-
#460 by Chrochne on 30 Jun, 2017 07:55
-
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.
snip...
Could that possibly make sense?
What is curious about a plasma possibly existing in the cavity is that the plasma can more effectively absorb kinetic energy from light. I think I remember Shell mentioning the possibility of plasma in the cavity at one point in time. Possibly this is why she made her cavity see through or that screen mesh? The plasma would need to be created, so energy would start to be stored in the cavity and later plasma could form when the electric fields become strong enough to strip electrons from the gasses inside.
The formation of too much plasma and I question if it could possibly start to interfere with the stored energy in the cavity,(the free electrons being too reflective), the wavelength might not constructively interfere any more, causing energy to be rejected from the cavity. For it to work, some light would have to pass through the plasma and resonate in the cavity to sustain the electric fields that sustain the plasma.
After that you need light that resonates between the big cavity wall and the plasma toward the narrow end of the cavity. The plasma doesn't need to touch the cavity wall and should in fact be repelled from the changing magnetic field via the currents in the cavity. So basically the plasma more effectively absorbs kinetic energy from light and then passes this on to the cavity via repulsion off the cavities changing magnetic field.
The need to sustain both currents in the cavity at a certain wavelength, and current induced in the plasma via another wavelength may mean multiple wavelengths are required.
This provides a possible means for the cavity to travel pointed end forwards if the plasma is near the pointed end but may depend on the plasma's location and possibly/possibly not with respect to where your injecting the radiation. I.e. I'm not sure what effect it would have to inject the radiation inside the plasma as opposed to injecting the radiation at the end where there is no plasma. I suspect injecting radiation in the middle of the plasma may have an effect of reducing any propulsive effect but maybe not.
I would suspect you would want the location of the injecting antenna to be about a quarter wavelength away from the big plate for both injected wavelengths. Could this be why large freq. splatter of microwave oven magnetrons work? (injecting multiple wavelengths?)
Does it coinside with experimental evidence suggesting some minimal power level required for the effect to really take hold. Some minimal power required to form plasma?
Just some non-educated guess. I wonder if what you describe sounds a bit like small scale version of the ITER plasma reactor. From that picture of the corss-section of the reactor on wikipedia it do resembles a bit shape of the modified EmDrive, except of course that it is circular shape reactor in the end. Could there be some similarity to EmDrive or not at all?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
Did anyone tried circular shape of the EmDrive
?
-
#461 by bad_astra on 30 Jun, 2017 17:13
-
Tokamaks are tori. They have various cold points for the magnetic field, which is one thing the Wendelstein stellarator is attempting to work around with its very precise shaping for the magnetic fields. Cannae looks like a series of tori but I don't know for certain. where would the dielectric go?
-
#462 by SeeShells on 30 Jun, 2017 18:38
-
Tokamaks are tori. They have various cold points for the magnetic field, which is one thing the Wendelstein stellarator is attempting to work around with its very precise shaping for the magnetic fields. Cannae looks like a series of tori but I don't know for certain. where would the dielectric go?
Starting on page 6 of the EagleWorks report they describe the Cannae device with and without a dielectric plug where the antenna goes. 2mb pdf.
Shell
-
#463 by SeeShells on 30 Jun, 2017 19:06
-
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-atomic-mass-photon-momentum-paradox.htmlQuote
In a recent publication, Aalto University researchers show that in a transparent medium each photon is accompanied by an atomic mass density wave. The optical force of the photon sets the medium atoms in motion and makes them carry 92% of the total momentum of light, in the case of silicon.
The novel discovery solves the centennial momentum paradox of light. In the literature, there has existed two different values for the momentum of light in the transparent medium. Typically, these values differ by a factor of ten and this discrepancy is known as the momentum paradox of light. The difference between the momentum values is caused by neglecting the momentum of atoms moving with the light pulse.
Shell -
#464 by Augmentor on 30 Jun, 2017 21:43
-
The arxiv reference for "Photon mass drag and the momentum of light in a medium" is
https://arxiv.org/abs/1603.07224
David M -
#465 by Monomorphic on 30 Jun, 2017 22:46
-
I added a 20W dummy load to the rig today. In addition to being used to perform null tests, its mass is used to help level the pendulum. This lead to a reduction in stainless steel counterweights.
-
#466 by WarpTech on 30 Jun, 2017 23:31
-
I added a 20W dummy load to the rig today. In addition to being used to perform null tests, its mass is used to help level the pendulum. This lead to a reduction in stainless steal counterweights.
You might want to try stainless steel tie wraps instead of nylon. They work better at high temperatures, considering a 20W resistor is going to get pretty hot without a fan. An aluminum conduit clamp would also work, and add a little more mass to absorb the heat. -
#467 by Monomorphic on 01 Jul, 2017 12:37
-
I added a 20W dummy load to the rig today. In addition to being used to perform null tests, its mass is used to help level the pendulum. This lead to a reduction in stainless steal counterweights.
You might want to try stainless steel tie wraps instead of nylon. They work better at high temperatures, considering a 20W resistor is going to get pretty hot without a fan. An aluminum conduit clamp would also work, and add a little more mass to absorb the heat.
The 20W load doesn't get hot with 2.5W input. When I upgrade to ~25W, I will be using a 100W load. It is important to use loads rated for much higher than the actual RF input. Otherwise a hot dummy load will shed vortices and obscure the results. -
#468 by graybeardsyseng on 01 Jul, 2017 22:54
-
I added a 20W dummy load to the rig today. In addition to being used to perform null tests, its mass is used to help level the pendulum. This lead to a reduction in stainless steal counterweights.
You might want to try stainless steel tie wraps instead of nylon. They work better at high temperatures, considering a 20W resistor is going to get pretty hot without a fan. An aluminum conduit clamp would also work, and add a little more mass to absorb the heat.
The 20W load doesn't get hot with 2.5W input. When I upgrade to ~25W, I will be using a 100W load. It is important to use loads rated for much higher than the actual RF input. Otherwise a hot dummy load will shed vortices and obscure the results.
Excellent point - operating well below the max rating of components is generally a good idea for preserving linearity or at least predictable behavior. However, when you go to 25 watts you may still see unwanted/unplanned thermal effects - the 100W dummy load definitely won't be as hot as the 20W one would be and may well not have vortex shedding BUT that heat has to go somewhere and so there may be other unwanted/unexpected error mechanisms. Likely you have planned for these in any case.
Just a thought - you likely have also already planned this as your test plan/profile sounds quite robust but perhaps a couple of off resonance runs or with some other mechanism to dump the max RF into the dummy load and look at its thermal behavior with your FLIR system. Like I said just a random thought on a Saturday night.
I would probably also second the recommendation for SS vice nylon tie wraps if the load is going to get very hot and also because nylon also has interesting behavior under RF power. (discussed MUCH earlier - like thread 2 or 4). Another HOWEVER thought though - the SS wraps have a much higher thermal conductivity of course and will transfer the heat to other perhaps unexpected places and could introduce other effects/errors.
Herman
-
#469 by LowerAtmosphere on 02 Jul, 2017 03:19
-
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-atomic-mass-photon-momentum-paradox.html
QuoteIn a recent publication, Aalto University researchers show that in a transparent medium each photon is accompanied by an atomic mass density wave. The optical force of the photon sets the medium atoms in motion and makes them carry 92% of the total momentum of light, in the case of silicon.
The novel discovery solves the centennial momentum paradox of light. In the literature, there has existed two different values for the momentum of light in the transparent medium. Typically, these values differ by a factor of ten and this discrepancy is known as the momentum paradox of light. The difference between the momentum values is caused by neglecting the momentum of atoms moving with the light pulse.
Shell
Excellent. Hyperplanck's posts about phonons fit perfectly into this.
@Monomorphic, yes I was referring to some spherical/parabolic end simulations. Since proposing the hypothesis here - credit to Flux_Capacitor for being the first to notice that the field strength was high enough for dielectric breakdown and for proposing the white noise injection via klystron in thread 8, as we now recently discovered that the system will store a wide bandwidth.
2.4x10^7kV/m was quoted in my previous posts, so I assumed this was a modal peak value from one of the simulations. I did some extensive digging through the past two threads and found some examples of both realistic and futuristic peak values which I included below. As expected, parabolic mirrors or spherical ends work best at creating a focal point for maximum density, though the modal shape is usually something symmetric along the wrong axis* or a TM sidewall pressure (versus endcap pressure) which decreases thrust because the resonant wave's information caught in the plasma/ions/wavelets/phonons/electron soup (take your pick) has a more similar time-to-wall. There is a lesser pressure gradient in a desirable direction if your field is symmetric across the perpendicular of your acceleration vector or if it is symmetric and each peak is equally strong. Most simulated peak fields are around 700kV/m, which is not close enough to the 3000kV/m (or ~3300kV/m) to appear to matter. There is natural ambient ionization in the air which is increased once you begin injecting large amounts of energy into the cavity*** even if the ionization cycle does not begin for hot plasma, like you would see in a tokomak**. The behaviour of the plasma depends on the voltage, the geometry, the wave shape, the waveguide and most crucially the eigenmodes.
Max E-Fields Old Simulations
Spherical endplate TE012 - 36MV/m - https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1610054#msg1610054
TT - 7.5MV/m - https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41732.msg1616337#msg1616337
Cannae - 25.6MV/m - https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1612540#msg1612540
Sphere - 6.5MV/m - https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1611016#msg1611016
Tapered prism (Similar to Yang) - 3.017MV/m https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1610152#msg1610152
Spherical endplate TE013 - ~27MV/m - https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1608904#msg1608904
Helical Antenna clover leaf - very high - https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40959.msg1608617#msg1608617
I think the old posts by Dr. Rodal regarding fluid mechanics are also interesting and worth considering though they rely on the exchange of kinetic energy of massive particles, not electron pressure between current layers(=standing waves) and therefore do not solve CoM issues as they are not directional unlike field line relaxations.
* For example: TE011 where both endcaps more or less share the same central field (or only a few 'layers of the onion' when compared to TE013 or TE019). The layers cause the lag in information through magnetic reconnection, while the location of the modal peak determines the source of the information.
**All this rephrases my previous posts a bit and makes a lot more sense after you read Yamada's 2010 guide to magnetic reconnection. The theory is that the reconnection rate scales with how collisionless the plasma is as a function of the mean free path of the electron and furthermore strong guide fields slow down the reconnection rate. If you have a fairly weak system like the EM Drive then you either need: a long distance to build charge needed for realignment (like the Earth's cold magnetotail) or boundary conditions which keep the pressure locked in and the waves resonate along more or less closed paths. I cannot hope to explain the entire concept better than Yamada did so read his guide and mentally add in the recent discoveries about fast reconnection, relativistic electrons, electron behaviour in metallic lattices, plasmonics, and phonons. If we even achieve 1% ionization equilibrium (assuming only the atmosphere matters) then you will be getting thrust. If you achieve 99% ionization then you will need strong guide fields to prevent turbulence which in turn reduces reconnections. The golden zone is somewhere in the middle where the cold plasma does not pose a danger when unstable. All of this is some late night thoughts so apologies for typos...
***Among others, it is clear since the 1970s that in their excited state many of the elements in air will disassociate. If you keep injecting energy, more of the electrons will be excited on average. https://www.nist.gov/publications/ionization-carbon-nitrogen-and-oxygen-electron-impact-0
-
#470 by Bob012345 on 02 Jul, 2017 19:01
-
https://phys.org/news/2017-06-atomic-mass-photon-momentum-paradox.html
QuoteIn a recent publication, Aalto University researchers show that in a transparent medium each photon is accompanied by an atomic mass density wave. The optical force of the photon sets the medium atoms in motion and makes them carry 92% of the total momentum of light, in the case of silicon.
The novel discovery solves the centennial momentum paradox of light. In the literature, there has existed two different values for the momentum of light in the transparent medium. Typically, these values differ by a factor of ten and this discrepancy is known as the momentum paradox of light. The difference between the momentum values is caused by neglecting the momentum of atoms moving with the light pulse.
Shell
They conclude the Minkowski momentum is valid in a medium. Is there any way to create a medium around a ship to greatly enhance the momentum of a laser beam for propulsion? Would a Bose Einstein Condensate act as such a medium? -
#471 by Mulletron on 03 Jul, 2017 01:22
-
Listening to this tonight really resonated with me. Understanding this copper can and what it's doing and what it all means in a larger context, and how to think about it all in an effective way has been a challenging and rewarding experience.
As we sail through this world of technological marvel and complex systems, it’s easy to assume we know the watery depths that yawn beneath our hull. As it turns out, however, it’s all an illusion of explanatory depth. We think we understand day-to-day gadgets, but are at a loss to explain their functionality. We think we understand policy and politics, but are better at explaining why we hold our beliefs than how particular policies might solve life’s hideous problems. In this two-part episode of Stuff to Blow Your Mind, Robert and Joe dip into the waters of cognitive illusion.
* http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/s3-streaming.stufftoblowyourmind.com:8084/sciencelab/2017-01-17-stbym-explanatory-depth-1.mp3?awCollectionId=1004&awEpisodeId=923124
* http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/streaming.stufftoblowyourmind.com/sciencelab/2017-01-19-stbym-explanatory-depth-2.mp3?awCollectionId=1004&awEpisodeId=923126
* Podcast Feed: Stuff To Blow Your Mind (http://www.howstuffworks.com/podcasts/stuff-to-blow-your-mind.rss) -
#472 by tchernik on 03 Jul, 2017 03:08
-
I concur that human mind can be endlessly deceived by others and by itself. The intentions and beliefs of other humans and of oneself can't always be trusted.
The beauty of natural science and engineering as philosophies of life and as methods, is that while trying to discern the secrets of nature or to make it do something it doesn't do naturally, nature is the most chivalrous rival there is.
It never cheats. It never deceives, but it can provide wrong answers if we don't ask the right questions.
And it never forgets, and never forgives (that's why it continues to be a rival).
That's comforting, at least for me. If there is any truth in the Emdrive at all, it will be the same for anyone testing, no matter where, when and whom, regardless or their beliefs, if they stick to the method. -
#473 by TheTraveller on 03 Jul, 2017 03:44
-
I concur that human mind can be endlessly deceived by others and by itself. The intentions and beliefs of other humans and of oneself can't always be trusted.
The beauty of natural science and engineering as philosophies of life and as methods, is that while trying to discern the secrets of nature or to make it do something it doesn't do naturally, nature is the most chivalrous rival there is.
It never cheats. It never deceives, but it can provide wrong answers if we don't ask the right questions.
And it never forgets, and never forgives (that's why it continues to be a rival).
That's comforting, at least for me. If there is any truth in the Emdrive at all, it will be the same for anyone testing, no matter where, when and whom, regardless or their beliefs, if they stick to the method.
I now believe the results EW obtained with their thruster was not that which I would expect to see from a "Shawyer Effect" EmDrive.
As the small end was well below the cutoff diameter used in EmDrive designs, the thruster EW tested was not a EmDrive.
Plus EmDrives that are driven by a continuous Rf feed, do not exhibit thrust if they are not accelerating / moving and in the EW test rig, their thruster was constrained from acceleration. OK it moved a VERY small number of um but only for a very short time, and yet produced thrust when not accelerating / moving. This is not the characterists of an EmDrive that is built to conform with the SPR EmDrive design guidelines.
Just maybe there is something to Dr. White's QV Thruster theory.
Which suggests there may be 3 ways to achieve P-P:
1) Shawyer EmDrive Effect.
2) Woodward Mach Effect.
3) White QV Effect. -
#474 by ramimahdi on 03 Jul, 2017 04:27
-
I have been a follower of this thread for a long time.
I cannot help but notice that no one is doing anything to combat the red shift of photons. This seems to be a serious challenge that needs serious attention.
To my layman understanding, photons need to resonate and for that we need tuned cavity dimensions suited for the photons wave length.
However, once photons loose some momentum to the small of end of the cavity they red shift, in what we hope to call direct conversion to thrust for the cavity. Once photons redshift, the dimensions of the cavity are no longer suitable for those photons. This leads to tremendous inefficiency.
I have a suggestion,
To continue, efficiently, extracting momentum from photons, the system needs to induce energy back to the photons to keep them in the same wavelength.
I think this can be done by having the small end of the cavity push pack on photons with a force equal to the difference of force exerted from the photons on the small and the large end of the cavity.
In the attached diagram you see that, if the shown small end of the cavity spins in the shown directions, that will cause a push/force effect against incoming/bouncing photons. Also, for any acceleration or thrust level, there is certain spin speed that can compensate for the redshift. The force is a function of spinning speed.
In the down side, the need for a spinning cavity will complicate experimentation a lot.
Also note, this shape of the small end can also be applied to the large end in reverse way. This can insure that photons continue to bounce vertically, but it might need opposite directions of spin.
what you guys think of this suggestion.
-
#475 by TheTraveller on 03 Jul, 2017 07:22
-
I have been a follower of this thread for a long time.
I cannot help but notice that no one is doing anything to combat the red shift of photons. This seems to be a serious challenge that needs serious attention.
To my layman understanding, photons need to resonate and for that we need tuned cavity dimensions suited for the photons wave length.
However, once photons loose some momentum to the small of end of the cavity they red shift, in what we hope to call direct conversion to thrust for the cavity. Once photons redshift, the dimensions of the cavity are no longer suitable for those photons. This leads to tremendous inefficiency.
I have a suggestion,
To continue, efficiently, extracting momentum from photons, the system needs to induce energy back to the photons to keep them in the same wavelength.
I think this can be done by having the small end of the cavity push pack on photons with a force equal to the difference of force exerted from the photons on the small and the large end of the cavity.
In the attached diagram you see that, if the shown small end of the cavity spins in the shown directions, that will cause a push/force effect against incoming/bouncing photons. Also, for any acceleration or thrust level, there is certain spin speed that can compensate for the redshift. The force is a function of spinning speed.
In the down side, the need for a spinning cavity will complicate experimentation a lot.
Also note, this shape of the small end can also be applied to the large end in reverse way. This can insure that photons continue to bounce vertically, but it might need opposite directions of spin.
what you guys think of this suggestion.
Resonance is only needed to achieve coupler impedance matching so to be able to cause the internal coupler to emit photons from Rf energy applied external to the cavity to the coupler. Approx 6.16^26 2.45GHz photons are emitted by the internal coupler per second.
Resonance is not required for the end plates to generate differential radiation pressure via Compton Scattering. As the trapped photons degrade and their wavelength increases, they will continue to transfer monentum to the end plares, to support cavity acceleration, no matter what their degraded wavelength. -
#476 by spupeng7 on 03 Jul, 2017 09:09
-
(...)
Space doesn’t really exist because it is a representation in one moment (drawing, illustrations etc.) of points that are not at the same moment (spacetime) except in our minds. The Earth-Moon “distance” is approximately 1 light second. No two points of this “distance” are at the same moment, or else light would not take any time to travel the distance. We may use kilometers (or geodesics) for convenience but it doesn’t make space real. “Space” is a dimension of consciousness, not a dimension of the universe. So, we may forget the poetics of “curving space” or “this telling that” what to do.
In conclusion, “space” is a necessary tool for representing concepts of physical knowledge but it plays no part in the universe since it doesn’t exist. IMO, we should replace the “false cause” for motion as “curvature” or “geodesics” by the true and logical cause for motion, a higher probability of existence due to a differential in the rate of time. I don’t dispute any of the representations used in physics. Here, I only want to remind us to carefully remove our own observer contributions from our knowledge before we say that the universe is this or that.
Marcel,
"There is in particular one problem whose exhaustive solution could provide considerable elucidation. What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission? Does it spread out in all directions with further propagation in the sense of Huygens' wave theory, so constantly taking up more space, in boundless progressive attenuation? Or does it fly out like a projectile in one direction in the sense of Newton's emanation theory? In the first case, the quantum would no longer be in the position to concentrate energy upon a single point in space in such a way as to release an electron from its atomic bond, and in the second case, the main triumph of the Maxwell theory - the continuity between the static and the dynamic fields and, with it, the complete understanding we have enjoyed, until now, of the fully investigated interference phenomena - would have to be sacrificed, both being very unhappy consequences for today's theoreticians."
Max Planck, Nobel Lecture, June 2, 1920.
****************************
Marcel,
much of the last three centuries of physics has been a battle to avoid acceptance of remotely acting forces. This has been a necessary struggle but one that is, in my opinion, ultimately doomed. I believe the understanding you have reached in the above quote, has a potential solution to Planck's dilemma, encapsulated within it.
If we accept that space exists as a consequence of the nature of human perception, we may then see that the presence of a charge has gravitational and therefore inertial consequence everywhere. We may also see that the acceleration of a charge accelerates the next nearest charge in line of sight and in resonance with it, with respect to the relative rates of passage of time within which they reside.
The line of sight being that geodesic specific to the interaction. This may be visualized without contradiction if the acceleration of the charges interacting electromagnetically are aligned to that geodesic at the moment of complex time at which they interact. We might then find better explanations for inertia, gravity, electromagnetic action and emdrive thrust. It may even be possible to find an explanation for fringe effects and Young's two slit experiment if geodesics intersecting atomic orbitals are considered.
Attempting always to nobble my own argument.
JMN..
-
#477 by dustinthewind on 04 Jul, 2017 00:47
-
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.
snip...
Could that possibly make sense?
What is curious about a plasma possibly existing in the cavity is that the plasma can more effectively absorb kinetic energy from light. I think I remember Shell mentioning the possibility of plasma in the cavity at one point in time. Possibly this is why she made her cavity see through or that screen mesh? The plasma would need to be created, so energy would start to be stored in the cavity and later plasma could form when the electric fields become strong enough to strip electrons from the gasses inside.
The formation of too much plasma and I question if it could possibly start to interfere with the stored energy in the cavity,(the free electrons being too reflective), the wavelength might not constructively interfere any more, causing energy to be rejected from the cavity. For it to work, some light would have to pass through the plasma and resonate in the cavity to sustain the electric fields that sustain the plasma.
After that you need light that resonates between the big cavity wall and the plasma toward the narrow end of the cavity. The plasma doesn't need to touch the cavity wall and should in fact be repelled from the changing magnetic field via the currents in the cavity. So basically the plasma more effectively absorbs kinetic energy from light and then passes this on to the cavity via repulsion off the cavities changing magnetic field.
The need to sustain both currents in the cavity at a certain wavelength, and current induced in the plasma via another wavelength may mean multiple wavelengths are required.
This provides a possible means for the cavity to travel pointed end forwards if the plasma is near the pointed end but may depend on the plasma's location and possibly/possibly not with respect to where your injecting the radiation. I.e. I'm not sure what effect it would have to inject the radiation inside the plasma as opposed to injecting the radiation at the end where there is no plasma. I suspect injecting radiation in the middle of the plasma may have an effect of reducing any propulsive effect but maybe not.
I would suspect you would want the location of the injecting antenna to be about a quarter wavelength away from the big plate for both injected wavelengths. Could this be why large freq. splatter of microwave oven magnetrons work? (injecting multiple wavelengths?)
Does it coinside with experimental evidence suggesting some minimal power level required for the effect to really take hold. Some minimal power required to form plasma?
Just some non-educated guess. I wonder if what you describe sounds a bit like small scale version of the ITER plasma reactor. From that picture of the corss-section of the reactor on wikipedia it do resembles a bit shape of the modified EmDrive, except of course that it is circular shape reactor in the end. Could there be some similarity to EmDrive or not at all?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER
Did anyone tried circular shape of the EmDrive ?
From the equation in the paper it seems there are some conditions that reduce the breakdown voltage/meter if I was reading it correctly. I suspected under certain conditions the breakdown voltage would be a fraction of the expected 3*10^6 V/m. Still that's a fairly high V/m. Read through it a few times but will have to sub some values in to see if the break down can be lowered enough. I am unsure it is reasonable to assume there is a plasma but it is interesting that there could be a plasma and at one end of the cavity.
I think what was important was that they "give a method of observing if a plasma is formed". Directly confirming or observing what is actually going on in the cavity is integral to understanding what might be occurring if anything. -
#478 by dustinthewind on 04 Jul, 2017 06:12
-
I have been a follower of this thread for a long time.
I cannot help but notice that no one is doing anything to combat the red shift of photons. This seems to be a serious challenge that needs serious attention.
To my layman understanding, photons need to resonate and for that we need tuned cavity dimensions suited for the photons wave length.
However, once photons loose some momentum to the small of end of the cavity they red shift, in what we hope to call direct conversion to thrust for the cavity. Once photons redshift, the dimensions of the cavity are no longer suitable for those photons. This leads to tremendous inefficiency.
I have a suggestion,
To continue, efficiently, extracting momentum from photons, the system needs to induce energy back to the photons to keep them in the same wavelength.
I think this can be done by having the small end of the cavity push pack on photons with a force equal to the difference of force exerted from the photons on the small and the large end of the cavity.
In the attached diagram you see that, if the shown small end of the cavity spins in the shown directions, that will cause a push/force effect against incoming/bouncing photons. Also, for any acceleration or thrust level, there is certain spin speed that can compensate for the redshift. The force is a function of spinning speed.
In the down side, the need for a spinning cavity will complicate experimentation a lot.
Also note, this shape of the small end can also be applied to the large end in reverse way. This can insure that photons continue to bounce vertically, but it might need opposite directions of spin.
what you guys think of this suggestion.
Resonance is only needed to achieve coupler impedance matching so to be able to cause the internal coupler to emit photons from Rf energy applied external to the cavity to the coupler. Approx 6.16^26 2.45GHz photons are emitted by the internal coupler per second.
Resonance is not required for the end plates to generate differential radiation pressure via Compton Scattering. As the trapped photons degrade and their wavelength increases, they will continue to transfer monentum to the end plares, to support cavity acceleration, no matter what their degraded wavelength.
If there was some change in frequency in the current EM drive the change in frequency might be hardly noticeable. Using the equation W=energy/sec h=planks constant f=frequency then
W/h/f = photons per sec emitted. df=frequency lost per photon and n = number of cycles a photon completes then df*h*n = energy lost per photon W*df*h*n/(h*f) = W*df*n/f = energy absorbed per second as kinetic energy if such a thing could occur.
Throwing in some numbers in SI units. W=20 watts df=0.5 hz or cycles/sec n=1000 f=2.45*10^9 Hz we get 4.08*10^-6 joules/sec absorbed as kinetic energy. We integrate the absorbed kinetic energy over time to get the objects change in velocity from rest. A low velocity estimation using m=1 kg E=1/2*m*v^2 so v=sqrt(2*E/m) -> sqrt(2*4.08*10^-6/1) = 0.00286 m/s
dW/dv = F = 4.08*10^-6 joules/sec / (0.00286 m/s) = ~ 1.4 mN so it doesn't take much of a change in frequency (0.5 hz), considering the number of photons, to induce a significant force. -
#479 by Peter Lauwer on 04 Jul, 2017 09:14
-
I have tested it on a scale, like described in the article, and found no sign of pushing. I will further test it on my torsion balance (next month). It is quite easy to test, you just put a dummy load on the balance and see whether there is any deflection if it is powered.
Also, the mantle (cavity wall) can easily be cooled with water flow.
I was able to roughly simulate your coupling cavity/waveguide. With the coax and connectors in the cavity, which are hard to quantify since I don't have exact dimensions, it won't be exact. I'm pretty sure the second image below shows TM011. I'm not sure about the first, but it looks like the two antennas are coupling better with that mode. I would need to do more setup to run a proper S21.
Hi Jamie (I'm back from holiday and other distractions),
Again, thanks a lot for the sims. But the frequencies you got out of it, 3.50 and 3.35 GHz, do not really come close to the measured frequencies (3.60 and 3.25 GHz).
Does it due to, apart from the influence of the connectors etc., the fact that one of the endplates in not in contact with the wall?
Peter
Added: I guess it is best to paint the cavity and take pictures with an IR camera to determine what modes it is running.
?
JMN..