Probably posted elsewhere, but a heads up on high-Q related paper, apparently publishing something old school radar guys from the 50's knew but didn't talk/publish much about...
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6344/1260"Breaking Lorentz reciprocity to overcome the time-bandwidth limit in physics and engineering"
Some satcomms guys think this may be big, as well as fiber optic telecomms guys...
Hi guys,
Just found out following information about the EmDrive development.
BBC made a report about the Gilo Industries on 4.4. 2017 that I missed (shame on me!). They spoke a bit about that new investment from the Kuang-Chi this year.
Mr. Gilo also mentions something interesting. That "they can not yet speak about the best thing they made" and that they may reveal it later this year.
Of course it can be anything. They work on many interesting project, but given the fact, that we know about their cooperation with Mr. Shawyer there is some probability it can be the EmDrive.
This supports, that Mr. Shawyer mentions in his presentation work on "new superconducting cavity desing" with Gilo Industries (2015).
Latest news from TT regarding the new Shawyer patent and Gilo is that it is not going so well.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Phil wrote:
"BTW Roger's patent flat plate big end and complex curve small end was done to eliminate the need for the big spherical radius curve.
However I'm told that design in the patent, including the fancy antenna, did not work well in practice and Roger has gone back to more standard designs. In my opinion that antenna just has too much metallic mass inside the cavity. Metallic mass that will cause photon absorption and emit cycles that will not help the end plates obtaining the best differential."
...
Q: is the reference https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.28.2960 available without a paywall anywhere?
Although I cannot post the free version of Hawking's paper because it is in a Russian site (*), this article by Prof. Baez (**) is simpler, freely available, to explain what the concept of imaginary time and a Wick rotation are, and since you are still interested in Hawking's use of imaginary time (Wick rotation) 30 years ago, you may be interested in this:
A Spring in Imaginary TimeHomework:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/classical/spring.pdf2 solutions posted:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/classical/spring_garett.pdfhttp://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/classical/spring_alex.pdfQUESTION: What does Newton’s law F = ma become if we formally replace normal time t by imaginary time s = it?
ANSWER: In short, working in imaginary time replaces F = ma by F = −ma
Also see this discussion
"Thermodynamics and Wick Rotation", Posted by John Baez:
https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2010/08/thermodynamics_and_wick_rotati.html---------------------------
(*) Yes, Hawking's paper is available free of charge in the Internet, I originally posted a free link to the paper, but then I realized that it is a Russian university, (the highly respected SKOBELTSYN INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS
LOMONOSOV MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY), and I recalled the mods not liking us to post Russian links...so I changed it to the one behind the paywall
(**) This is the same Prof. Baez that posted blogs that the Shawyer's EM Drive is nonsense
https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2006/10/new_scientist_reacts.htmlhttps://plus.google.com/+johncbaez999/posts/E1ecoYsa5ae
Latest news from TT regarding the new Shawyer patent and Gilo is that it is not going so well.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Phil wrote:
"BTW Roger's patent flat plate big end and complex curve small end was done to eliminate the need for the big spherical radius curve.
However I'm told that design in the patent, including the fancy antenna, did not work well in practice and Roger has gone back to more standard designs. In my opinion that antenna just has too much metallic mass inside the cavity. Metallic mass that will cause photon absorption and emit cycles that will not help the end plates obtaining the best differential."
I concur. Had Roger Shawyer's experiments with superconductors gone as he expected, he would be showing off his floating machines already and we would be having a very different conversation.
We haven't seen that, ergo the experiment's results aren't as good as he expected.
Which may indicate there is no such thing as an Emdrive thrust effect.
Or that the Emdrive is not working as he theorized and therefore not scaling, something that seems likely for me all evidence from other independent parties considered. It may still work, it's just weak and with yet unknown parameters controlling the thrust.
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-year-old-physics-problem.htmlhttp://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6344/1260Breaking Lorentz reciprocity with frequency conversion and delay
https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09548At EPFL, researchers challenge a fundamental law and discover that more electromagnetic energy can be stored in wave-guiding systems than previously thought. The discovery has implications in telecommunications. Working around the fundamental law, they conceived resonant and wave-guiding systems capable of storing energy over a prolonged period while keeping a broad bandwidth. Their trick was to create asymmetric resonant or wave-guiding systems using magnetic fields.
The study, which has just been published in Science, was led by Kosmas Tsakmakidis, first at the University of Ottawa and then at EPFL's Bionanophotonic Systems Laboratory run by Hatice Altug, where the researcher is now doing post-doctoral research.
This breakthrough could have a major impact on many fields in engineering and physics. The number of potential applications is close to infinite, with telecommunications, optical detection systems and broadband energy harvesting representing just a few examples. Resonant and wave-guiding systems are present in the vast majority of optical and electronic systems. Their role is to temporarily store energy in the form of electromagnetic waves and then release them. For more than 100 hundred years, these systems were held back by a limitation that was considered to be fundamental: the length of time a wave could be stored was inversely proportional to its bandwidth. This relationship was interpreted to mean that it was impossible to store large amounts of data in resonant or wave-guiding systems over a long period of time because increasing the bandwidth meant decreasing the storage time and quality of storage.
This law was first formulated by K. S. Johnson in 1914, at Western Electric Company (the forerunner of Bell Telephone Laboratories). He introduced the concept of the Q factor, according to which a resonator can either store energy for a long time or have a broad bandwidth, but not both at the same time. Increasing the storage time meant decreasing the bandwidth, and vice versa. A small bandwidth means a limited range of frequencies (or 'colors') and therefore a limited amount of data.
Until now, this concept had never been challenged. Physicists and engineers had always built resonant systems—like those to produce lasers, make electronic circuits and conduct medical diagnoses—with this constraint in mind.
But that limitation is now a thing of the past. The researchers came up with a hybrid resonant / wave-guiding system made of a magneto-optic material that, when a magnetic field is applied, is able to stop the wave and store it for a prolonged period, thereby accumulating large amounts of energy. Then when the magnetic field is switched off, the trapped pulse is released. With such asymmetric and non-reciprocal systems, it was possible to store a wave for a very long period of time while also maintaining a large bandwidth. The conventional time-bandwidth limit was even beaten by a factor of 1,000. The scientists further showed that, theoretically, there is no upper ceiling to this limit at all in these asymmetric (non-reciprocal) systems.
"It was a moment of revelation when we discovered that these new structures did not feature any time-bandwidth restriction at all. These systems are unlike what we have all been accustomed to for decades, and possibly hundreds of years", says Tsakmakidis, the study's lead author. "Their superior wave-storage capacity performance could really be an enabler for a range of exciting applications in diverse contemporary and more traditional fields of research." Hatice Altug adds..
and from the article in Science magazine:
We believe that it is now possible to design ultrahigh-Q resonant systems in atomic, optical, and condensed matter physics, as well as in mechanical and electrical engineering, with unprecedentedly high bandwidths and ultrafast response times, in addition to ultraslow- and stopped-light systems with unusually high delay-bandwidth products, for a wide range of applications in those fields.
Latest news from TT regarding the new Shawyer patent and Gilo is that it is not going so well.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Phil wrote:
"BTW Roger's patent flat plate big end and complex curve small end was done to eliminate the need for the big spherical radius curve.
However I'm told that design in the patent, including the fancy antenna, did not work well in practice and Roger has gone back to more standard designs. In my opinion that antenna just has too much metallic mass inside the cavity. Metallic mass that will cause photon absorption and emit cycles that will not help the end plates obtaining the best differential."
I concur. Had Roger Shawyer's experiments with superconductors gone as he expected, he would be showing off his floating machines already and we would be having a very different conversation.
We haven't seen that, ergo the experiment's results aren't as good as he expected.
Which may indicate there is no such thing as an Emdrive thrust effect.
Or that the Emdrive is not working as he theorized and therefore not scaling, something that seems likely for me all evidence from other independent parties considered. It may still work, it's just weak and with yet unknown parameters controlling the thrust.
Why don't we wait for real information instead of rumors. I distrust this type of information.
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-year-old-physics-problem.html
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6344/1260
Breaking Lorentz reciprocity with frequency conversion and delay
https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09548
At EPFL, researchers challenge a fundamental law and discover that more electromagnetic energy can be stored in wave-guiding systems than previously thought. The discovery has implications in telecommunications. Working around the fundamental law, they conceived resonant and wave-guiding systems capable of storing energy over a prolonged period while keeping a broad bandwidth. Their trick was to create asymmetric resonant or wave-guiding systems using magnetic fields.
The study, which has just been published in Science, was led by Kosmas Tsakmakidis, first at the University of Ottawa and then at EPFL's Bionanophotonic Systems Laboratory run by Hatice Altug, where the researcher is now doing post-doctoral research.
This breakthrough could have a major impact on many fields in engineering and physics. The number of potential applications is close to infinite, with telecommunications, optical detection systems and broadband energy harvesting representing just a few examples. Resonant and wave-guiding systems are present in the vast majority of optical and electronic systems. Their role is to temporarily store energy in the form of electromagnetic waves and then release them. For more than 100 hundred years, these systems were held back by a limitation that was considered to be fundamental: the length of time a wave could be stored was inversely proportional to its bandwidth. This relationship was interpreted to mean that it was impossible to store large amounts of data in resonant or wave-guiding systems over a long period of time because increasing the bandwidth meant decreasing the storage time and quality of storage.
This law was first formulated by K. S. Johnson in 1914, at Western Electric Company (the forerunner of Bell Telephone Laboratories). He introduced the concept of the Q factor, according to which a resonator can either store energy for a long time or have a broad bandwidth, but not both at the same time. Increasing the storage time meant decreasing the bandwidth, and vice versa. A small bandwidth means a limited range of frequencies (or 'colors') and therefore a limited amount of data.
Until now, this concept had never been challenged. Physicists and engineers had always built resonant systems—like those to produce lasers, make electronic circuits and conduct medical diagnoses—with this constraint in mind.
But that limitation is now a thing of the past. The researchers came up with a hybrid resonant / wave-guiding system made of a magneto-optic material that, when a magnetic field is applied, is able to stop the wave and store it for a prolonged period, thereby accumulating large amounts of energy. Then when the magnetic field is switched off, the trapped pulse is released. With such asymmetric and non-reciprocal systems, it was possible to store a wave for a very long period of time while also maintaining a large bandwidth. The conventional time-bandwidth limit was even beaten by a factor of 1,000. The scientists further showed that, theoretically, there is no upper ceiling to this limit at all in these asymmetric (non-reciprocal) systems.
"It was a moment of revelation when we discovered that these new structures did not feature any time-bandwidth restriction at all. These systems are unlike what we have all been accustomed to for decades, and possibly hundreds of years", says Tsakmakidis, the study's lead author. "Their superior wave-storage capacity performance could really be an enabler for a range of exciting applications in diverse contemporary and more traditional fields of research." Hatice Altug adds..
and from the article in Science magazine:
We believe that it is now possible to design ultrahigh-Q resonant systems in atomic, optical, and condensed matter physics, as well as in mechanical and electrical engineering, with unprecedentedly high bandwidths and ultrafast response times, in addition to ultraslow- and stopped-light systems with unusually high delay-bandwidth products, for a wide range of applications in those fields.
Which leads me to the simple question if light can be manipulated such that it has a billion fold momentum for the same energy. Maybe that's what's happening, just not yet a billion fold. Such 'heavy light' certainly would be useful for thrust.
The last month and a half have been very busy for me. I've been traveling some, and have had other projects wrapping up and some new projects beginning that are very time consuming. But work still continues on my tests.
I had to revert to the custom copper/stainless terminal block as it is easier to isolate the main leads while probing for errant EM fields. This configuration also seems to have less noise than the previous. I hope to complete a series of 2.5W tests at intervals along the return loss trace to see if there is any difference in displacement. After that, onward to 30W.
I have also purchased the Prusa i3 MK2S 3D printer. It arrives in 7 weeks! There is a huge back order as it is in high demand right now. I will be using it to fabricate spherical end plates.
Jamie -
I think you will be very pleased with the Prusa printer. A close friend and former coworker has one and for precision and accuracy of build it does an outstanding job, plus the user interface etc are first rate. Now - I love my Delta printer (Rostock V2) - print volume about about 25cm dia x 40cm high), but the Prusa works fantastic. It will likely be my next addition to the additive fab side of the house. I think it will complement the Delta - especially for smaller prints.
As I type this I am looking at several of my buddy's giveaways (once yu get a 3D printer you end up with lots of "extra" items you just had to try from thingiverse etc - you end up giving away a LOT of little items) including a thumb wrench, plastic lab jack and a novelty double threaded (bi-directional) nut and bolt assemble. I am VERY impressed with the quality of printing even with basic ABS and PLA.
Bye the way the Prusa folks have some awesome customer service.
Herman
graybeardsyseng
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-year-old-physics-problem.html
......
and from the article in Science magazine:
We believe that it is now possible to design ultrahigh-Q resonant systems in atomic, optical, and condensed matter physics, as well as in mechanical and electrical engineering, with unprecedentedly high bandwidths and ultrafast response times, in addition to ultraslow- and stopped-light systems with unusually high delay-bandwidth products, for a wide range of applications in those fields.
Ok, a basic question... As far as I can recall there has never been any experimental evidence of this with the fustrums right? All the simulations and instrumentation showed the fustrums behaving like symmetrical wave guides. Is this something that is an artifact that is built in based on the "old" understanding of Q? Or am I missing something?
(...)
I think (spupeng7 should explain himself what he means of course 
) that by imaginary time spupeng7 may be referring to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_time which is a concept that was basically popularized by Hawking in his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time" in an attempt at a Quantum Gravity theory. By this imaginary time Hawking is not at all referring to
a representation of coordinates for special relativity where the metric has a -1 for the time axis, which effectively means an "imaginary" basis vector for time. I think this is a helpful way of thinking about spacetime, but I don't think it is necessary, as you can do all of the required math without needing complex numbers
which is a different concept.
This different (older concept) is the representation xo= i c t which is OK, and perhaps helpful when used in Special Relativity but not (when solving problems) in General Relativity.
(...)
Yes, I should explain myself if I can...
Attempting to define complex time requires the definition of a dynamic within which it fits. When I try to do this I stray into Twistor Space which defeats the purpose by being impossible to visualize.
The only transparent visualization I can find has moments of spacetime with point origin at a charge, from which there is coincidence with all locations at intervals ict. These are the locations in spacetime where absorption of energy, which is emitted at that origin, can occur.
This has consequences, first that no intermediary particle or wave is required for that transfer of energy and secondly, sequence remote from the observer is unique to the observers perspective.
The transfer of energy between remote charges then falls into two categories both acting by dilation of time. First gravity and inertia which are the continuous interaction of all charges proportional to the inverse square of their separation and second, electromagnetic action which is the transfer of quantum between resonant pairs of charges irrespective of their separation.
Complex time is then, the structure which allows connection between charges separated by ict and is complex because ict has coincident solutions at both locations in spacetime. Maybe this is just philosophy but what other explanation is there for the motion of charges within the emdrive, engendering its acceleration?
With respect for those who describe virtual particles, I cannot force myself to imagine them
Latest news from TT regarding the new Shawyer patent and Gilo is that it is not going so well.
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Phil wrote:
"BTW Roger's patent flat plate big end and complex curve small end was done to eliminate the need for the big spherical radius curve.
However I'm told that design in the patent, including the fancy antenna, did not work well in practice and Roger has gone back to more standard designs. In my opinion that antenna just has too much metallic mass inside the cavity. Metallic mass that will cause photon absorption and emit cycles that will not help the end plates obtaining the best differential."
I concur. Had Roger Shawyer's experiments with superconductors gone as he expected, he would be showing off his floating machines already and we would be having a very different conversation.
We haven't seen that, ergo the experiment's results aren't as good as he expected.
Which may indicate there is no such thing as an Emdrive thrust effect.
Or that the Emdrive is not working as he theorized and therefore not scaling, something that seems likely for me all evidence from other independent parties considered. It may still work, it's just weak and with yet unknown parameters controlling the thrust.
Understood. Yes it seems that way and I agree with you. It is just that I can not shake the feeling that there are some people that just wish that this device does not work. I do not plan to go to any conspiracies, I just collect available informations. I guess it is just my feeling and I will leave it at that. Maybe I also just too much wish that this device works and others just happily crush others people dreams.
Understood. Yes it seems that way and I agree with you. It is just that I can not shake the feeling that there are some people that just wish that this device does not work. I do not plan to go to any conspiracies, I just collect available informations. I guess it is just my feeling and I will leave it at that. Maybe I also just too much wish that this device works and others just happily crush others people dreams.
I don't think there is a problem with being highly skeptical, as long you remain open minded and are willing to approach "the story" with a positive attitude.
A lot of people inhere have been putting time and effort into this "EM-drive project" but does not mean they are unconditional "believers". But the prospect that there is a small chance that it does work is enough to keep the interest and positive -but critical- approach going...
As for the conspiracy theories, I think there probably is some opposition, but that is nothing extraordinary as (potential) new technologies are always perceived as a menace to existing economical models...
There are dozens of non EMdrive related examples of that. But , in the end, all efforts to stop new technology will fail. That's a constant one should learn from human history...
The problem is that there are a lot of crazies and charlatans on the interwebz. Not saying that you guys are, but there are a lot of crazy, crackpot ideas out there. This ranges from people who 'find' pictures of Sasquatch in NASA Mars photos, down to anti-vaxers.
If someone comes out and proposes an idea that seems too much like science fantasy, and a lot of well-respected scientists say that it shouldn't be possible, then it's going to take a lot more effort to convince people that the idea is sound.
I don't know about you guys, but I remember the Dean drive. Once bitten, etc.
But , in the end, all efforts to stop new technology will fail. That's a constant one should learn from human history...
Look up 'Project Orion'.
Look up 'Project Orion'.
I can design a trebuchet to get me from my back yard to the nearest grocery store. It will work. It will be reusable. I'm not going to do it. It's not a holdback on new technology. It's not new technology at all.
Project Orion is hard to even call new technology. Riding a shock wave happens often, its just the riders are usually victims.
It had numerous issues working against it. I doubt anyone denies that theoretically blowing things up behind a giant shock absorber will work. It's not cheap for starters. An Orion ship would have required multiple detonation devices, and military devices would have been overkill. There is not an inexhaustible amount of fissile material. The vehicles would have to have been constructed in orbit (realistically launching these from Earth was never a real option. We can discuss that on some other thread, but i think it's been done before) very stoutly. Again, not cheap, and the engineering was not certain. Throw in possible treaty violations, radiation concerns, etc, Orion is just an idea that must probably sit forever on the shelf of history unless for some reason someone is desperate enough to need it and has no other option. The problem is there are always other options.
I'm as tired of the frauds as anyone, but I don't see the EMdrive experimenters and theorists putting incredible efforts into this in any such light. Even if it has no more thrust than is useful for station-keeping, that will be extremely useful. That's why I keep watching this.
These experiments were done at atmospheric pressure and should be done in vacuum. My understanding is that others who have done it in vacuum have not seen the effect.
As for me too, the BB effect was a case closed since the 1990s. But I am happy we can discuss here some peculiar points.
Contrary to the belief, experiments have also been done in a vacuum, but maybe it was not high enough (10-6 torr) and a plasma was still flowing between electrodes? Another thing: if the Biefeld-Brown effect is just electrohydrodynamic in nature (ionic wind), can someone explain why a measurable force is still detected when those asymmetric capacitors are put inside a closed metallic box immersed in insulating oil?
This kind of test had been conducted by Townsend Brown himself, as well as Takaaki Musha on behalf of Honda Motor Co. who detected up to 2 grams of change on the balance with 8kVAC and 18KVDC currents (Musha's paper"Explanation of dynamical Biefeld-Brown effect from the standpoint of ZPF field" published in JBIS in 2008 is attached below as long as a schematic diagram of his experiment).
Info seen after this post of Quantum Gravity in the other topic.
Were there major flaws in Brown and Musha's experiments? EMI/HV interference with the setup? Ionic wind in the air around the whole setup?
In regards to this experiment you mention a problem of wind. Wind problems are because momentum is carried off into some external part of the environment, providing some means of propulsion as does a propellant. I would probably recommend an enclosed system to eliminate the possibility of momentum being carried off and giving the the device the equal and opposite of the missing momentum. I think I recently gave an example of such an enclosed testing apparatus here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=42978.msg1691070#msg1691070 . It could also be as simple as just encasing the object so hot air/ionic wind can not be vectored off in a single direction. The device + box should not have a net momentum.
The Crookes Radiometer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer does best in an incomplete vacuum and works off thermal vectoring of air particles I believe. The experiment having been done in vacuum of 10E-6 torr does seem to be in its benefit, but that may depend on the physics of the system which is different from the Radiometer. It's easiest just to eliminate the possibility of net momentum altogether.
If as you claim some experiment has placed them in some enclosed box where no net momentum can be had and that box experienced some net momentum I would be very interested as that "might" indicate some propellant-less effect.
The only thing I might wonder about would be if some current was induced in the box itself with the result of a magnetic field reaching outside the box.
bad astra,
Would you care to define a serious effort in terms of dollars and sense. Here is a good start...
The scalability of any propellentless propulsion system depends on using a number of methods for amplifying the power signal including scaling of mechanical, electrical and geometric construction for unidirectional thrust. The emDrive is current a drive without a theory albeit a number of attempts are underway, some of which are diving deeper towards that of new physics including quantum field theory and quantum gravity. However, the real serious folks are looking at inertial mass and changes in momentum, both linear and angular. After all, any 1st year physics student would require conservation of momentum as a condition.
For the gravity folks, the best bet appears to be the Mach-Woodward thruster, a thruster with a theory. For the quantum folks, the best bet appears to be the emDrive with theory-of-the-day.
There may be some common ground between the two approaches since parametric amplification and couplings are needed to produce a decent theory involving non-linear oscillations.
The open question is what contributions from EM permit a change in momentum, E' = (d(mv)/dt)= F. Electrostatic, electrodynamics, QCD and QED are just a few. Picking the right variation of Maxwell equations might help although Dirac's version is favored while the Axion version might just catch on.
For theories, the critical level to provide some prediction and projection of what might be is just not there. Some folks are resorting to guessing while others are at least setting a goal of rigor. The plain truth is that not much is moving in a single emDrive that exceed a certain ratio like thrust/mass in N/kg or thrust/power in N/kWe.
Designs of arrays await the development and small production of any PP drive that exceeds 1N/kWe AND that can last 10 years. For a 10 year projected life cycle of an interstellar vehicle, over a trillion thrust cycles are required for even the most conservative approaches to the nearest star system with planets.
The simple fact is that these drives require a multidisciplinary approach which is really a team approach, not something an individual effort can design/build by themselves. After all, this is why we are all here. To learn from each other...no matter how painful or humbling it might be.
Time will tell,
David
I was just reading and noticed meberbs had figured out the 2nd order doppler effects which I thought was cool here:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=37642.msg1413761#msg1413761 when a thought struck me.
Light is able to transfer more of its energy effectively to a lighter object such as a free electron than it is able to transfer its energy to a more massive object. Now in the tip of the frustum we have some large electric fields which could possibly ionize gas while at the large end ionization may be less so.
So lets say we have this ion cloud at the tip of the frustum and the photons are impacting free electrons up there and more effectively transferring energy. After the electron "more effectively" absorbs some momentum this transfers some to the proton/nucleus afterwards and these air particles effectively then strike the cavity. The cavity more effectively gains momentum because the air particles are much more massive than photons. The air particles having lost some of their momentum return with less velocity only to repeat the process. So we have momentum more effectively being absorbed from photons at the narrow end of the cavity than from the big end.
Light striking the large end after the drive accelerates is less able to absorb its momentum back (via the 2nd order effects of a Doppler shift), so over all light loses energy.
Could that possibly make sense?
Look up 'Project Orion'.
I can design a trebuchet to get me from my back yard to the nearest grocery store. It will work. It will be reusable. I'm not going to do it. It's not a holdback on new technology. It's not new technology at all.
Project Orion is hard to even call new technology. Riding a shock wave happens often, its just the riders are usually victims.
It had numerous issues working against it. I doubt anyone denies that theoretically blowing things up behind a giant shock absorber will work. It's not cheap for starters. An Orion ship would have required multiple detonation devices, and military devices would have been overkill. There is not an inexhaustible amount of fissile material. The vehicles would have to have been constructed in orbit (realistically launching these from Earth was never a real option. We can discuss that on some other thread, but i think it's been done before) very stoutly. Again, not cheap, and the engineering was not certain. Throw in possible treaty violations, radiation concerns, etc, Orion is just an idea that must probably sit forever on the shelf of history unless for some reason someone is desperate enough to need it and has no other option. The problem is there are always other options.
I'm as tired of the frauds as anyone, but I don't see the EMdrive experimenters and theorists putting incredible efforts into this in any such light. Even if it has no more thrust than is useful for station-keeping, that will be extremely useful. That's why I keep watching this.
Great post - I especially like the last paragraph !! And interesting points WRT Project Orion, but I believe it was originally mentioned by flyby as a counter example to the concept that you can't keep a new idea/technology/development down/suppressed..
Was Orion new development?? Well in the early 1950's it was much more so than it appears now. Certainly there were technical hurdles to overcome - and some which would be very hard to solve. But it progressed to a flying model - yes it did fly albeit with conventional explosives. Other variations of the concept were proposed using fusion vice fission and an electromagnetic "Blast plate". Another "new technology" from the time which SO FAR has not been developed to flying status are nuclear heated rocket engines (Project Nerva). I doubt a classic Orion approach will ever be used - or it might just save humankind (see Footfall - Niven and Pournelle 1985)
The point is that it does happen that new ideas, new technologies etc may grow and flourish or may wither away - for many reasons. In order to grow and flourish they need a fertile ground (good theoretical underpinnings, a certain amount of economic viability, a workable way to utilize the development, etc) and careful nurturing ( open mindedness and critical thinking, interested persons and groups, nutrients i.e. funding and time, peer reviews and market reviews and work work work by those interested persons and parties).
WRT EMDrive, If it is to ever be a useful device it must first a) EXIST as a real effect and b) be nurtured and tended. I suspect that if condition a) is met there will be large number of nurturers and tenders. Yes - even if it is a low thrust device only useable for stationkeeping and attitude control.
The efforts and contributions here for both theoretical and experimental arenas are just fantastic. The use of the internet and forums like NSF is a stunning example of what open discussions and cooperation can do. The DIY contributions likewise are also stunning in their depth and quality and personal contribution and sacrifice. I think in the next few months we will likely have a lot of experimental "red meat" to chew on.
Sorry for the longwinded post - off for some rest now.
Herman
graybeardsyseng
Project Orion got to a high level of conceptual development and did flight testing with conventional explosives, so yeah, I think it would have flown. Besides all that, there is nothing in our current understanding of physics that forbids it's operation.
Once someone provides solid, demonstrable evidence that you can use these drives to move objects, then you will find a lot more effort put into finding out how it works.
Project Orion got to a high level of conceptual development and did flight testing with conventional explosives, so yeah, I think it would have flown. Besides all that, there is nothing in our current understanding of physics that forbids it's operation.
Once someone provides solid, demonstrable evidence that you can use these drives to move objects, then you will find a lot more effort put into finding out how it works.
WRT understanding of physics - very true. The theoretical basis of EMDrive should continue to be explored and discussed!!!! A firm basis and understanding of EMDrive (assuming it exists) will shorten any development efforts enormously. The discussions here are fantastic and wonderful. I feel good if I manage to understand at least 50% of them but they are stretching my journeyman math skills and knocking the rust of some of my 40 year old semi-skills such as tensors.
Orion's challenges lay more in the realm of engineering physics such flight dynamics, control and shock/jolt management; not to mention reliable fuel (bomblet) feed and ignition. On one of my first assignments as a junior engineer out of college the project engineer had been a very junior engineer on Orion. As I had done my senior thesis on updating some of the challenges of Orion and their possible solution he and I had some interesting discussions. BTW here is a pretty good video of the flight tests (done in 1950's newsreel fashion)
Why am I harping on Project Orion in the EMDrive forum. Because I think there are some project development concepts that can be useful. Not the design, but the approach to solving problems and testing. While the basic physics of Orion was understood of course, Orion had some significant physics issues - Freeman Dyson was borrowed from the Institute for Advanced Studies to work with General Atomics on Orion. Orion was a serious effort to develop interplanetary capability (among others) before we had even reached the moon.
The concept of developing the free flyer using dynamite is an example of the kind of exploratory approach I am thinking would benefit the EMDrive efforts. They used simple designs to explore unknown behaviors of specific issues. No - I am not suggesting dynamite bombs under a frustum BUT perhaps some more detailed exploration of frustum shape, materials and RF feed/resonance would be of benefit i.e. not trying to measure (notional) thrust but exploring open issues i.e. shape, end cap design, aspect ratio, mode stimulation and control, resonance establishment and control. effect of dielectrics (type, locations etc) - just some examples, by no means a complete list. BTW - some or most of these are well within the technical capability of DIYers. Yes - my money is where my mouth is - I am working up a test plan and lab right now.
Reading the history of Orion and other similar efforts provides a good brainstorming start for areas to explore in the EMDrive pantheon.
Herman
graybeardsyseng
) that by imaginary time spupeng7 may be referring to this 
