Let's leave the job of identifying personal attacks to the moderators.
Instead, let's thank the person (Kenjee) who has made the most recent creative contributions to the forum, by posting independent calculations, generously done in his own time, of the electric fields, magnetic fields and energy density:
Let's post positive
technical contributions, whether theoretical or experimental. This is what people come to the forum for
Thank you for indulging me with your replies, gentlemen
Not a dumb question. If the EM drive produces thrust, it's a reasonable assumption it has a correlation to field strength. Without an accepted working theory, individuals are checking many possibilities.
Is there an ideal, regarding what a plot should look like? Would that ideal be the interior of the cavity being filled with as many "red donuts" (strong toroidal electric fields) as possible? I keep imagining that the centerline that passes through all the donuts is the thrust centerline generated by these toroidal E-fields. So I keep visualizing these toroidal E-fields as "smoke-ring vortices" of Quantum Foam, which are then moving virtual particles along that centerline to produce thrust. Therefore the more "smoke-ring vortices" (toroidal E-fields) you have, and the stronger (more reddish) they are, then the better the propulsive effect. Am I way off?
In a way, that picture is consistent with the Pilot Wave theory, which holds that the virtual particles have a persistent trajectory, even if the virtual particles themselves are only transiently visible to us as quantum fluctuations.
Here's some quick answers Sanman:
When I see the shaded zones inside the frustrum area, they seem to show concentrations of electric field strength - the reddish areas seem to be stronger than the bluish-greenish areas - but why is electric field strength indicative of propulsive capability?
It's related to Q and is critical for surpassing threshold levels in gravitational gradient/time lag based theories. The B component has been neglected slightly during the research, mainly because (opinion) TM has been less promising than TE. A popular explanation for this has to do with the direction in which you would want electron and ion pressure to equalize (small to big end), though there is an unresolved question as to whether TM is truly worse than TE. If new TM results equal those of TE then we know that the interaction of the B component with the endplates is the same as that of the E component.
So at this point it's not confirmed that optimizing for full Lorentz effect (E+B) is better than optimizing for just E alone? I've seen various COMSOL plots of E-field posted at times, but has anyone produced any of the B-field? (just curious as to what they look like, and how they compare)
And why do these resonant cavities have to be pumped with microwaves in particular? What's so special about microwaves? Why not UV-light instead, for example? Is it because the wavelength of microwaves makes them more convenient to work with?
Microwaves have multiple unique and useful resonant freqs which are located nearby on the bandwidth. Microwave cavities are a useful size and magnetrons are common. Also, they have tolerable wall skin depths allowing for feasible DIY builds.
But other than the convenience for human hands, there's no natural benefit from using one frequency of EM over another? (Well, I'd assume that higher frequencies are harder to reflect inside the cavity, while lower frequencies are more easily reflected without losses.)
Jim once told me that a single larger rocket engine with a larger thrust chamber is better than many small ones. Likewise, we know that larger tokamaks operate more efficiently than smaller ones, because of cube-square.
I'm wondering if a larger frustrum/cavity would operate more efficiently than a smaller one, producing a better signal-to-noise ratio. On the other hand, I'd imagine that building an accurate measurement device becomes more difficult if your EMdrive gets too large.
Does the actual size of the frustrum matter, or just its ratios?
Put roughly: everything is dependent on ratios of 1/2 waves. Of course the size matters.
FYI: here are two cutoff related papers surrounding the EM Drive and two educational sources regarding more general questions about resonating waveguides.
http://whites.sdsmt.edu/classes/ee481/notes/481Lecture10.pdf
Thank you for that! I recognize that the cavity dimensions have to correspond to the frequency of EM being used, but I was just mainly wondering if the EMdrive performance changes with size scaling.
(ie. would a bigger 10m-wide EMdrive be better than a 10cm-wide one?)
I'm reminded of the challenges of Very Long Baseline Interferometry, whereby telescopes positioned at very large distances from each other can more precisely image distant objects, with the caveat that these telescopes have to be aligned at wavelength-precision.
Likewise, I was imagining that a very large EMdrive could operate more efficiently than a smaller one, with the caveat that its dimensions would have to be at a precision equal to the resonant EM wavelength (or half-wavelength).
IMO – We should not have any standing waves regime; they are self cancellations. We need to develop a stable E field within a variable B field. This way, we should be able to squeeze out a resultant time rate gradient which can escape/envelop the device. In turn, the time rate gradient would impart a stochastic differential to all particles (Croca) of the device and motion.
Here is the “squeezing” rational. A variation of B in dt induces a specific E. If we produce a variation B in a higher E than the specific one, we are then forcing or squeezing the dt into matching the B and E we control. A proper dt gradient would effectively produce a time vector for motion.
... thank the person (Kenjee) who has made the most recent creative contributions to the forum, by posting independent calculations, generously done in his own time, of the electric fields, magnetic fields and energy density:
Let's post positive technical contributions, whether theoretical or experimental. This is what people come to the forum for
Thanks for all your hard work.
Spupeng7 (John) and myself have entertained a little side-project this past month, despite our business. Here are the first fruits of that endeavour for the professional and academically oriented among us. Enjoy 10 EM Drive threads worth of attachments, scraped by web macro and presented as raw download links and link text (use ctrl+f for now until we create clean lists with more metadata). The next phase involves downloading, collating and sorting through ALL linked papers and files. This is the first step towards the idealized endgoal of an automated library of all EM Drive related research and literature from the perspective of this illuminating forum. Thank you all for your sincere contributions and prolonged hard work. Please contact John or myself for feedback or requests, and we will work towards providing easily accessible standardized knowledge for all.
...the eddy current heating energy is sourced or taken from the photon's energy, which causes them to decrease their energy and increase their wavelength, until finally almost all their energy is thermalised and they have very long wavelengths.
...the trapped photons existing post the pulse will continually increase their wavelength as they lose energy to eddy currents, the coupler and conversion into work to accelerate mass. All of which continually drain photon energy and increase the wavelength.
I've seen this incorrect description show up a number of times on this forum. Both of these statements are false: that's just not how photons in quantum mechanics work. Eddy heating does not change the frequency of the microwave. Instead, it reduces the stored energy by reducing the
number of microwave photons. This is true for all photon wavelengths. For example, a blue laser, when reflected thousands of times between mirrors does not change into a red laser; instead it just becomes a less strong blue laser (fewer photons). Microwave guides and cavity resonators work the same. The frequency does NOT change, but the field strengths decline (i.e. fewer photons), as the signal loses strength.
Photon frequency
can change during reflections, such as when energy is added to or removed from the photon due to either the Doppler effect (such as in laser thermal broadening) or interaction with other quantum states in the reflective medium (look up Raman scattering), but those scenarios are not applicable to eddy current heating due to microwaves. Microwave frequency does NOT get lower along a microwave guide or in a resonator. The signal just loses strength.
...the eddy current heating energy is sourced or taken from the photon's energy, which causes them to decrease their energy and increase their wavelength, until finally almost all their energy is thermalised and they have very long wavelengths.
...the trapped photons existing post the pulse will continually increase their wavelength as they lose energy to eddy currents, the coupler and conversion into work to accelerate mass. All of which continually drain photon energy and increase the wavelength.
I've seen this incorrect description show up a number of times on this forum. Both of these statements are false: that's just not how photons in quantum mechanics work. Eddy heating does not change the frequency of the microwave. Instead, it reduces the stored energy by reducing the number of microwave photons. This is true for all photon wavelengths. For example, a blue laser, when reflected thousands of times between mirrors does not change into a red laser; instead it just becomes a less strong blue laser (fewer photons). Microwave guides and cavity resonators work the same. The frequency does NOT change, but the field strengths decline (i.e. fewer photons), as the signal loses strength.
Photon frequency can change during reflections, such as when energy is added to or removed from the photon due to either the Doppler effect (such as in laser thermal broadening) or interaction with other quantum states in the reflective medium (look up Raman scattering), but those scenarios are not applicable to eddy current heating due to microwaves. Microwave frequency does NOT get lower along a microwave guide or in a resonator. The signal just loses strength.
Gargoyle,
How are the number of photons reduced in a resonant cavity once the Rf input stops? What absorbes the photon and then does not emit it? Much be a really massive inelastic collision?
What causes the eddy currents if not the photon's time varying H field, which generates current flow in the cavity walls & end plates, and from that induced current flown an opposing H field to limit photon H field penetration, ie skin depth?
Where does the energy dissipated by the eddy currents come from if not from the photon's energy?
Is not radiation pressure generated by the Raman effect from orbital electrons impacted by photons that are 1st absorbed and then emitted by the electron with less energy, momentum and longer wavelength than inbound?
BTW photons are never reflected. They carry no charge and as such external E and H fields have no effect on their direction. They are absorbed and maybe emitted. If the collision is elastic, the outbound photon has the same energy as the inbound photon. If the collision is inelastic then the outbound photon will have a lower or higher energy vs the inbound photon.
...
Your foil introduces a new element which should cause the side wall eddy current ring to be broken into smaller isolated sections, even though the foil has a conductive adhesive. Remember that at 2.45 GHz, the eddy currents only penetrate 5x the skin depth or around 6 um into the foil and thus never reach the other surface of the foil nor reach the conductive adhesive.
We're talking GHz's. It is not DC current. Isn't there some capacitive coupling etc.?
Peter,
At 2.45GHz, there is no significant current flow deeper than 6um. The eddy currents only flow on the inside surface of the foil.
Spupeng7 (John) and myself have entertained a little side-project this past month, despite our business. Here are the first fruits of that endeavour for the professional and academically oriented among us. Enjoy 10 EM Drive threads worth of attachments, scraped by web macro and presented as raw download links and link text (use ctrl+f for now until we create clean lists with more metadata). The next phase involves downloading, collating and sorting through ALL linked papers and files. This is the first step towards the idealized endgoal of an automated library of all EM Drive related research and literature from the perspective of this illuminating forum. Thank you all for your sincere contributions and prolonged hard work. Please contact John or myself for feedback or requests, and we will work towards providing easily accessible standardized knowledge for all.
LA,
thankyou for generously attaching my name to your good works. My contribution has mostly been encouragement so far
Looking forward to the links from the threads (2 to 5) which I have not had time to read yet.
John..
Sorry to be asking dumb questions again - but how are these plots indicative of any propulsive capability?
When I see the shaded zones inside the frustrum area, they seem to show concentrations of electric field strength - the reddish areas seem to be stronger than the bluish-greenish areas - but why is electric field strength indicative of propulsive capability?
And why do these resonant cavities have to be pumped with microwaves in particular? What's so special about microwaves? Why not UV-light instead, for example? Is it because the wavelength of microwaves makes them more convenient to work with?
Does the actual size of the frustrum matter, or just its ratios?
sanman,
there are no dumb questions, curiosity and education are the cure for all of our problems
With a nod of respect to those who answered your question about pilot waves, I would like to add that if an imbalance of charge distribution internally has consequences external to the frustum, then that imbalance could cause the frustum to accelerate. If that is the case then these E field plots could be very valuable.
I went ahead with fabricating an adjustable small end for the spherical end-plate frustum. I'm hoping this will allow me to better align the two end-plates, thereby increasing Q. Looking forward to running the VNA while adjusting all the knobs...
I went ahead with fabricating an adjustable small end for the spherical end-plate frustum. I'm hoping this will allow me to better align the two end-plates, thereby increasing Q. Looking forward to running the VNA while adjusting all the knobs...
I'm sure the extra two arms you grew will make that easier.
IMO – We should not have any standing waves regime; they are self cancellations. We need to develop a stable E field within a variable B field. This way, we should be able to squeeze out a resultant time rate gradient which can escape/envelop the device. In turn, the time rate gradient would impart a stochastic differential to all particles (Croca) of the device and motion.
Here is the “squeezing” rational. A variation of B in dt induces a specific E. If we produce a variation B in a higher E than the specific one, we are then forcing or squeezing the dt into matching the B and E we control. A proper dt gradient would effectively produce a time vector for motion.
Hi, thanks for your response - so when you mention varying the magnetic field, does this mean that there should be some kind of pulsing/cycling of magnetic fields, to accomplish this? Are there other analogs in physics to compare this idea against? The operation of a piston is idealized as a cycle of adiabatic expansion and isothermal compression. Is the work being done by an idealized EMdrive being done continuously, or is it happening in a cyclical/pulsed way? Or is there perhaps an analogy to a turbine, whose mode of operation is continuous?
...the eddy current heating energy is sourced or taken from the photon's energy, which causes them to decrease their energy and increase their wavelength, until finally almost all their energy is thermalised and they have very long wavelengths.
...the trapped photons existing post the pulse will continually increase their wavelength as they lose energy to eddy currents, the coupler and conversion into work to accelerate mass. All of which continually drain photon energy and increase the wavelength.
I've seen this incorrect description show up a number of times on this forum. Both of these statements are false: that's just not how photons in quantum mechanics work. Eddy heating does not change the frequency of the microwave. Instead, it reduces the stored energy by reducing the number of microwave photons. This is true for all photon wavelengths. For example, a blue laser, when reflected thousands of times between mirrors does not change into a red laser; instead it just becomes a less strong blue laser (fewer photons). Microwave guides and cavity resonators work the same. The frequency does NOT change, but the field strengths decline (i.e. fewer photons), as the signal loses strength.
Photon frequency can change during reflections, such as when energy is added to or removed from the photon due to either the Doppler effect (such as in laser thermal broadening) or interaction with other quantum states in the reflective medium (look up Raman scattering), but those scenarios are not applicable to eddy current heating due to microwaves. Microwave frequency does NOT get lower along a microwave guide or in a resonator. The signal just loses strength.
Gargoyle,
How are the number of photons reduced in a resonant cavity once the Rf input stops? What absorbes the photon and then does not emit it? Much be a really massive inelastic collision?
What causes the eddy currents if not the photon's time varying H field, which generates current flow in the cavity walls & end plates, and from that induced current flown an opposing H field to limit photon H field penetration, ie skin depth?
Where does the energy dissipated by the eddy currents come from if not from the photon's energy?
Is not radiation pressure generated by the Raman effect from orbital electrons impacted by photons that are 1st absorbed and then emitted by the electron with less energy, momentum and longer wavelength than inbound?
BTW photons are never reflected. They carry no charge and as such external E and H fields have no effect on their direction. They are absorbed and maybe emitted. If the collision is elastic, the outbound photon has the same energy as the inbound photon. If the collision is inelastic then the outbound photon will have a lower or higher energy vs the inbound photon.
TT, gargoyle is right on all counts. I usually don't jump in on posts where people are way off the mark on things (because I barely have the time to figure out my own problems) but here's a pretty good article about this. Make sure you're properly separating the properties of individual photons from the properties of electromagnetic waves.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-do-mirrors-reflect-ph/
Hang on. Doesn't thermal dynamics require universal entropy to increase if a system becomes more ordered? That energy density looks ordered to me. How can that happen in an isolated system?
Hang on. Doesn't thermal dynamics require universal entropy to increase if a system becomes more ordered? That energy density looks ordered to me. How can that happen in an isolated system?
Maybe the system isn't really isolated, and is interacting with the transient fluctuations of the Dynamic Vacuum?
Natural Metaphysics for Dummies
(for entertainment purposes only)
IMO - You can’t have something from nothing. Everybody knows that. But “something” is always taken as something “being”. So yes, existence as “being” from nothingness is not possible; the rule of non-contradiction forbids it. But there are different “degrees” of existence between “being” and nothingness. This gap is the domain of “happening”. Something can exist as “happening” without failing the rule of non-contradiction. So, only a dynamic process “happening” can sprout out and exist out of nothingness.
This dynamic process that makes the whole universe, e.g. vacuum, fields, E and B, particles etc. is what we call, in its simplest form, Time. That is why maths is so good for its description. It is all one and the same stuff. This process has only one variable and only one property. This is for simple logical operational reasons. The variable can have different values and this is what distinguishes everything in the universe. The property is a fixed value or constant related to the process. This property is constant everywhere in our universe and is what makes our universe all internally logically operational. This property is the Planck with its specific value.
If something had a different Planck value, it would not be logically operational in our universe i.e. it would not make any difference. In other words, it would be non-existent. This “something” with a different Planck value would/could only exist, or make a difference, in another universe where the Planck value is of the same value as its own. We most likely have a whole bunch of universes, all super imposed, and all ignoring each other in this way. This would have been the natural solution, at the Big Bang, for stacking up all that stuff when there was nowhere else to put it.
My guess, hunch, from Garrett Lisi’s E-8 and from the number of known crystalline forms, is that we have about 240 universes piled up on each other.
Now, our (EM-Drive) experiences deal with the variable i.e. the rate of the process i.e. the rate of evolution of time. IF by accident the property or Planck value was locally changed, device and people would disappear from this universe and would re-appear in another one, with known consequences (e.g. Philadelphia experiment). Or worst, they would find themselves in the gap between universes. This “gap” is from the rule of the excluded middle required for allowing the rule of non-contradiction to operate a clean distinction between universes. This reason for the “quantization” of the property is the same dictating the quantization of the variable, actually, the quantization of everything logically distinguishable, i.e existing. Earlier, I suggested using this “gap” to travel without ever hitting anything and possibly going very very fast ... A sort of wormhole, out of the universe and into the gap, and back into the universe, elsewhere. Messing with the Planck is a dangerous business, for sure!
Nothingness [------------ happening ------------------------] Being fig 1
[ High time rate ------------- low time rate]
The domain of existence by “happening” described above is a spectrum (fig 1). It goes from nothingness, with a high rate of the time process, and across toward the “being” end, with a lower rate of the time process. Things existing in such a spectrum, or field, would spontaneously move toward the “being” end of the spectrum, i.e. towards where the rate of time is slower (stochastic differential). Of course, reaching the actual “state of being” is forbidden. Because of that, we could see this spectrum/scale, not as linear, but as circular, between nothingness and ... nothingness. This could give us some indication on the nature/shape of the time process...
At any rate, be careful out there! Start slow...
BTW photons are never reflected. They carry no charge and as such external E and H fields have no effect on their direction. They are absorbed and maybe emitted. If the collision is elastic, the outbound photon has the same energy as the inbound photon. If the collision is inelastic then the outbound photon will have a lower or higher energy vs the inbound photon.
You seem to be talking about photons as classical objects here (elastic vs inelastic collisions, etc), yet this is not how photons work. This can be useful to watch:
Optimization of Miniaturized Resonant Microwave Cavities for Use in Q-Thrusters by Joshua Steven Pennington, 70 page-long M.S. Thesis.
Abstract
A gedankenexperiment was considered to compare a hypothetical thruster that used no reaction mass to propulsion methods currently in use. A brief discussion of previous research work done on closed resonant cavity thrust devices was conducted. Using the previous work as a template, a simulation plan was devised. Computational models of resonant microwave cavities were constructed and investigated using COMSOL software. These COMSOL simulations were verified against known analytical solutions using Matlab software as a computational tool. Multiphysics simulations were created to study the microwave heating environment of the resonant cavities. From the COMSOL study outputs, the electromagnetic field magnitude, temperature, surface resistive losses, volume resistive losses, quality factor, and energy contained in the electric field were presented and discussed. The disagreements between the computational model and real-world resonant cavities were also presented and discussed..
http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2473/Inertial frames and breakthrough propulsion physics by Marc G. Millis
Abstract
The term “Breakthrough Propulsion Physics” comes from the NASA project by that name which examined non-rocket space drives, gravity control, and faster-than-light travel. The focus here is on space drives and the related unsolved physics of inertial frames. A “space drive” is a generic term encompassing any concept for using as-yet undiscovered physics to move a spacecraft instead of existing rockets, sails, or tethers. The collective state of the art spans mostly steps 1–3 of the scientific method: defining the problem, collecting data, and forming hypotheses. The key issues include (1) conservation of momentum, (2) absence of obvious reaction mass, and (3) the net-external thrusting requirement. Relevant open problems in physics include: (1) the sources and mechanisms of inertial frames, (2) coupling of gravitation to the other fundamental forces, and (3) the nature of the quantum vacuum. Rather than following the assumption that inertial frames are an immutable, intrinsic property of space, this paper revisits Mach's Principle, where it is posited that inertia is relative to the distant surrounding matter. This perspective allows conjectures that a space drive could impart reaction forces to that matter, via some as-yet undiscovered interaction with the inertial frame properties of space. Thought experiments are offered to begin a process to derive new hypotheses. It is unknown if this line of inquiry will be fruitful, but it is hoped that, by revisiting unsolved physics from a propulsion point of view, new insights will be gained.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094576516314011
Same for Bell
Thank you, thank you, thank you !
Sorry for begging you some more, but... if/when you'll have some time, could you redo the calculations/drawings for the bell but reversing the bottom curve (pointing inside) ? See, I was looking at the pic shown here
http://vixra.org/pdf/1706.0283v1.pdf (fig 3.2, page 11) and I wonder how reversing the bottom curve affects the distribution of fields; maybe it's a crazy line of thought (again, as I already wrote, this isn't my "cup of coffee") but I'm curious to see what happens if we shape the cavity to attempt maximizing reflections from the bottom (larger) pane toward the side walls and, at the same time, maximize the reflections from the top (smaller) pane toward the larger pane (minimizing the ones going to side walls)
I went ahead with fabricating an adjustable small end for the spherical end-plate frustum. I'm hoping this will allow me to better align the two end-plates, thereby increasing Q. Looking forward to running the VNA while adjusting all the knobs...
GREAT job ! Given the speed at which you proceed I wonder if you found a way to clone yourself
Getting back on topic; is the larger end plate curved too (and if so, does the curve point inside or outside the frustum) ?
