielectric but its molecules are floating and therefore they transfer only a tiny amount of energy into net thrust using this theory of chiral molecules in an EM field.
On the other hand EW is the first and only lab who share all important dimensions and data. I am sympathetic with there data for this reason. They don't measure anything without dielectric.
Still thinking about this, but besides amino-acids and organic molecules, how about copper amino-acids like hydroxyproline Copper (this is very chiral molecule !!!)?
Of course, this (copper(ii) N-decyl-l-hydroxyproline) example has a huge mass, but we can think of similar chiral molecules not having a huge mass ?
How about proline-copper?
Again, air has what you need: N, O, H and C (the H coming from water vapor, humidity in the air of course, and the C coming from carbon dioxide)
It used to be that's how the beginning of life was hypothesized -
#1572 by X_RaY on 24 Apr, 2016 19:07
-
Ok this matter has to be present / could be prove on the inner surface of the emdrive after a long time run. Sounds like a testable idea using spectrometric methodsReally Great!
The idea explains the important of air without any polymer as the Cu++ from self-sputtering may form chiral polymer molecules when interacting with the air. Remember that air has what you need: it has Nitrogen, Oxigen and Carbon (as Carbon Dioxide). Cu++ is an excellent catalyst (actually we used Cu as a catalyst for polymer reactions for industrial purposes. Your theory is really an outstanding idea.
The only question I have is can we neglect the results of all the experiments without dielectric? Yes air is a dielectric but its molecules are floating and therefore they transfer only a tiny amount of energy into net thrust using this theory of chiral molecules in an EM field.
On the other hand EW is the first and only lab who share all important dimensions and data. I am sympathetic with there data for this reason. They don't measure anything without dielectric.
Still thinking about this, but how about amino-acids like hydroxyproline Copper (this is very chiral molecule !!!)?
-
#1573 by robus on 24 Apr, 2016 19:49
-
I thought about commuting with a low-budget airline but this would still
cost me about 33 € or 37 $ per flight. I would earn approximately 1200 € / m. I calculated that I could spend 600 € on commuting in order to still be able to pay all the other bills.
My question is if there is a reader here who could help me by funding the difference?
I would of course provide you with daily updates on the work.
This sounds like a good candidate for Patreon account. You could provide periodic updates to patrons. Check out Patreon.com
Robert -
#1574 by meekGee on 24 Apr, 2016 20:29
-
As a non-physicist, I have a general question about the EM drive.
In thermodyanmics, a lot of devices were rules as impossible because "if you could build this doohickey, then you can incorporate it in a larger apparatus like so, and then violate the second (or first) law." Therefore, this doohickey cannot be built.
The EM drive appears to produce reactionless impulse. But this doesn't necessarily violate any laws - maybe it communicates with the rest of the universe and the reaction is uniformly distributed throughout the observable universe...
Instead, what it means is that you can no longer say "I have an isolated system" for the purpose of momentum calculations... because maybe inside the system there resides an EM drive. So no system is ever isolated.
So now - if the EM works as advertised - can we build conceptual systems (as thought experiments) that do other magical things using EM drives as building blocks?
Basically - how far does penny roll once we agree that the EM drive works? -
#1575 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 20:46
-
As a non-physicist, I have a general question about the EM drive.
Nobody knows yet how far it rolls, but one such system has been proposed by Frobnicat: put two EM Drives spinning as a generator: can excess energy be produced such as to be used to power a 3rd EM Drive that would be used for propulsion, hence having a spacecraft able to self-accelerate to high speed wihout even using a power supply (this is a thought experiment about conservation of energy)
In thermodyanmics, a lot of devices were rules as impossible because "if you could build this doohickey, then you can incorporate it in a larger apparatus like so, and then violate the second (or first) law." Therefore, this doohickey cannot be built.
The EM drive appears to produce reactionless impulse. But this doesn't necessarily violate any laws - maybe it communicates with the rest of the universe and the reaction is uniformly distributed throughout the observable universe...
Instead, what it means is that you can no longer say "I have an isolated system" for the purpose of momentum calculations... because maybe inside the system there resides an EM drive. So no system is ever isolated.
So now - if the EM works as advertised - can we build conceptual systems (as thought experiments) that do other magical things using EM drives as building blocks?
Basically - how far does penny roll once we agree that the EM drive works? -
#1576 by Eusa on 24 Apr, 2016 20:47
-
As a non-physicist, I have a general question about the EM drive.
In my quantum gravity theory, the vacuum buoyancy, the vacuum energy flows from the space to the matter and no massive object is an isolated system indeed. If a drive can distort the flow of vacuum quanta, there occur an artificial mass that accelerates other bodies in the universe at delay of speed of causality c. It's under finding out if the em-radiation can be almost partly the same as gravitational waves as a field of standing waves guiding the flow of gravitons/inertons to the matter particles to hold them as inertial singularities of spacetime.
In thermodyanmics, a lot of devices were rules as impossible because "if you could build this doohickey, then you can incorporate it in a larger apparatus like so, and then violate the second (or first) law." Therefore, this doohickey cannot be built.
The EM drive appears to produce reactionless impulse. But this doesn't necessarily violate any laws - maybe it communicates with the rest of the universe and the reaction is uniformly distributed throughout the observable universe...
Instead, what it means is that you can no longer say "I have an isolated system" for the purpose of momentum calculations... because maybe inside the system there resides an EM drive. So no system is ever isolated.
So now - if the EM works as advertised - can we build conceptual systems (as thought experiments) that do other magical things using EM drives as building blocks?
Basically - how far does penny roll once we agree that the EM drive works? -
#1577 by Monomorphic on 24 Apr, 2016 20:54
-
I tried stacked dialectrics with a high electric permittivity. Starting with 30 at the top and ending with 6 at the bottom. RF injection was into the middle at layer with 18 permittivity. Got a result that doesn't look very promising.
-
#1578 by meekGee on 24 Apr, 2016 21:25
-
As a non-physicist, I have a general question about the EM drive.
Nobody knows yet how far it rolls, but one such system has been proposed by Frobnicat: put two EM Drives spinning as a generator: can excess energy be produced such as to be used to power a 3rd EM Drive that would be used for propulsion, hence having a spacecraft able to self-accelerate to high speed wihout even using a power supply (this is a thought experiment about conservation of energy)
In thermodyanmics, a lot of devices were rules as impossible because "if you could build this doohickey, then you can incorporate it in a larger apparatus like so, and then violate the second (or first) law." Therefore, this doohickey cannot be built.
The EM drive appears to produce reactionless impulse. But this doesn't necessarily violate any laws - maybe it communicates with the rest of the universe and the reaction is uniformly distributed throughout the observable universe...
Instead, what it means is that you can no longer say "I have an isolated system" for the purpose of momentum calculations... because maybe inside the system there resides an EM drive. So no system is ever isolated.
So now - if the EM works as advertised - can we build conceptual systems (as thought experiments) that do other magical things using EM drives as building blocks?
Basically - how far does penny roll once we agree that the EM drive works?
That's the kind of thing I'm looking for, but would that violate conservation of energy?
IIUC, the EM drive eats energy and produces thrust, just like any rocket. Rocket lose a lot of energy into the propellant, and in that respect, an EM drive will have some "specific impulse".
Unless I'm missing something, this apparatus will only violate conservation of energy if the generator makes more energy than is put into the EM drive... -
#1579 by Rodal on 24 Apr, 2016 21:31
-
...
That's the kind of thing I'm looking for, but would that violate conservation of energy?
IIUC, the EM drive eats energy and produces thrust, just like any rocket. Rocket lose a lot of energy into the propellant, and in that respect, an EM drive will have some "specific impulse".
Unless I'm missing something, this apparatus will only violate conservation of energy if the generator makes more energy than is put into the EM drive...
Correct. Professor Frobnicat was the first one to show that, if the claims that the EM Drive can produce a force/PowerInput greater than the one of a photon rocket (Prof.Yang claims that in her experiments she produced over 300,000 times the Force/PowerInput of a photon rocket) then at a given speed, the kinetic energy exceeds the energy input and hence excess power is produced, therefore violating conservation of energy. Most EM Drive proponents (i.e. Shawyer, Yang, etc.) put this "under the carpet". Dr. McCulloch deals with it full-front and admits that according to his Unruh effect theory this is possible, and he claims that the excess-energy would come from the Quantum Vacuum.
Your theory is really an outstanding idea.