-
#580 by FattyLumpkin on 25 Mar, 2016 18:06
-
Hey Monomorphic, do you have any more sims of the trapezoidal prism? How is your Frustum build coming along? Chomping at the bit, FL Image below could be taller, LOL!!!
-
#581 by Monomorphic on 25 Mar, 2016 18:20
-
Hey Monomorphic, do you have any more sims of the trapezoidal prism? How is your Frustum build coming along?
I have more sims of the trapezoidal-shaped cavity, but nothing new to show until I start changing the dimension ratios. I'm adding another track to my air-track system. This is so I can have a platform between the two like Shawyer's air-track. I'm also switching to a pressurized air system. The shop vac is loud and doesn't have enough pressure.
-
#582 by rfmwguy on 25 Mar, 2016 18:47
-
Looking good Jamie...very impressive. Its happened to the best of projects, first you do this, then do that, then something else...we used to call it Spec Creep back in the day. It usually lead to longer milestones and frustrated upper management. Since YOU are upper management, you have nothing to worry about other than information-starved readersHey Monomorphic, do you have any more sims of the trapezoidal prism? How is your Frustum build coming along?
I have more sims of the trapezoidal-shaped cavity, but nothing new to show until I start changing the dimension ratios. I'm adding another track to my air-track system. This is so I can have a platform between the two like Shawyer's air-track. I'm also switching to a pressurized air system. The shop vac is loud and doesn't have enough pressure.
-
#583 by forgravity on 25 Mar, 2016 19:03
-
For those that missed the stream you can find others here:
http://watchseries-online.li/episode/horizon-s55e02-project-greenglow-the-quest-for-gravity-control -
#584 by DaCunha on 25 Mar, 2016 20:43
-
Dear all
solving the gravitational wave propagation integral
(and thus the Einstein field equations in weak field limit because the integral is then an equivalent formulation of them) in the weak field limit and in the case of a cylindrically symmetric hollow resonator with an oscillating internal energy density I have found out that even in the original
einstein theory (without hoyle-narlikar modifications) there is a difference in the radiated gravitational field between the two + and - z directions if in addition to the 00-component of the energy-momentum tensor (mass energy density) and the 0a / a0 energy current density terms there are non-zero stress components in radial or axial direction.
For what follows I described the cavity in local cylindrical coordinates with it's symmetry axis
aligned along the z axis. I modelled the cavity using mass density distributions of lorentzian shape which allows for an analytic solution of the integral in a constant retardation phase approximation. This also allows to derive an analytic expression for the 0z component of T from the 00 component via the continuity equation. After solving the integral for the h field I determined the scalar
at two different locations "above" and "below" the resonator. I assumed a length for the resonator of 1 m and a diameter of 20 cm. The thickness of the walls is determined by the coefficients of the lorentzian shape functions more less to be of the order of mm to cm. The total power fluctuating inside the cavity was assumed to be P = 1 MW. The maximum stress amplitude in axial direction (diagonal tensor component Tzz) was assumed to be 10^4 N/m². The frequency of energy fluctuation was chosen as 150 MHz. That said the 00 (tt) component of the energy momentum tensor was split in a time dependent and independent part.
with
and
The energy current density component Ttz can be derived from this expression
but although straight forward it is so unduly complicated and long, that I don't write it here.
While I chose the stress components Trr,Tphiphi,Tzz
to be oscillating with the same frequency but with a possible different phase delta relative to the oscillating energymass flow.
in which there is
The Result of the calculations is that, as can be seen in the first attached picture, when there are zero stress components Trr,Tphiphi,Tzz and only non-zero energy mass density and energy flow density components Ttt,Ttz, there is no difference (green line) between the amplitudes of the radiated gravitational wave field above (blue line) and below (red line) the resonator.
But: In the case of a non zero stress component Tzz, however, depending on the relative phase delta (blue line 0, red line pi/2, green line pi) there are amplitude differences between the wave fields above and below the resonator
Interestingly the difference is smallest for a phase of pi/2. This just corresponds to the case when the stress maximum is reached when the fluctuating energymass density has its maximum in the center of the resonator. Coincidence? This somehow reminds one of the predicted Woodward effect relative phase behaviour doesn't it?
To be clear: The amplitude difference is tiny. It is no artefact, but up to now it cannot explain the total thrust Eagleworks measured but the findings are interesting and it might well be that there are unknown facets of a more accurate modified theory (Hoyle Narlikar) that will give a larger amplitude difference.
-
#585 by demofsky on 25 Mar, 2016 21:52
-
To be clear: The amplitude difference is tiny. It is no artefact, but up to now it cannot explain the total thrust Eagleworks measured but the findings are interesting and it might well be that there are unknown facets of a more accurate modified theory (Hoyle Narlikar) that will give a larger amplitude difference.
This is very interesting! A theoretical approach that may resolve the whole open/closed controversy and hint that this may be a gravity phenomena after all!
Congratulations!!
-
#586 by Rodal on 25 Mar, 2016 22:07
-
Dear all
Thank you so much for your contribution !
solving the gravitational wave propagation integral (and thus the Einstein field equations in weak field limit because the integral is then an equivalent formulation of them) in the weak field limit and in the case of a cylindrically symmetric hollow resonator with an oscillating internal energy density I have found out that even in the original
einstein theory (without hoyle-narlikar modifications) there is a difference in the radiated gravitational field between the two + and - z directions if in addition to the 00-component of the energy-momentum tensor (mass energy density) and the 0a / a0 energy current density terms there are non-zero stress components in radial or axial direction.
For what follows I described the cavity in local cylindrical coordinates with it's symmetry axis
aligned along the z axis. I modelled the cavity using mass density distributions of lorentzian shape which allows for an analytic solution of the integral in a constant retardation phase approximation. This also allows to derive an analytic expression for the 0z component of T from the 00 component via the continuity equation. After solving the integral for the h field I determined the scalar at two different locations "above" and "below" the resonator. I assumed a length for the resonator of 1 m and a diameter of 20 cm. The thickness of the walls is determined by the coefficients of the lorentzian shape functions more less to be of the order of mm to cm. ...
Much appreciated
QUESTIONS:
1) Your calculation is for a constant cross-section cylindrical cavity (please correct me if I am wrong) without an unsymmetrically placed dielectric insert. What do you expect to find for a tapered cavity as proposed by Shawyer?
2) Does your calculation show greater amplitude differences between the wave fields above and below the resonator for thicker thickness of the metal used in the cavity ? (as predicted for example by Minotti in his gravito-magnetic formulation)
3) My understanding is that the amplitude difference between the wave fields above and below the resonator gives a net force/PowerInput that is several orders of magnitude smaller not only than the force/PowerInput claimed by EM Drive experimenters (not just smaller than Shawyer/Yang, and smaller than NASA), but actually significantly smaller than the force/PowerInput of a perfectly collimated photon rocket. Is my understanding correct?
(The problem is that G/c4 has such a small magnitude)
-
#587 by SeeShells on 25 Mar, 2016 22:47
-
Correct me if I see this wrong but is this the differences we're seeing? Nice Work!
Shell
-
#588 by rfmwguy on 25 Mar, 2016 23:02
-
Greenglow link...just completed watching. Entertaining but not too revealing. Lots of local shots near me at Glenn where ions beat nuclear and Millis at the end of the day. Evans, Shawyer and Tajmar are refreshing opposites of the classic conservative scientist. Nice production visuals.
http://idowatch.net/npnt7ur2b1ml.html -
#589 by rfmwguy on 25 Mar, 2016 23:49
-
Correct me if I see this wrong but is this the differences we're seeing? Nice Work!
I'll take a stab at your question...2 signals (red and blue) out of phase 180 degrees in his top pic yields green line zero amplitude as they cancel out. Bottom pic is a phase mix yielding green line amplitude swings slightly more amplitude above zero than below. Not seen this type of characterization before...CoE problems? Not sure.
Shell -
#590 by Notsosureofit on 26 Mar, 2016 00:07
-
Dear all
solving the gravitational wave propagation integral (and thus the Einstein field equations in weak field limit because the integral is then an equivalent formulation of them) in the weak field limit and in the case of a cylindrically symmetric hollow resonator with an oscillating internal energy density I have found out that even in the original
einstein theory (without hoyle-narlikar modifications) there is a difference in the radiated gravitational field between the two + and - z directions if in addition to the 00-component of the energy-momentum tensor (mass energy density) and the 0a / a0 energy current density terms there are non-zero stress components in radial or axial direction.
Very nice ! I'm quite sure you would need an asymmetry to maintain the phase difference and consideration of the modes to maximize the effect. (notice the repeating minima)
If you can then show that difference is the same as that resulting from a gravitational gradient acting on the cavity photons AND that the result is interchangeable, you would go a long way toward proving (mathematically) the "Notsosureofit Hypothesis". -
#591 by Rodal on 26 Mar, 2016 00:55
-
Correct me if I see this wrong but is this the differences we're seeing? Nice Work!
I'll take a stab at your question...2 signals (red and blue) out of phase 180 degrees in his top pic yields green line zero amplitude as they cancel out. Bottom pic is a phase mix yielding green line amplitude swings slightly more amplitude above zero than below. Not seen this type of characterization before...CoE problems? Not sure.
Shell
The author wrote instead:QuoteThe Result of the calculations is that, as can be seen in the first attached picture, when there are zero stress components Trr,Tphiphi,Tzz and only non-zero energy mass density and energy flow density components Ttt,Ttz, there is no difference (green line) between the amplitudes of the radiated gravitational wave field above (blue line) and below (red line) the resonator.
But: In the case of a non zero stress component Tzz, however, depending on the relative phase delta (blue line 0, red line pi/2, green line pi) there are amplitude differences between the wave fields above and below the resonator
Interestingly the difference is smallest for a phase of pi/2.
which I read as follows:
The top picture considers zero Maxwell stresses: zero electromagnetic pressure Tzz.
The only non-zero components considered in the top picture are
a) Ttt (this time–time component is the density of relativistic mass = mass/Volume, i.e. since E = m c2, m/V= (E/V)/c2, the energy density divided by the speed of light squared),
and
b) Ttz (and Tzt since I presume that the contravariant energymass-stress tensor is symmetric) (this time-longitudinal component is the flux of relativistic mass across a surface, which is equal to the momentum density: for gravitational waves this is the vector of energy flux density of the gravitational field (the Heaviside vector https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Heaviside_vector ) divided by the speed of light squared; for electromagnetism, this is the Poynting vector component divided by the speed of light squared).
There is no phase difference to talk about between Ttt and Tzz because the electromagnetic pressure Tzz is zero for the top picture.
The blue line is the amplitude of the radiated gravitational wave above the resonator .
The red line is the amplitude of the radiated gravitational wave below the resonator.
The green line is the difference between the absolute values of the radiated gravitational waves above and below the resonator, which is a perfect zero for all times. (The green line is perfectly horizontal).
_____________
The bottom picture only shows the difference between the absolute values above and below the resonator.
Remember that for zero electromagnetic pressure this difference was zero.
I agree with SeeShells that it is only the bottom picture (the case in which we have electromagnetic pressure) that shows a non-zero difference between the absolute value of the radiated fields.
The bottom picture considers a non-zero electromagnetic pressure component Tzz (the component of pressure=force/area, divided by the speed of light squared, along the longitudinal axis of axisymmetry). This electromagnetic pressure Tzz has a possible different phase (delta) relative to the oscillating energy density Ttt
The blue line in the bottom picture represents zero phase difference between Tzz (electromagnetic pressure) and Ttt (energy density)
The green line represents 180 degrees phase difference between Tzz and Ttt.
The red line represents 90 degrees phase difference between Tzz and Ttt, which results in the minimum difference (for non-zero electromagnetic pressure) in absolute value of the amplitudes of the radiated gravitational wave field above and below the resonator.
The difference in amplitude of the absolute values of the gravitational wave fields above and below the resonator is greatest for 0 degrees and 180 degrees phase difference between Tzz (electromagnetic pressure) and Ttt (energy density). -
#592 by rfmwguy on 26 Mar, 2016 01:39
-
Does this pertain to both an open and closed system or by definition does it classify itself as open?
-
#593 by Rodal on 26 Mar, 2016 01:41
-
Does this pertain to both an open and closed system or by definition does it classify itself as open?
I would classify it as an open system since you have radiated gravitational fields outside the resonator
This formulation is completely consistent with known physics and, unlike Shawyer's "explanation" there is no violation of conservation of momentum.
It beautifully shows an effect of the electromagnetic pressure on the radiated gravitational waves.
However, if I'm correct, the predicted effect is smaller than even the force/PowerInput of a perfectly collimated photon rocket (because G/c4 is tiny), hence at the present stage it cannot validate the claims of the EM Drive of anomalous force/PowerInput much greater than a perfectly collimated photon rocket.
What remains to be shown is:
* effect of tapering the resonant cavity (as per original idea of Shawyer)
* effect of asymmetrically placed dielectrics like crystalline polymer dielectrics (used by NASA Eagleworks) -
#594 by rfmwguy on 26 Mar, 2016 02:15
-
Open system makes sense when discussing G, even with a closed EM shielded device. Tapering is a focus of EM radiation where standing waves could increase and more energy loss to heat. With a concentration of energy what else might occur? Perhaps that energy level jump as described in the paper by the berkeley physicist working on deposition. Trying to visualize other possibilities to account for an imbalance. A dielectric must have some other properties besides reducing physical space needed for cavity resonance. Its non-magnetic...electrically, it could impart a phase shift and/or group time delay...hmmm
-
#595 by mwvp on 26 Mar, 2016 02:47
-
Checkout the photo from:
A green UFO escaped Shawyer's frustrum and is flying just above Shawyer's right ear!
-
#596 by Monomorphic on 26 Mar, 2016 02:53
-
Long evening in the workshop! It may not look much different from the last image, but the dual airtrack is complete. I didn't just add another track, I built two new tracks. This is because the original track was flawed. I drilled too many holes and didn't offset the rows. Tomorrow I will complete the platform between the two gliders. But that's easy!
-
#597 by demofsky on 26 Mar, 2016 03:52
-
Does this pertain to both an open and closed system or by definition does it classify itself as open?
I would classify it as an open system since you have radiated gravitational fields outside the resonator
This formulation is completely consistent with known physics and, unlike Shawyer's "explanation" there is no violation of conservation of momentum.
It beautifully shows an effect of the electromagnetic pressure on the radiated gravitational waves.
However, if I'm correct, the predicted effect is smaller than even the force/PowerInput of a perfectly collimated photon rocket (because G/c4 is tiny), hence at the present stage it cannot validate the claims of the EM Drive of anomalous force/PowerInput much greater than a perfectly collimated photon rocket.
What remains to be shown is:
* effect of tapering the resonant cavity (as per original idea of Shawyer)
* effect of asymmetrically placed dielectrics like crystalline polymer dielectrics (used by NASA Eagleworks)
The one other thing to consider here would be transient effects like the way standing waves collapse in the fustrum. Might contribute to things being out of phase.
I suppose this also nominally reinforces the argument to test gravitational effects outside the fustrum. It has been suggested that this could be accomplished by an accelerometer outside the fustrum. That said, so far the numbers are very low. On the other hand, if this is responsible for the EM Drive effect then something should be detectable. -
#598 by SeeShells on 26 Mar, 2016 08:00
-
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/9811001.pdfDoes this pertain to both an open and closed system or by definition does it classify itself as open?
I would classify it as an open system since you have radiated gravitational fields outside the resonator
This formulation is completely consistent with known physics and, unlike Shawyer's "explanation" there is no violation of conservation of momentum.
It beautifully shows an effect of the electromagnetic pressure on the radiated gravitational waves.
However, if I'm correct, the predicted effect is smaller than even the force/PowerInput of a perfectly collimated photon rocket (because G/c4 is tiny), hence at the present stage it cannot validate the claims of the EM Drive of anomalous force/PowerInput much greater than a perfectly collimated photon rocket.
What remains to be shown is:
* effect of tapering the resonant cavity (as per original idea of Shawyer)
* effect of asymmetrically placed dielectrics like crystalline polymer dielectrics (used by NASA Eagleworks)
The one other thing to consider here would be transient effects like the way standing waves collapse in the fustrum. Might contribute to things being out of phase.
I suppose this also nominally reinforces the argument to test gravitational effects outside the fustrum. It has been suggested that this could be accomplished by an accelerometer outside the fustrum. That said, so far the numbers are very low. On the other hand, if this is responsible for the EM Drive effect then something should be detectable.
I wish my math wasn't so rusty, just good enough to let me see how evanescent actions could come into effect and maybe amplify this effect. Help this old gal here, am I seeing this wrong?
Shell -
#599 by CW on 26 Mar, 2016 08:43
-
Dear all
solving the gravitational wave propagation integral (and thus the Einstein field equations in weak field limit because the integral is then an equivalent formulation of them) in the weak field limit and in the case of a cylindrically symmetric hollow resonator with an oscillating internal energy density I have found out that even in the original
einstein theory (without hoyle-narlikar modifications) there is a difference in the radiated gravitational field between the two + and - z directions if in addition to the 00-component of the energy-momentum tensor (mass energy density) and the 0a / a0 energy current density terms there are non-zero stress components in radial or axial direction.
Very nice ! I'm quite sure you would need an asymmetry to maintain the phase difference and consideration of the modes to maximize the effect. (notice the repeating minima)
If you can then show that difference is the same as that resulting from a gravitational gradient acting on the cavity photons AND that the result is interchangeable, you would go a long way toward proving (mathematically) the "Notsosureofit Hypothesis".
You mean, that this frustum creates a very narrow band gravitation-like gradient, which the frustum 'slides down' to accelerate?
