-
#2160 by TheTraveller on 29 Oct, 2016 06:12
-
Good news.
Both spherical end plate frustums passed temp cycling without any delamination. Difference was to NOT highly polish between coatings, put on a double thickness Silver coating, super polish that and then gold flash.
Now they start building 2 flat end plate variants, so I can test and evaluate the difference between flat & spherical end plates.
Starting to get excited as all the new hardware gets close to being real and in my workshop.
My new equipment lineup by late Dec/early Jan:
2 x wide freq 100W Rf amps
2 x narrow freq (2.4-2.5GHz) 250W Rf amps
4 x freq generator
4 x lowest reflected power freq tracker with additional input for accelerometer input
1 x 0.01g 3kg max hacked digital with direct load cell output
1 x magnetic thrust bearing rotary test rig
Various microwave interconnect bits & pieces
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Which says Roger's latest design is interesting but full YBCO coating on spherical end plate frustum is maybe a better option for space.
Exciting times to ENGAGE, 3.8 ship years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Centauri at 1g (including mid way flip & burn),
Phil -
#2161 by chongma on 29 Oct, 2016 06:39
-
Good news.
Both spherical end plate frustums passed temp cycling without any delamination. Difference was to NOT highly polish between coatings, put on a double thickness Silver coating, super polish that and then gold flash.
Now they start building 2 flat end plate variants, so I can test and evaluate the difference between flat & spherical end plates.
Starting to get excited as all the new hardware gets close to being real and in my workshop.
My new equipment lineup by late Dec/early Jan:
2 x wide freq 100W Rf amps
2 x narrow freq (2.4-2.5GHz) 250W Rf amps
4 x freq generator
4 x lowest reflected power freq tracker with additional input for accelerometer input
1 x 0.01g 3kg max hacked digital with direct load cell output
1 x magnetic thrust bearing rotary test rig
Various microwave interconnect bits & pieces
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Which says Roger's latest design is interesting but full YBCO coating on spherical end plate frustum is maybe a better option for space.
Exciting times to ENGAGE, 3.8 ship years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Centauri at 1g (including mid way flip & burn),
Phil
Sounds exciting. How long until you put the whole thing together and test? Is this for a commercial customer or will you be sharing the results on NSF? How did you handle the power source burnout that everyone else is having? Do you have a circulator? -
#2162 by meberbs on 29 Oct, 2016 06:41
-
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Passive cooling to 7K is not happening near earth or in the solar system. Radiant heat from the sun / earth / moon will keep things much warmer than that.
Look at something like James Webb, which uses active cooling plus a sun shade to keep its optics around 40-50K. Heat from electronics is part of it, but the primary driver is solar radiation.
Outside the solar system, you would still need a good reason to get it that cold, because you want the rest of your vehicle much warmer; many things do not like being in cryo conditions. The rest of the vehicle being warmer means active cooling again. -
#2163 by Gilbertdrive on 29 Oct, 2016 09:21
-
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Passive cooling to 7K is not happening near earth or in the solar system. Radiant heat from the sun / earth / moon will keep things much warmer than that.
Look at something like James Webb, which uses active cooling plus a sun shade to keep its optics around 40-50K. Heat from electronics is part of it, but the primary driver is solar radiation.
Outside the solar system, you would still need a good reason to get it that cold, because you want the rest of your vehicle much warmer; many things do not like being in cryo conditions. The rest of the vehicle being warmer means active cooling again.
Outside the solar system, the frustrum can be deported, fixed to the spaceship by an insulated perch, and with the right spaceship side very well insulated so it does not radiate much to the frustrum.
The problem would be : How far the RF generator can be put from the frustrum with reasonable energy losses ?
If really the thrust is 1t/kWrf, the travels would be so fast in the solar system that liquid Helium can be used. But it seems strange to speak about 1t/kWrf when a few milli Newtons are still not proven. -
#2164 by Gilbertdrive on 29 Oct, 2016 09:41
-
Assuming 1t/Kwrf.
Assuming a spaceship of 100t with a 10Kwrf Emdrive.
It would means an acceleration of 1m/s
After 10 days, the spaceship will have covered 1/2*1*(10*86400)^2/1000=37 324 800 km.
So, 10 days of acceleration, and 10 days of decelleration would be enough to go on mars.
for such a short period, liquid Helium can be used.
If it is for an interstellar mission, less than 130 days of acceleration are required to outdistance Pluto.
So, Liquid Helium is a viable solution for interplanetary transport, to be followed by passive cooling for interstallar transport.
But of course, it is assuming 1t/Kwrf
If it is only 1kg/Kwrf, it is less good.
And for now, proving 10g/Kwrf should be already great.
If the final thrust/energy ratio was comparable to Ion Thrusters, then, active cooling seems to be necessary. -
#2165 by TheTraveller on 29 Oct, 2016 15:56
-
Assuming 1t/Kwrf.
Assuming a spaceship of 100t with a 10Kwrf Emdrive.
It would means an acceleration of 1m/s
After 10 days, the spaceship will have covered 1/2*1*(10*86400)^2/1000=37 324 800 km.
So, 10 days of acceleration, and 10 days of decelleration would be enough to go on mars.
for such a short period, liquid Helium can be used.
If it is for an interstellar mission, less than 130 days of acceleration are required to outdistance Pluto.
So, Liquid Helium is a viable solution for interplanetary transport, to be followed by passive cooling for interstallar transport.
But of course, it is assuming 1t/Kwrf
If it is only 1kg/Kwrf, it is less good.
And for now, proving 10g/Kwrf should be already great.
If the final thrust/energy ratio was comparable to Ion Thrusters, then, active cooling seems to be necessary.
Just stack enough 1t//kWrf EmDrives to achieve 1g acceleration of the ship's mass.
3.8 ships years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Alpha Centauri orbiti, with a mid way filp & burn. -
#2166 by TheTraveller on 29 Oct, 2016 15:59
-
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Passive cooling to 7K is not happening near earth or in the solar system. Radiant heat from the sun / earth / moon will keep things much warmer than that.
Look at something like James Webb, which uses active cooling plus a sun shade to keep its optics around 40-50K. Heat from electronics is part of it, but the primary driver is solar radiation.
Outside the solar system, you would still need a good reason to get it that cold, because you want the rest of your vehicle much warmer; many things do not like being in cryo conditions. The rest of the vehicle being warmer means active cooling again.
YBCO works well at 70K, or LN2 cooling to supplement deep space 7K passive cooling. -
#2167 by TheTraveller on 29 Oct, 2016 16:02
-
Good news.
Both spherical end plate frustums passed temp cycling without any delamination. Difference was to NOT highly polish between coatings, put on a double thickness Silver coating, super polish that and then gold flash.
Now they start building 2 flat end plate variants, so I can test and evaluate the difference between flat & spherical end plates.
Starting to get excited as all the new hardware gets close to being real and in my workshop.
My new equipment lineup by late Dec/early Jan:
2 x wide freq 100W Rf amps
2 x narrow freq (2.4-2.5GHz) 250W Rf amps
4 x freq generator
4 x lowest reflected power freq tracker with additional input for accelerometer input
1 x 0.01g 3kg max hacked digital with direct load cell output
1 x magnetic thrust bearing rotary test rig
Various microwave interconnect bits & pieces
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Which says Roger's latest design is interesting but full YBCO coating on spherical end plate frustum is maybe a better option for space.
Exciting times to ENGAGE, 3.8 ship years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Centauri at 1g (including mid way flip & burn),
Phil
Sounds exciting. How long until you put the whole thing together and test? Is this for a commercial customer or will you be sharing the results on NSF? How did you handle the power source burnout that everyone else is having? Do you have a circulator?
Burnout elimination is just standard Microwave enginerring. Yes you need circulators and heat sinks. Don't use them and yes maggies & Rf amps die quick. -
#2168 by zen-in on 29 Oct, 2016 17:08
-
Good news.
Both spherical end plate frustums passed temp cycling without any delamination. Difference was to NOT highly polish between coatings, put on a double thickness Silver coating, super polish that and then gold flash.
Now they start building 2 flat end plate variants, so I can test and evaluate the difference between flat & spherical end plates.
Starting to get excited as all the new hardware gets close to being real and in my workshop.
My new equipment lineup by late Dec/early Jan:
2 x wide freq 100W Rf amps
2 x narrow freq (2.4-2.5GHz) 250W Rf amps
4 x freq generator
4 x lowest reflected power freq tracker with additional input for accelerometer input
1 x 0.01g 3kg max hacked digital with direct load cell output
1 x magnetic thrust bearing rotary test rig
Various microwave interconnect bits & pieces
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Which says Roger's latest design is interesting but full YBCO coating on spherical end plate frustum is maybe a better option for space.
Exciting times to ENGAGE, 3.8 ship years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Centauri at 1g (including mid way flip & burn),
Phil
I thought you had built your device several months ago. YBCO film is anisotropic in the X - Y plane. In the Z dimension the superconductivity is just a molecule thick. My experiments with high temperature superconductors has shown that they are lossy when exposed to AC > 60 Hz. Cryo cavities are typically made with type I superconductors, like Niobium. You cannot achieve superconducting temperatures with passive cooling. In Earth orbit the minimum temperature is -100 C (173 K). Away from Earth lower temps are possible, but active cooling would still be required. That is all moot because YBCO and other type II superconductors would not work anyway. -
#2169 by Josave on 29 Oct, 2016 17:25
-
> For a counter example i give you this: SMASH
>Thinking an untested theory can be a counter example to anything real
Isn't there just a slight, tingling doubt somewhere in back of your mind, or are you sure you've just circumvented a rule of science and engineering thats as old as history?
>Then Mike McCulloch's related his MiHsC dark matter theory to EmDrive.
Then Mike McCulloch's related his MiHsC dark matter theory to EmDrive.
[Then Mike McCulloch's related his MiHsC dark matter theory to EmDrive.
oh my god.
There are dozens of counter examples. I think that you confound pure enginering problems, and "new physics" problems.
In most of enginering problems, the laws of physics are not in question. Designing a 3 million spares Saturn V meant thousands or millions of enginering problems (bigs or smalls) that were resoluted. Here the approach divide and conquer is perfect.
But, when you get an experiment that violates the standard laws of physics, you have to look together the laws and the experiment. It is not about only enginering, it is about new physics and non standard enginering.
In fact, at the contrary of what you are saying, the progress of the knowledge of physical laws, were very often with several different experiments.
For example, the Copernicus revolution. It was not about just one phenomenon. It was about the movements of all knowns planets. And these movements were different for each one. the internal planets were obeying different rules than external planets. The copernicus theory, with only one rule, explained all these movements. It was not more precise than the epicycles. In fact, using circles, it was less precise, but it explained all movements by the same law.
Later, came Newton. With the law of gravity, he explained at the same time the movement of the planets around the sun, and the apple falling of the tree, that were considered like two totally different phenomenons before.
When the periodical classification of elements was made, it was also taking into account dozens of different atoms at the same time. If each atom had been considered like a separated problem, how would have been possible an atomic theory ?
In 1844, William Robert Grove postulated a relationship between mechanics, heat, light, electricity and magnetism by treating them all as manifestations of a single "force" (energy in modern terms)
Here also, very different phenomenons, linked together by a new theory !
Later, The famous E=MC^2 linked mass, and energy, that were precedently considered like separated, explaining at the same time very different things.
And in General Relativity, time, gravity, and the metric are linked ! All things that were considered like different a century ago.
So, at the opposite of what you say, explaining different things with one theory is a good thing in theoretical approach. And once the new theory is validated, it help engineers to do the work. Of course, bridges could be constructed before that gravity was discovered, and before strength of materials was theorized, but it helps to construct lighther and bigger bridges.
Emdrive is not only an enginering problem, it is a new physics problem. You can not solve a new physics problem without speaking of physical laws. It is logically impossible. We are not speaking of building a new bridge, we are speaking of a device that violates standard physics. Any attempt to explain how the emdrive works needs at least a new law or a modified law. One experiment, one law. It is the minimum here. If you don't like the idea of modifying gravity, what physical law would you modify ?
Once again, I have no personal opinion about the precise Todd Theory, what is still in the earlier stages of developpement, but IMHO gravity is a good candidate.
Yes, and this thread is named "New Physics for Space Technology" so letīs talk about it.
Going on, MiHsC theory is really predicting facts. Those two articles were written to support the dark matter model, and questions MoND, but the data presented and analysed in them firmly supports the MiHsC model of inertia and gravity of Dr. McCulloch:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.05003v2.pdf
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1610.06183v1.pdf
Surprisingly, in both publications you can see in Fig. 2 that MoND doesn't fit galaxy stellar velocities when the universe was smaller (redshift z = 1 and redshift z = 2).
The incredible fact is that MiHcS theory does, as Dr. McCulloch points in this graph (an article is going to be published about this).
-
#2170 by dustinthewind on 29 Oct, 2016 18:02
-
...
But if P is momentum and P is a function of Q2, and Q is a function of omega, then that means that momentum is a function of omega2, instead of a linear function of omega ...
In the attached image, P is momentum density, Q = K is the refractive index AND a Quality factor whose stored energy and dissipation vary within the cavity wrt "r". (This actually makes a lot of sense in terms of the Quantum Gravity of harmonic oscillators.)
Q is not a constant. The "force density" is a function of r, and dQ/dr is not zero. As the wave, P moves from back to front, it completes 1/2 cycle of omega. It's value changes as a linear function of omega. It gains momentum as it moves to the front where Q is higher (down-hill), and it loses momentum as it moves to the back where Q is lower (up-hill). As it goes up and down the hill the "force density" oscillates at frequency omega, not 2 omega. You said we needed a "force" acting at omega, not momentum.
You mention the wave traveling from back to front increasing in momentum and then back again decreasing in momentum. That is is good, but there is another counter-propagating wave simultaneously going back and forth. I believe this is where we get the 2omega.
This looks really similar to what I was saying about the mass of the photon changing at one end but I don't often mention the change in velocity. The change in wavelength at the narrow end seems to be a parallel to a change in the value of K, which was symbolic of an increase in momentum. I think I remember looking at one simulation and suggesting it was almost a difference of 4 or 2. It is almost the opposite of what Shawyer is saying though because he seems to imply the momentum decreases at the narrow end. It would be nice if they could put in a mirror sensor in the narrow end and test if the photon momentum is actually increasing or not. -
#2171 by Rodal on 29 Oct, 2016 18:07
-
...
But if P is momentum and P is a function of Q2, and Q is a function of omega, then that means that momentum is a function of omega2, instead of a linear function of omega ...
In the attached image, P is momentum density, Q = K is the refractive index AND a Quality factor whose stored energy and dissipation vary within the cavity wrt "r". (This actually makes a lot of sense in terms of the Quantum Gravity of harmonic oscillators.)
Q is not a constant. The "force density" is a function of r, and dQ/dr is not zero. As the wave, P moves from back to front, it completes 1/2 cycle of omega. It's value changes as a linear function of omega. It gains momentum as it moves to the front where Q is higher (down-hill), and it loses momentum as it moves to the back where Q is lower (up-hill). As it goes up and down the hill the "force density" oscillates at frequency omega, not 2 omega. You said we needed a "force" acting at omega, not momentum.
You mention the wave traveling from back to front increasing in momentum and then back again decreasing in momentum. That is is good, but there is another counter-propagating wave simultaneously going back and forth. I believe this is where we get the 2omega.
This looks really similar to what I was saying about the mass of the photon changing at one end but I would also need to state the change in velocity. Also that the wavelength at the narrow end was a parallel to a change in the value of K, which was symbolic of an increase in momentum. It is almost the opposite of what Shawyer is saying though. It would be nice if they could put in a mirror sensor in the narrow end and test if the photon momentum is actually increasing or not.
I still don't understand what is the mathematical expression for the "force density" that oscillates at the same frequency as E and B (or H), do you?
What are the units of this force density?
What is the equation for the force density? What is this force due to ? A gradient of Q? but Q is a property of the whole entire cavity. Different cavities can have different Q, depending on the eigenmodes/eigenfrequencies, the geometry and the material in the cavity. So how can there be a gradient of Q, dQ/dr, in the longitudinal (r) direction for the same cavity?
How does dP/dr give a linear expression of omega?
if omega is not a function of r, and S is independent of omega, I see a quadratic expression of omega there -
#2172 by X_RaY on 29 Oct, 2016 19:32
-
When there is more dissipation at one side of the cavity as for the other, than this means more heat at this side and therefore a temporary electron displacement into the direction of the colder side and more ir-radiation enters the free space(photon rocket). I mean there is no loss of energy but a conversion into other forms. Of course this effect on the electrons in the cavity material is reversable and therefore not usable for propulsion.
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39214.msg1510123#msg1510123 -
#2173 by dustinthewind on 29 Oct, 2016 19:53
-
...
But if P is momentum and P is a function of Q2, and Q is a function of omega, then that means that momentum is a function of omega2, instead of a linear function of omega ...
In the attached image, P is momentum density, Q = K is the refractive index AND a Quality factor whose stored energy and dissipation vary within the cavity wrt "r". (This actually makes a lot of sense in terms of the Quantum Gravity of harmonic oscillators.)
Q is not a constant. The "force density" is a function of r, and dQ/dr is not zero. As the wave, P moves from back to front, it completes 1/2 cycle of omega. It's value changes as a linear function of omega. It gains momentum as it moves to the front where Q is higher (down-hill), and it loses momentum as it moves to the back where Q is lower (up-hill). As it goes up and down the hill the "force density" oscillates at frequency omega, not 2 omega. You said we needed a "force" acting at omega, not momentum.
You mention the wave traveling from back to front increasing in momentum and then back again decreasing in momentum. That is is good, but there is another counter-propagating wave simultaneously going back and forth. I believe this is where we get the 2omega.
This looks really similar to what I was saying about the mass of the photon changing at one end but I would also need to state the change in velocity. Also that the wavelength at the narrow end was a parallel to a change in the value of K, which was symbolic of an increase in momentum. It is almost the opposite of what Shawyer is saying though. It would be nice if they could put in a mirror sensor in the narrow end and test if the photon momentum is actually increasing or not.
I still don't understand what is the mathematical expression for the "force density" that oscillates at the same frequency as E and B (or H), do you?
What are the units of this force density?
What is the equation for the force density? What is this force due to ? A gradient of Q? but Q is a property of the whole entire cavity. Different cavities can have different Q, depending on the eigenmodes/eigenfrequencies, the geometry and the material in the cavity. So how can there be a gradient of Q for the same cavity?
Ouch. I just realized looking at this paper here: page 21 Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) representation of general relativity by H. E. Puthoff that I had it backwards. An increase in the wavelength suggests a decrease in the value of K which throws a monkey wrench in my hypothesis of the mass of light increasing at the narrow end. It lines up better with what Shawyer was saying. That the momentum of light decreases at the narrow end.
Maybe WarpTech has a better angle on this. I am curious WarpTech. Does your model predict a smaller wavelength at the narrow end?
If the momentum of light increases at the big end then maybe it is a direct indication of the change in momentum of the quantum vacuum? That is if light is some stimulation of virtual electron-positron pairs at the low level. If the quantum vacuum has increased in momentum at the big end then the cavity must increase in momentum in the direction of the narrow end. But why?
The PV equations give a change in frequency of the light as it leaves the big end my being corrected, K should decrease at the narrow end. This change in frequency as the light leaves the big end leads to a phase mismatch where the phase of the light will be advanced with respect to the current at the base plate. Normally as the light meets the base plate E_max_light = -E_max_big plate so they cancel out. Now we have a phase miss match of E_max_light before the cavity can accelerate its current making its counter electric field.
However, even if there were a phase miss match at the skin depth in copper the copper below should be ample to induce enough current.
What about virtual electron-positron pairs entering the narrow end and as they osculate at the wavelength gradient, maybe they are excited to move towards the big end and as a result of acceleration induce a frequency gradient by an accelerated frame?
Reguardless, this is backwards to what I was expecting. I am going to have to rethink this.
-----
@Dr Rodal. I would guess the measured Q of a cavity is Q_ave or the average Q as a function of the damping of the cavity. Depending on the path the current takes in the cavity, which is what I think WarpTech is getting at. Particularly I think he was looking at the TE modes. Hopefully I am not misleading here. A gradient in the Q is what I suspect he is after which for TE modes would vary with the perimeter(height) of the circle of current, perpendicular to the center axis, as a function of power dissipated through the copper I^2*R/length*perimeter. -
#2174 by rfmwguy on 30 Oct, 2016 01:54
-
The goal I've had since day one is to establish enough evidence that could lead to humanity's first interstellar probe. It's sole mission is to reach alpha centauri within the lifetime of my children. I've found that lofty goals are a great motivator. Perhaps it's only a dream, but I have not given up hope. Glad you seem to be thinking along the same lines. Why not think big? Perhaps we'll see the launch. Perhaps the time, effort and resources we expend will pay off. We should always be cognizant of the possibilities, that's what makes us human. Good luck with your latest efforts.Assuming 1t/Kwrf.
Assuming a spaceship of 100t with a 10Kwrf Emdrive.
It would means an acceleration of 1m/s
After 10 days, the spaceship will have covered 1/2*1*(10*86400)^2/1000=37 324 800 km.
So, 10 days of acceleration, and 10 days of decelleration would be enough to go on mars.
for such a short period, liquid Helium can be used.
If it is for an interstellar mission, less than 130 days of acceleration are required to outdistance Pluto.
So, Liquid Helium is a viable solution for interplanetary transport, to be followed by passive cooling for interstallar transport.
But of course, it is assuming 1t/Kwrf
If it is only 1kg/Kwrf, it is less good.
And for now, proving 10g/Kwrf should be already great.
If the final thrust/energy ratio was comparable to Ion Thrusters, then, active cooling seems to be necessary.
Just stack enough 1t//kWrf EmDrives to achieve 1g acceleration of the ship's mass.
3.8 ships years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Alpha Centauri orbiti, with a mid way filp & burn. -
#2175 by WarpTech on 30 Oct, 2016 04:21
-
...
But if P is momentum and P is a function of Q2, and Q is a function of omega, then that means that momentum is a function of omega2, instead of a linear function of omega ...
In the attached image, P is momentum density, Q = K is the refractive index AND a Quality factor whose stored energy and dissipation vary within the cavity wrt "r". (This actually makes a lot of sense in terms of the Quantum Gravity of harmonic oscillators.)
Q is not a constant. The "force density" is a function of r, and dQ/dr is not zero. As the wave, P moves from back to front, it completes 1/2 cycle of omega. It's value changes as a linear function of omega. It gains momentum as it moves to the front where Q is higher (down-hill), and it loses momentum as it moves to the back where Q is lower (up-hill). As it goes up and down the hill the "force density" oscillates at frequency omega, not 2 omega. You said we needed a "force" acting at omega, not momentum.
You mention the wave traveling from back to front increasing in momentum and then back again decreasing in momentum. That is is good, but there is another counter-propagating wave simultaneously going back and forth. I believe this is where we get the 2omega.
This looks really similar to what I was saying about the mass of the photon changing at one end but I would also need to state the change in velocity. Also that the wavelength at the narrow end was a parallel to a change in the value of K, which was symbolic of an increase in momentum. It is almost the opposite of what Shawyer is saying though. It would be nice if they could put in a mirror sensor in the narrow end and test if the photon momentum is actually increasing or not.
I still don't understand what is the mathematical expression for the "force density" that oscillates at the same frequency as E and B (or H), do you?
What are the units of this force density?
What is the equation for the force density? What is this force due to ? A gradient of Q? but Q is a property of the whole entire cavity. Different cavities can have different Q, depending on the eigenmodes/eigenfrequencies, the geometry and the material in the cavity. So how can there be a gradient of Q for the same cavity?
Ouch. I just realized looking at this paper here: page 21 Polarizable-Vacuum (PV) representation of general relativity by H. E. Puthoff that I had it backwards. An increase in the wavelength suggests a decrease in the value of K which throws a monkey wrench in my hypothesis of the mass of light increasing at the narrow end. It lines up better with what Shawyer was saying. That the momentum of light decreases at the narrow end.
Maybe WarpTech has a better angle on this. I am curious WarpTech. Does your model predict a smaller wavelength at the narrow end?Quote from: WarpTechMy model predicts the wavelength will contract where the stored energy is the greatest. Where that is apparently depends on the shape of the mode, the shape of the frustum, and what's inside it.
If the momentum of light increases at the big end then maybe it is a direct indication of the change in momentum of the quantum vacuum? That is if light is some stimulation of virtual electron-positron pairs at the low level. If the quantum vacuum has increased in momentum at the big end then the cavity must increase in momentum in the direction of the narrow end. But why?Quote from: WarpTechQ is the stored energy divided by the power dissipated per cycle. It serves the same function as K in the PV Model, only if you make the energy stored and the power dissipated, instantaneous variables of the coordinates. This is where @Rodal is going to disagree, because I am essentially redefining what Q is. Give me an alternative?
The PV equations give a change in frequency of the light as it leaves the big end my being corrected, K should decrease at the narrow end. This change in frequency as the light leaves the big end leads to a phase mismatch where the phase of the light will be advanced with respect to the current at the base plate. Normally as the light meets the base plate E_max_light = -E_max_big plate so they cancel out. Now we have a phase miss match of E_max_light before the cavity can accelerate its current making its counter electric field.
However, even if there were a phase miss match at the skin depth in copper the copper below should be ample to induce enough current.
What about virtual electron-positron pairs entering the narrow end and as they osculate at the wavelength gradient, maybe they are excited to move towards the big end and as a result of acceleration induce a frequency gradient by an accelerated frame?Quote from: WarpTechI don't need them.
Reguardless, this is backwards to what I was expecting. I am going to have to rethink this.
-----
@Dr Rodal. I would guess the measured Q of a cavity is Q_ave or the average Q as a function of the damping of the cavity. Depending on the path the current takes in the cavity, which is what I think WarpTech is getting at. Particularly I think he was looking at the TE modes. Hopefully I am not misleading here. A gradient in the Q is what I suspect he is after which for TE modes would vary with the perimeter(height) of the circle of current, perpendicular to the center axis, as a function of power dissipated through the copper I^2*R/length*perimeter.
Like I said, specify the stored energy and the power dissipation as a function of the coordinates. In spherical coordinates, where the origin is the apex of the cone, if the energy is stored near the small end at say, r0. Then the gravitational equal potential surfaces for r > r0, will be concentric spherical shells, centered on the apex of the cone, and increasing (negative) potential energy outwardly from r0. These concentric equal potential surfaces, each have a slightly different value of Q, and ideally, Q ~ 1/r.
Just so you understand, in PV, the wavelength contracts as light approaches the central mass of the gravitational field. It gains momentum and blue shifts. If it's going the other way, away from the gravitational mass, it loses momentum and red shifts. From what I'm gathering from the data, the center of gravitational mass is neither the front, nor the back of the frustum. It is where ever the energy is stored, which depends on a lot of other things.
Another thing that bothers me is, if the inside of the frustum is a highly reflective "ground plane". Then what is the force between the stored energy and the ground plane? If it were stored charge above a ground plane, that would be fairly easy. But a stored energy without charge? In practice, we do not have gravitational mirrors that reflect gravitational fields, but since this field is in a bandwidth that can be reflected... there is a possibility that we are seeing a gravitational dipole reaction between the stored energy and it's reflection.... more maybe later.
-
#2176 by TheTraveller on 30 Oct, 2016 05:59
-
Good news.
Both spherical end plate frustums passed temp cycling without any delamination. Difference was to NOT highly polish between coatings, put on a double thickness Silver coating, super polish that and then gold flash.
Now they start building 2 flat end plate variants, so I can test and evaluate the difference between flat & spherical end plates.
Starting to get excited as all the new hardware gets close to being real and in my workshop.
My new equipment lineup by late Dec/early Jan:
2 x wide freq 100W Rf amps
2 x narrow freq (2.4-2.5GHz) 250W Rf amps
4 x freq generator
4 x lowest reflected power freq tracker with additional input for accelerometer input
1 x 0.01g 3kg max hacked digital with direct load cell output
1 x magnetic thrust bearing rotary test rig
Various microwave interconnect bits & pieces
Been reading up on YBCO coatings. Looking like a X band YBCO thruster is doable and passively cooled by space to 7K, plus terrestrial cooled to 70K via liquid Nitrogen. Could exceed 10,000N/kWrf or 1t/kWrf so this is 1g drive stuff.
Which says Roger's latest design is interesting but full YBCO coating on spherical end plate frustum is maybe a better option for space.
Exciting times to ENGAGE, 3.8 ship years or 6 Earth years to Alpha Centauri at 1g (including mid way flip & burn),
Phil
I thought you had built your device several months ago. YBCO film is anisotropic in the X - Y plane. In the Z dimension the superconductivity is just a molecule thick. My experiments with high temperature superconductors has shown that they are lossy when exposed to AC > 60 Hz. Cryo cavities are typically made with type I superconductors, like Niobium. You cannot achieve superconducting temperatures with passive cooling. In Earth orbit the minimum temperature is -100 C (173 K). Away from Earth lower temps are possible, but active cooling would still be required. That is all moot because YBCO and other type II superconductors would not work anyway.
YBCO is better than Copper at 2.45GHz and it can be made superconductive by passive space cooling. Google it.
As for my spherical end plate build, as I reported here there was an issue with delamination, which appears to have been solved. -
#2177 by chongma on 30 Oct, 2016 07:21
-
A hypothetical emdrive solar powered craft could accelerate as it traveled towards the outer solar system. But when it got too far from the sun the solar arrays would generate less electricity? An interstellar craft would have to be nuclear powered?
-
#2178 by qraal on 30 Oct, 2016 08:25
-
It could be laser powered. Then, for power in interstellar space, it could use a magnetic loop and draw off a tiny fraction of its kinetic energy via interacting with the interstellar medium.
Nukes would be helpful, but aren't an absolute necessity. If you're doing more than ~0.04 c your kinetic energy is more than any fission reactor could *ever* supply.A hypothetical emdrive solar powered craft could accelerate as it traveled towards the outer solar system. But when it got too far from the sun the solar arrays would generate less electricity? An interstellar craft would have to be nuclear powered?
-
#2179 by Gilbertdrive on 30 Oct, 2016 09:21
-
It could be laser powered. Then, for power in interstellar space, it could use a magnetic loop and draw off a tiny fraction of its kinetic energy via interacting with the interstellar medium.
Shawyer claims that the Emdrive gives constant thrust for constant imput power. So, as it has been shown earlier, if it works like this, you can get far more Kinetic Energy (in any inertial reference frame) that the RF imput of the frustrum.
Nukes would be helpful, but aren't an absolute necessity. If you're doing more than ~0.04 c your kinetic energy is more than any fission reactor could *ever* supply.A hypothetical emdrive solar powered craft could accelerate as it traveled towards the outer solar system. But when it got too far from the sun the solar arrays would generate less electricity? An interstellar craft would have to be nuclear powered?
This point has not been proven, because no experiment has ever shown thrust bigger than P/V (P the electrical power and V the speed in the laboratory reference frame)
But, the opposite has also not been proven. Maybe the Emdrive is stealing energy to something else in the universe. For example stealing Kinetic Energy to other bodies, as it is for Gravity Assist. Or stealing Energy to the Quantum Vacuum, or beyond he Rindler Hoziron.
With the hypothesis of The Traveller, a thrust of 1t/Kwrf, a small interstellar probe would be OK with a Pu238 RTG, or several ones for a big probe. The RTG of the Voyager probes was 470W. A few of these would be OK.
But, before dreaming of tons of thrust for flying car and interstellar travel, a proven thrust of 10 grams, comparable with Ion Thrusters, would already be a revolution.
