It is taxpayer funded research, that isn't classified or export controlled (otherwise it couldn't be published to begin with). The results have to be freely available in the end (A few extra months or even a year delay from the publication date would still be legal most likely, so we can be glad we don't need to wait more).
It's also ten year behind the state of the art according to Shawyer. Wish we could see what's really going on...
Paul March is leaving Eagleworks. Maybe you should ask him why.
I will hope it is for opportunity. However, you have certainly created a question that many would like explained.
Wish him all the best.
Paul told me he was retiring and taking his wife on a LONG Holiday.
I'm sure we all wish Paul & his wife all the best in retirement.
Is there any obvious candidates at EW to take over his work?
"The Einstein field equation has zero divergence. The zero divergence of the stress–energy tensor is the geometrical expression of the conservation law. So it appears constants in the Einstein equation cannot vary, otherwise this postulate would be violated.
However, since Einstein's constant had been evaluated by a calculation based on a time-independent metric, this by no mean requires that G and c must be unvarying constants themselves, the only postulate derived from conservation of energy is that the ratio G/c2 must be constant.
Depending on the choice of natural units, this ratio can be set to a defined constant value; subject to measurement is the dimensionless gravitational coupling constant, variation in which would not necessarily amount to violation of the conservation of four-momentum."
Does any of the below pertain?
Gravitational constant may be changing on a 5.9 year cycle:
http://phys.org/news/2015-04-gravitational-constant-vary.html"As a clue to what this "something else" is, the scientists note that the 5.9-year oscillatory period of the measured G values correlates almost perfectly with the 5.9-year oscillatory period of Earth's rotation rate, as determined by recent Length of Day (LOD) measurements."
Speed of light may vary too:
cds.cern.ch/record/618057/files/0305457.pdf
"We then summarize the main VSL mechanisms proposed so far: hard breaking of Lorentz invariance; bimetric theories (where the speeds of gravity and light are not the same); locally Lorentz invariant VSL theories; theories exhibiting a color dependent speed of light; varying c induced by extra dimensions (e.g. in the brane-world scenario); and field theories where VSL results from vacuum polarization or CPT violation."
Then there's bimetric gravity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimetric_gravity
Despite the close correlation between LOD and G, the scientists note that the maximum percentage variation of the LOD is on the order of 10-9, which is large enough to change G by only 10-5 of the amplitude—not enough to explain the full 10-4 percentage variation in G. Since this means that the LOD variations cannot cause the G variations, the researchers surmise that both variations are caused by changing motions in the Earth's core, or perhaps some other geophysical process.
As a translation here, there is no reasonable way that they are saying that a geophysical process somehow changes the fundamental constant G throughout the universe. Instead this may mean that there is some error source such as changes of rotations in the earth's core that ends up affecting both length of day and measurements of G. For example, since measurements of G often use torsion pendulums, an effect altering LOD may also affect the measurements of G by a means related to the Foucault pendulum. (It would probably be something even more subtle though)
This also explains why the quantum measurement doesn't fit the pattern; it could be immune to this error. The oscillations are due to an error source and not a true changing of G.
Also relevant context from that paper for the variable speed of light:
The evidence is slim -- redshift dependence in alpha, ultra high energy cosmic rays, and (to a much lesser extent) the acceleration of the universe and the WMAP data. The constraints (e.g. those arising from nucleosynthesis or geological bounds) are tight, but not impossible.
I am glad some scientists are looking at these theories, because I sometimes wonder if scientists don't revisit their assumptions often enough. But this paper also acknowledges one of the main reasons why they don't. There is not much margin in the experimental errors for these theories to squeeze in.
I need some help. Could anybody out there give me the intensity of the electric and magnetic fields inside the cavity, varying power source, mode frequency and so on? Thanks.
I would like to help but I am unable to do so for the next three weeks due to unrelated-business travel, and a conference presentation on breakthrough propulsion.
There are many people that may be able (?) to help, I would suggest Monomorphic or X_Ray (in alphabetical order 
) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in 
May I ask you what will be the name of the conference and when it will take place? Will it be streamed on internet? I am sure many would like to watch and hear it. Including me.
I need some help. Could anybody out there give me the intensity of the electric and magnetic fields inside the cavity, varying power source, mode frequency and so on? Thanks.
I would like to help but I am unable to do so for the next three weeks due to unrelated-business travel, and a conference presentation on breakthrough propulsion.
There are many people that may be able (?) to help, I would suggest Monomorphic or X_Ray (in alphabetical order ) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in
May I ask you what will be the name of the conference and when it will take place? Will it be streamed on internet? I am sure many would like to watch and hear it. Including me.
It is the Estes Park Advanced Propulsion Workshop, 20-22 September 2016, organized by the Space Studies Institute (SSI, founded by Gerard K. O'Neill) (
http://ssi.org/ ) under Gary C Hudson, President. There will be presentations by Prof. J. Woodward, Prof. H. Fearn (California State University, Fullerton), Prof. M. Tajmar (TU Dresden), Paul March (NASA), Prof. D. Hyland (Texas A&M), among several others. I am giving a presentation (not anything I have discussed so far at NSF-EM Drive) on Tuesday, 20 September, during Block 3, 1:30PM-3:10PM. I understand that SeeShells is attending
My understanding is that it will not be streamed live, but it may be video recorded and the video available at SSI at a later date.
I need some help. Could anybody out there give me the intensity of the electric and magnetic fields inside the cavity, varying power source, mode frequency and so on? Thanks.
I would like to help but I am unable to do so for the next three weeks due to unrelated-business travel, and a conference presentation on breakthrough propulsion.
There are many people that may be able (?) to help, I would suggest Monomorphic or X_Ray (in alphabetical order ) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in
May I ask you what will be the name of the conference and when it will take place? Will it be streamed on internet? I am sure many would like to watch and hear it. Including me.
It is the Estes Park Advanced Propulsion Workshop, 20-22 September 2016, organized by the Space Studies Institute (SSI) (http://ssi.org/ ) under Gary C Hudson, President. There will be presentations by Prof. J. Woodward, Prof. H. Fearn (Fullerton), Prof. Tajmar (TU Dresden) and Paul March, among several others. I am giving a presentation on Tuesday (not anything I have discussed so far at NSF). I understand that SeeShells is attending
My understanding is that it will not be streamed live, but it may be video recorded and the video available at SSI at a later date.
Video and proceedings will be made public on the ssi.org site as soon as possible, but we don't have a schedule for those tasks to be completed at the moment.
Do you believe this effect would scale in a linear fashion with an increase in size of the cavity? Therefore become more measurable with a larger cavity.
The effect has a non-trivial dependence on geometry but appears to be scalable.
Forgive these questions if they are trivial; my math skills don't get anywhere near what's required to truly understand your paper.
1) Does your interpretation of the B-D theory then give any clues as to the optimal distribution of radiation within the frustum/cavity from a "thrust*" perspective? That is, say, an even distribution vs. a gradient?
2) Someone mentioned an analog in the natural world (using masers as an example).
Scientific American had an article about how a supervoid could cause a cold spot in the CMBR... that would be a gradient of sorts.
{Link to graphic:
http://www.nature.com/scientificamerican/journal/v315/n2/images/scientificamerican0816-28-I4.jpg}
If the entire universe were a frustum and the "source" of the CMBR were an analog for the small end of the frustum with (any particular point today) being the large end of the frustum, you'd get a "thrust*" towards the "small end..." would that look like "dark energy?"
* Term used loosely to describe a resultant acceleration
I need some help. Could anybody out there give me the intensity of the electric and magnetic fields inside the cavity, varying power source, mode frequency and so on? Thanks.
I would like to help but I am unable to do so for the next three weeks due to unrelated-business travel, and a conference presentation on breakthrough propulsion.
There are many people that may be able (?) to help, I would suggest Monomorphic or X_Ray (in alphabetical order ) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in
May I ask you what will be the name of the conference and when it will take place? Will it be streamed on internet? I am sure many would like to watch and hear it. Including me.
It is the Estes Park Advanced Propulsion Workshop, 20-22 September 2016, organized by the Space Studies Institute (SSI, founded by Gerard K. O'Neill) (http://ssi.org/ ) under Gary C Hudson, President. There will be presentations by Prof. J. Woodward, Prof. H. Fearn (California State University, Fullerton), Prof. M. Tajmar (TU Dresden), Paul March (NASA), Prof. D. Hyland (Texas A&M), among several others. I am giving a presentation on Tuesday (not anything I have discussed so far at NSF-EM Drive). I understand that SeeShells is attending
My understanding is that it will not be streamed live, but it may be video recorded and the video available at SSI at a later date.
I am attending the three day workshop.
My work has progressed to the point that I welcome clearer understanding the different theories and approaches to help refine and maybe better understand what of the results I have seen in the lab.
SSI is to be applauded in this approach in sponsoring this veritable mind-meld of Physicists, PhDs, Educators, Engineers and even the highly interested who have a common mindset and goal.
Let us dream.
Shell
Let us dream.
Indeed.
Then, Let us BUILD.
Oh, I am TT, I am.
This is my 4th test bed. I'm currently removing all metals including the aluminum frame, it will be made of wood. The lab tabletop is being replaced with a wooden top.
http://imgur.com/a/LSwQNI'll still have the torsion wire and small tension screw for the wire and a couple brass screws.
The new frustum is now a TE013 build.
Will have the control electronics on the top but critical areas are now sealed with Mu-metal sheets.
For now I'm staying with the magnetron.
The magnetron's power is driven by a varaible HV power supply and the heater power is current controlled, switchable on/off.
I keep the magnetron cooled and stable by a wrapped water cooling copper line into a forced air heat exchange radiator.
The magnetron drives into a tunable resonate cavity locking to 2.445GHz which drives an antenna probe to coax to a tunable frustum.
I was hoping to have this refined build done and tested before the upcoming workshop, but it just couldn't be done in time.
Shell
Let us dream.
Indeed.
Then, Let us BUILD.
Phil,
Sort of regret not putting together a public presentation for my 18.4 mN test result and sending it to these folks. Its probably best as I did not resolve stability/performance/heating issues with the magnetron(s). So, while the maggy was at top performance, 18.4 was there; but it did not last. I'd rather not present something that was not repeatable...a big no-no in my previous life presenting to engineers and board of director types.
I only check in about once a month, so in October, I hope to be able to return to the fun stuff by completing the solid state build...hopefully.
Let us dream.
Indeed.
Then, Let us BUILD.
Oh, I am TT, I am.
Can you say about what thrust you expect to see? Thanks.
I need some help. Could anybody out there give me the intensity of the electric and magnetic fields inside the cavity, varying power source, mode frequency and so on? Thanks.
I would like to help but I am unable to do so for the next three weeks due to unrelated-business travel, and a conference presentation on breakthrough propulsion.
There are many people that may be able (?) to help, I would suggest Monomorphic or X_Ray (in alphabetical order ) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in
May I ask you what will be the name of the conference and when it will take place? Will it be streamed on internet? I am sure many would like to watch and hear it. Including me.
It is the Estes Park Advanced Propulsion Workshop, 20-22 September 2016, organized by the Space Studies Institute (SSI) (http://ssi.org/ ) under Gary C Hudson, President. There will be presentations by Prof. J. Woodward, Prof. H. Fearn (California State University, Fullerton), Prof. M. Tajmar (TU Dresden) and Paul March (NASA), among several others. I am giving a presentation on Tuesday (not anything I have discussed so far at NSF). I understand that SeeShells is attending
My understanding is that it will not be streamed live, but it may be video recorded and the video available at SSI at a later date.
More info attached.
I wish I had known about this. My recent work and paper would've been well suited for this.
I need some help. Could anybody out there give me the intensity of the electric and magnetic fields inside the cavity, varying power source, mode frequency and so on? Thanks.
I would like to help but I am unable to do so for the next three weeks due to unrelated-business travel, and a conference presentation on breakthrough propulsion.
There are many people that may be able (?) to help, I would suggest Monomorphic or X_Ray (in alphabetical order ) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in
May I ask you what will be the name of the conference and when it will take place? Will it be streamed on internet? I am sure many would like to watch and hear it. Including me.
It is the Estes Park Advanced Propulsion Workshop, 20-22 September 2016, organized by the Space Studies Institute (SSI) (http://ssi.org/ ) under Gary C Hudson, President. There will be presentations by Prof. J. Woodward, Prof. H. Fearn (California State University, Fullerton), Prof. M. Tajmar (TU Dresden) and Paul March (NASA), among several others. I am giving a presentation on Tuesday (not anything I have discussed so far at NSF). I understand that SeeShells is attending
My understanding is that it will not be streamed live, but it may be video recorded and the video available at SSI at a later date.
More info attached.
I wish I had known about this. My recent work and paper would've been well suited for this.
Its appears to be a close knit group, mainly around the Woodwards Mach Effect thruster from what I gathered a few months ago. There was no formal call for papers and think it was by invitation only. Had a couple of early conversations with someone whom suggested I bring a working demo of my Gen II, but that was before I started any testing and had no idea if it performed. Timing was bad, in addition...
...
Its appears to be a close knit group, mainly around the Woodwards Mach Effect thruster from what I gathered a few months ago. There was no formal call for papers and think it was by invitation only. Had a couple of early conversations with someone whom suggested I bring a working demo of my Gen II, but that was before I started any testing and had no idea if it performed. Timing was bad, in addition...
Prof. M. Tajmar (TU Dresden, Germany) and Paul March (NASA) are going to be reporting on their EM Drive
experiments. Prof. Tajmar, acknowledged the advice of Shawyer (*), for his
experiments. It is well known that Shaywer has a different viewpoint than Prof. Woodward. The fact that Dr. White (NASA) advocates a different theory (degradable QV (**) ) than Dr. Woodward (Sciama/Mach Effect from GR) (***), on which they disagree, is well known. Several other attendees and presenters with different viewpoints.
It is a
small workshop, by design, and as such attendance was by invitation.
NSF readers can form their own judgement, for example, by reading the Mission Statement and Conference Overview previously posted by TheTraveller here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1584913#msg1584913 , and based on the reputation of the Space Studies Institute, since it was founded by the late Princeton University Professor Gerard K. O'Neill; later presided by Prof. Freeman Dyson (now in the Board of Trustees); and presently presided by Gary C Hudson.
Fundamental research in physics funded by the NSF tends to focus on quantum gravity and
string theory. NASA funded a small breakthrough propulsion program in the 1990s, but it was
not sustained. Even if money was available, it is not clear how and where funds should be
invested.
The typical conference format is ill-suited to this venture. Many conferences that accept
breakthrough propulsion papers allow any person to pay a fee and present any dubious technical
claim with little peer review or engagement with subject matter experts.
Therefore, we want to attempt to assemble a handful of potentially viable concepts for a
propulsion breakthrough, and give each of them a rigorous, real-time, peer-review on the twin
bases of theory and experiment. If someone has something with potential, they should relish a
chance to explain it to others. If their scheme is ultimately not viable, they can be freed to join
work in a more promising area
(Bold added for emphasis)
_____________
(*)
https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/dateien/forschung/folder-2007-08-21-5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/JPC---Direct-Thrust-Measurements-of-an-EM-Drive-and-Evaluation-of-Possible-Side-Effects.pdf?lang=en(**)
http://www.libertariannews.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf(***)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_F._Woodward
Let us dream.
Indeed.
Then, Let us BUILD.
Oh, I am TT, I am.
Can you say about what thrust you expect to see? Thanks.
No sir I can't. I'm currently chasing down a high impulse cyclic pulse jerk action and until that happens I simply can't say. I will say there is "something", so far it's unknown what excact conditions of timings cause it although I will find it.
Shell
) if they could re-post one of the many solutions they already posted or, if you could detail a specific geometry or other information they could solve the particular geometry and input you are most interested in 
