-
#1260 by rfmwguy on 05 Oct, 2016 20:51
-
Yes, it is 110VAC to the power supply which does the -4kV conversion. I am convinced I saw something real, but I do have to appreciate the high level of doubt there is about something so dramatic. This is the reason I did not publish a test report, was unable to complete the # of tests I wanted to. It did seem to me that there was no thermal change within 4 inches of the frustum, and therefore no expansion of the leads......
ahh... I didn't know you had indeed scanned the wiring for temperature.
Yes, Mr Li, it was getting to the point that I almost thought all was due to thermal expansion of wires. I even took a thermal video of the power lead nearby the cavity. Its on my youtube channel
What you might not know is I stripped off the power leads from the torsion beam and then began to experiment with perpendicular then parallel loop locations in relation to the torsion beam. In the end, the magnetron began to fail and was unable to complete more than 5 or so observations. I saw little variation in beam displacement regardless of loop/harness location, but I was unable to continue more testing.
In the end, I could not 100% say I removed wire thermal expansion as an error source, but the 5 or so displacement tests seemed to indicate I was not getting displacement forces. Not scientific enough (too few samples) for a public test report to be issued.
p.s. While this chart could be considered the definitive test that thermal wire expansion is not the cause, there still wasn't enough data runs. This was probably my best chart, with seconds as the X axis and the red zone where power was "on". displacement is happening too rapidly for a temperature coefficient. I do note the peak variances where there is slight displacement differences. I attribute that probably to magnetron output stability. The average of this chart translated into 18.4mN
Rfmwguy, is that the same current/voltage we see there that comes down from the wall plug?
As there is no increase in temperature, one can conclude there is barely to no additional linear expansion on that part. So if that is indeed the same wire that comes to the torsion setup, we can check off that possible cause also.... (It's starting to look better and better !
)
p.s. I guess I was not active posting on NSF during the testing this summer. For the record, I stated I would only continue working with EmDrive if I got near my 100x displacement improvement and became convinced it was an actual effect. I did both and therefore decided to progress to Gen III with solid state & batteries. -
#1261 by Flyby on 05 Oct, 2016 21:37
-
True, a live test is always better....
Small temperature increase can cause big difference. So before you check that off, better quantify it. For example, measure the force when runing the same amount of current (a few amperes AC in two leads and 500mA DC in another) through the leads without magnetron.
If we take a wire length of 3 meters (hanging from the ceiling), and consider that the temperature only increased with 1 °C (20°C to 21°C) (within the error margin of what has been measured?), you end up with a displacement of 0.051mm for copper.
The problem now is to calculate the forces this generates in a hanging wire and the rotational momentum it will cause on the torsion balance setup (if any)... not an easy task...
I have no idea what the impact is going to be on those hyper sensitive torsion balances (what was the sensitivity again? 100µN ?)
It might be important, as you're suggesting, or it might not be noticeable, as rfmwguy said...
So yeah, I'm all in favor for that dummy test you're proposing...way easier...
-
#1262 by Kenjee on 05 Oct, 2016 22:19
-
True, a live test is always better....
Small temperature increase can cause big difference. So before you check that off, better quantify it. For example, measure the force when runing the same amount of current (a few amperes AC in two leads and 500mA DC in another) through the leads without magnetron.
If we take a wire length of 3 meters (hanging from the ceiling), and consider that the temperature only increased with 1 °C (20°C to 21°C) (within the error margin of what has been measured?), you end up with a displacement of 0.051mm for copper.
The problem now is to calculate the forces this generates in a hanging wire and the rotational momentum it will cause on the torsion balance setup (if any)... not an easy task...
I have no idea what the impact is going to be on those hyper sensitive torsion balances (what was the sensitivity again? 100µN ?)
It might be important, as you're suggesting, or it might not be noticeable, as rfmwguy said...
So yeah, I'm all in favor for that dummy test you're proposing...way easier...
But how can that be problem if you can measure it with runing current just through wires with no connection to Magnetron, just physicly attached. (is it called Dummy load?)
Sorry for bad explanation, I think it is rather simple, in electrical way, to make bypass board on the connections to mag and braided wires with switches, thus ploting wire expansion with dummy load.
-
#1263 by spupeng7 on 05 Oct, 2016 23:18
-
p.s. I guess I was not active posting on NSF during the testing this summer. For the record, I stated I would only continue working with EmDrive if I got near my 100x displacement improvement and became convinced it was an actual effect. I did both and therefore decided to progress to Gen III with solid state & batteries.
Am so glad you are still with us. I was quietly worried that you would let go of it too soon. Amateur results keep the possibility alive that we will one day see multiple independent developments of functional emdrive systems. 
-
#1264 by SteveD on 06 Oct, 2016 00:01
-
Ok a couple things. First of all we have a problem in that Monomorphics wedge is showing movement without resonance. This would seem to point to some other phenomena involved. This is not fatal to the experimental campaign as NASA seemingly has data in vacuum using a self contained unit. I will point out that we don't know what's going on and should be both skeptical that it works and skeptical that, if it works, any explanations in the correct one. Put another way, how do we know that all this resonance stuff is needed and that best results aren't simply generated by heating a magnet feeding into an asymmetrical can?
That said I have a couple of thoughts:
Conservation of Energy
The EMDrive burns light.
Total Energy = Heat + Redshift due to photon rocket effect = Total Energy Input.
I think there's no real debate that a photon rocket must redshift the light that it emits to generate thrust.
That implies that, with an EMDrive, energy is split between two different "baskets"
Energy used in the EMDrive effect via Redshift. and
Photons that will eventually go to heat.
The conservation is energy argument would then seem spurious in most situations. Until a 100% conversion efficiency between joules of input power and joules of kinetic energy is reached an EMDrive cannot go over unit.
For Example:
100 w/s of input power converts to 1 joule of KE and 99 joules of heat.
100 w/s of input power converts to 50 joules of KE and 50 joules of heat.
The last might not actually be possible as the redshift needed to generate 50 joules of KE might be so great that the microwaves are quickly redshifted out of the bandwidth of the frustum and go to heat.
To an observer only looking at input power to out acceleration it might seem like you are getting constant acceleration for constant power. That would ignore the diminishing amount of power going to heat.
I believe Monomorphic had some interesting results from imparting motion (tapping) an EMDrive showing a surprisingly high level of redshift.
How this reacts with the laws of thermodynamics is an interesting question. Entropy is increasing somewhere. -
#1265 by rfmwguy on 06 Oct, 2016 00:35
-
Thanks, just the opposite...I threw myself into testing with limited postings. At the end of the day I found it was best to minimize distractions and purely focus on tests. Goodbye moderator duties included. I kept in touch with Mr Li whose critical analysis was invaluable. Only disappointment was realization I could not go beyond about a dozen test runs. Otherwise, it exceeded my expectations. Only a few knew about the successful runs. Since I'm not doing this for fame or ego, I didn't splash it around the media. I am scheduled to do another video podcast in January where I'll have an opportunity to describe what I found and my next steps.p.s. I guess I was not active posting on NSF during the testing this summer. For the record, I stated I would only continue working with EmDrive if I got near my 100x displacement improvement and became convinced it was an actual effect. I did both and therefore decided to progress to Gen III with solid state & batteries.
Am so glad you are still with us. I was quietly worried that you would let go of it too soon. Amateur results keep the possibility alive that we will one day see multiple independent developments of functional emdrive systems. -
#1266 by dustinthewind on 06 Oct, 2016 03:26
-
I had mentioned before my reluctance to believe that an interaction of a change in mass could instantly communicate to the rest of the universe. I am not sure any of you are implying this, but to me it seems in question as to how exactly this information is being conveyed to the rest of the universe.
... Now the idea of instantly pushing on the rest of the universe to me seems a bit of a jump. Maybe that is just me. However, I can see that if that push had to do with disturbing the vacuum, that the rest of the universe rests in, such that the rest of the universe will feel the result in time, then I can understand that. Maybe I'm not seeing the big picture though. ...
I had some Woodward effect thoughts:
I was driving along and thinking when it occurred to me that LIGO had recently had its first observation of gravitational waves which should travel at the speed of light. I would really like to know more details how LIGO actually observed this and should look it up some time. This gravitational space time wave would indeed take time to interact with the rest of the universe. The gravity wave could effectively change the mass of something it interacts with, with respect to a non-local observer, as by the PV equations. A medium interacting with the vacuum may appear to change in mass when really that mass is not its own, it is the vacuums mass. Accelerating that object may indeed be accelerating the vacuum by a coupling method. Later, a reduction in mass and opposite acceleration of the medium speaks to me of decoupling with the vacuum and not accelerating it. This way the vacuum is only accelerated in one direction.
Such an interaction to me seems to smack of possibly generating gravitational waves, later to interact with the rest of the universe.
Experiments have been done that generate matter and anti-matter from the vacuum which appears to increase the coupling between light and the vacuum.
I almost want to say it might be possible to make a vacuum plasma rocket that shoots out matter and antimatter (not sure I should call that plasma) not needing any propellant. I am not sure that would be efficient. Pushing on the vacuum repeatedly in a cyclic manner (efficiently transferring energy) might show some promise if its possible.
Also, there must be some coupling with the vacuum and matter in a way that causes the frame dragging effect and one might think the larger the gravitational well the more coupling with the vacuum (mass increase) and increased frame dragging. -
#1267 by spupeng7 on 06 Oct, 2016 05:01
-
Electron inertia should be central to consideration of a Machian explanation for thrust from an emdrive. The following paper by Professor E. G. Cullwic details the subject as it stood in 1955.
-
#1268 by Peter Lauwer on 06 Oct, 2016 09:38
-
....
For Example:
100 w/s of input power converts to 1 joule of KE and 99 joules of heat.
100 w/s of input power converts to 50 joules of KE and 50 joules of heat.
The last might not actually be possible as the redshift needed to generate 50 joules of KE might be so great that the microwaves are quickly redshifted out of the bandwidth of the frustum and go to heat.
...
The momentum of 100 W of EM radiation exerts a force of about half a micronewton. So the total momentum is not nearly enough to explain the reported forces as measured by several researchers.
Cheers, Peter -
#1269 by rfmwguy on 06 Oct, 2016 13:55
-
The EW paper coming out in December should go a long way to explain the effect, but you are right, simple radiation pressure is not enough. Mike McCullough also has a working theory as do several others such as Warp Tech. No one to my knowledge is trying to explain it with radiation pressure. It is an effect without a suitable theory is how many look at it. Happens in astronomy all the time.....
For Example:
100 w/s of input power converts to 1 joule of KE and 99 joules of heat.
100 w/s of input power converts to 50 joules of KE and 50 joules of heat.
The last might not actually be possible as the redshift needed to generate 50 joules of KE might be so great that the microwaves are quickly redshifted out of the bandwidth of the frustum and go to heat.
...
The momentum of 100 W of EM radiation exerts a force of about half a micronewton. So the total momentum is not nearly enough to explain the reported forces as measured by several researchers.
Cheers, Peter -
#1270 by bmcgaffey20 on 06 Oct, 2016 13:56
-
....
For Example:
100 w/s of input power converts to 1 joule of KE and 99 joules of heat.
100 w/s of input power converts to 50 joules of KE and 50 joules of heat.
The last might not actually be possible as the redshift needed to generate 50 joules of KE might be so great that the microwaves are quickly redshifted out of the bandwidth of the frustum and go to heat.
...
The momentum of 100 W of EM radiation exerts a force of about half a micronewton. So the total momentum is not nearly enough to explain the reported forces as measured by several researchers.
Cheers, Peter
then multiply by the square root of Q to get your new F value
j/k sounded good tho -
#1271 by Star One on 06 Oct, 2016 14:38
-
The EW paper coming out in December should go a long way to explain the effect, but you are right, simple radiation pressure is not enough. Mike McCullough also has a working theory as do several others such as Warp Tech. No one to my knowledge is trying to explain it with radiation pressure. It is an effect without a suitable theory is how many look at it. Happens in astronomy all the time.....
For Example:
100 w/s of input power converts to 1 joule of KE and 99 joules of heat.
100 w/s of input power converts to 50 joules of KE and 50 joules of heat.
The last might not actually be possible as the redshift needed to generate 50 joules of KE might be so great that the microwaves are quickly redshifted out of the bandwidth of the frustum and go to heat.
...
The momentum of 100 W of EM radiation exerts a force of about half a micronewton. So the total momentum is not nearly enough to explain the reported forces as measured by several researchers.
Cheers, Peter
From the posting on here there appears to be very active efforts to come up with a theory. -
#1272 by Rodal on 06 Oct, 2016 15:16
-
Electron inertia should be central to consideration of a Machian explanation for thrust from an emdrive. The following paper by Professor E. G. Cullwic details the subject as it stood in 1955.
Cullwick was known as a critic of the Special Theory of Relativity (see his "Electromagnetism & Relativity – Longmans; 2nd edition edition (1959)" ( http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=5324162 )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Geoffrey_Cullwick
His opinion at the end of the paper's AbstractQuotesuggests the possibility of a unified theory in which there would be no necessity to distinguish between a superconductor and a perfect conductor.
does not seem to have been corroborated, 60 years later:
Superconductors exhibit quantum effects such as the Meissner effect and quantization of magnetic flux. The magnetic flux is expelled during the phase transition to superconductivity (the Meissner effect), and the magnetic field is always zero within the bulk of the superconductor.
By contrast for perfect conductors, the interior magnetic field must remain fixed but can have a zero or nonzero value. -
#1273 by RERT on 06 Oct, 2016 15:45
-
....
If we take a wire length of 3 meters (hanging from the ceiling), and consider that the temperature only increased with 1 °C (20°C to 21°C) (within the error margin of what has been measured?), you end up with a displacement of 0.051mm for copper.
....
One way to get an order of magnitude is to look at the force necessary to compress a piece of copper elastically to compensate for the thermal expansion: i.e. how much force would a piece of copper exert if clamped rigidly while being heated?
The Web says thermal expansion of copper is 16.6*10^-6/K, and its modulus of elasticity is 117*10^9 N/m^2.
For a wire 2mm on a side, a 1 Kelvin rise in temp looks to me like about 8 Newtons force from my hypothetical clamped rod. Not really much to go on since a test rig wire isn't clamped and isn't rigid, but it's a number - probably a very high upper bound on possible forces involved.
Have to agree testing is preferable to calcs. -
#1274 by rfmwguy on 06 Oct, 2016 15:58
-
Yes, think we've moved past off-hand rejections to serious study which could lead to who-knows-what else as a spinoff of the effort to explain EmDrive observations. Seems like a win-win scenario for open minded scientists...a chance to explain something plus a chance to be at the forefront of an emerging technology. Commercially speaking, it doesn't pay any current bills, but there's enough DIY efforts that more people are taking notice lately. December should be a milestone month for the EmDrive and related technologies.
The EW paper coming out in December should go a long way to explain the effect, but you are right, simple radiation pressure is not enough. Mike McCullough also has a working theory as do several others such as Warp Tech. No one to my knowledge is trying to explain it with radiation pressure. It is an effect without a suitable theory is how many look at it. Happens in astronomy all the time.....
For Example:
100 w/s of input power converts to 1 joule of KE and 99 joules of heat.
100 w/s of input power converts to 50 joules of KE and 50 joules of heat.
The last might not actually be possible as the redshift needed to generate 50 joules of KE might be so great that the microwaves are quickly redshifted out of the bandwidth of the frustum and go to heat.
...
The momentum of 100 W of EM radiation exerts a force of about half a micronewton. So the total momentum is not nearly enough to explain the reported forces as measured by several researchers.
Cheers, Peter
From the posting on here there appears to be very active efforts to come up with a theory. -
#1275 by MrFrankenverse on 06 Oct, 2016 16:02
-
Here's a simple thought experiment:
I have a recoilless gun suspended rigidly in a closed free moving cavity. The gun is fired and the bullet hits the cavity wall at one end.
Hypothesis:
Since there is no recoil felt by the cavity all the energy in the bullet's motion is transformed into movement of the box. -
#1276 by Peter Lauwer on 06 Oct, 2016 16:11
-
Here's a simple thought experiment:
I have a recoilless gun suspended rigidly in a closed free moving cavity. The gun is fired and the bullet hits the cavity wall at one end.
Hypothesis:
Since there is no recoil felt by the cavity all the energy in the bullet's motion is transformed into movement of the box.
The cavity feels the recoil when the gun hits the opposite wall. -
#1277 by Bob012345 on 06 Oct, 2016 17:13
-
Here's a simple thought experiment:
I have a recoilless gun suspended rigidly in a closed free moving cavity. The gun is fired and the bullet hits the cavity wall at one end.
Hypothesis:
Since there is no recoil felt by the cavity all the energy in the bullet's motion is transformed into movement of the box.
A recoilless gun is a way of allowing the gun itself to remain relatively fixed in space while some gas is ejected out the back to counter the kick of the bullet. If you account for the gas all the momentum will cancel. So, no net motion beyond adjusting the center of mass a bit. Nice try though.
-
#1278 by Bob012345 on 06 Oct, 2016 17:52
-
Ok a couple things. First of all we have a problem in that Monomorphics wedge is showing movement without resonance. This would seem to point to some other phenomena involved. This is not fatal to the experimental campaign as NASA seemingly has data in vacuum using a self contained unit. I will point out that we don't know what's going on and should be both skeptical that it works and skeptical that, if it works, any explanations in the correct one. Put another way, how do we know that all this resonance stuff is needed and that best results aren't simply generated by heating a magnet feeding into an asymmetrical can?
I highlighted that part of your sentence because that is what I have often wondered about. If I understand it, one needs resonance to both build up energy density and to prevent interference or canceling of the waves. I wonder though if the same objectives could be achieved by circulating the waves in asymmetric waveguides in such a way that they don't interfere with themselves. In place of the role of The Q factor, each wave circulates a large number of times. In that case, you get the asymmetric boost for each circulation but you don't need to worry about keeping the resonance. It's always in 'resonance' by design like a particle accelerator. Even when accelerating. In my concept, the device is more like a bundle of thousands of fibers, each with an asymmetric design in one direction of travel but not the return path. One might have miles of length and millimeters of width bundled into a compact device. You never need to keep resonance, just keep waves from interfering by pulsing or some other means. It could be thousands if individual fiber loops or one fiber folded many thousands of times for one path. Any thoughts? -
#1279 by Rodal on 06 Oct, 2016 18:52
-
We should remind readers that there is a member of NSF with experience in General Relativity that posted not just a theory but a formula that predicts experimental results:
http://emdrive.wiki/@notsosureofit_Hypothesis
and he did so years ago, before many of the people conducting experiments were posting at NSF. His formula takes into account the electromagnetic mode shapes (unlike other often quoted theories that do not explicitly take into account the mode shapes).
)
