OKAY --- *blows whistle*
Let me ask the big couple of questions nobody else has asked yet.
When and where can I buy one, and how much will it cost?
No, seriously though there is a surprisingly low amount of skepticism right now for such ground breaking claims. Is it now really happening?
I think the skepticism is more severe than ever..and rightly so.
However, the optimist in me says that the reason we've not seen 2nd gen experimental results from Shawyer is that the work has been classified by the UK government. This seems to be confirmed by Shawyer's quote in this recent article regarding the use of Emdrive in a fictional TV series titled "Salvation":
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/could-emdrive-save-planet-world-ending-asteroid-strike-1634279"People in the space and aviation industry I know on the other side of the pond love it. It's a beautiful way of getting it out to the public without anyone being put in jail for releasing classified information. In the show's view, this is a very advanced technology that only American super brains can work out. It's wonderful, I love it actually!"
This is why the DIYers are so important. My hope is that monomorphic or Shell can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the effect is real or not.
But I hope you can agree that no matter the increased kinetic energy in the exhaust, the chemical energy released (rocket power) can be uniform from the perspective of the rocket. I'm suggesting that's what matters. Everything else is perspective dependent. We wouldn't say an accelerating EMDrive or MEGA drive has to use increased electrical power because it's going faster. We shouldn't say that for a rocket as well.
Just to be clear, Bob, are you claiming:
a.) Both an accelerating rocket and an EM drive conserve momentum and energy in all frames of reference
or
b.) Neither an accelerating rocket nor an EM drive conserve momentum and energy in all frames of reference
or
c.) Something else entirely
Very nearly finished with printing and assembling all the parts. Last piece will be finished in 14 hours, which will bring the total print time for all parts to 192 hours (8 days). I was able to incorporate 20 custom printed clips to help keep all the pieces together. This made the adhesion process a breeze.
All said and done, I will have used ~$70 worth of filament.
http://emdrives.com stopped working 
You have wrong address.
It is http://emdrive.com/ and not with (s)
Two different addresses:
http://emdrive.com/ is the address used by SPR (Shawyer)
http://emdrives.com was an address that was created by someone at the time that interest in the EM Drive was at a peak (during threads 2 and 3, at the time following the 2014 initial disclosure that NASA Eagleworks was working on this, the time at which White was even talking to the press about Q drives and even interstellar travel based on the Alcubierre drive, and about tabletop experiments with interferometers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White%E2%80%93Juday_warp-field_interferometer). Then http://emdrives.com used to link automatically to these threads at NSF.
It is not clear to me what the purpose of http://emdrives.com ever was, but apparently this domain name expired on 8/3/2017 and is pending renewal or deletion.
Thanks. Yeah it's me... I used it to quickly get to the last post on the last page of this forum thread. I recently just noticed it had expired so if people give me a sec hopefully I can renew it now and get it back up.
Very nearly finished with printing and assembling all the parts. Last piece will be finished in 14 hours, which will bring the total print time for all prices to 192 hours. I was able to incorporate 20 custom printed clips to help keep all the pieces together. This made the adhesion process a breeze. All said and done, I will have used ~$70 worth of filament.
How's the inner surface of the cavity looking?
How's the inner surface of the cavity looking?
Nice tolerances. I have a hard time feeling most of the gaps between the pieces with my fingers, and this is before a light sanding.
http://emdrives.com stopped working
You have wrong address.
It is http://emdrive.com/ and not with (s)
Two different addresses:
http://emdrive.com/ is the address used by SPR (Shawyer)
http://emdrives.com was an address that was created by someone at the time that interest in the EM Drive was at a peak (during threads 2 and 3, at the time following the 2014 initial disclosure that NASA Eagleworks was working on this, the time at which White was even talking to the press about Q drives and even interstellar travel based on the Alcubierre drive, and about tabletop experiments with interferometers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White%E2%80%93Juday_warp-field_interferometer). Then http://emdrives.com used to link automatically to these threads at NSF.
It is not clear to me what the purpose of http://emdrives.com ever was, but apparently this domain name expired on 8/3/2017 and is pending renewal or deletion.
Thanks. Yeah it's me... I used it to quickly get to the last post on the last page of this forum thread. I recently just noticed it had expired so if people give me a sec hopefully I can renew it now and get it back up.
So emdrives.com is back up now, auto-redirecting to the last post on the last page of this forum thread.
Love to but too insufficient (yet) a hypothesis to test from this speculation.
Specifically:
A) How does any kind of "knot" interact with an/any external field(s)?
B) Why do the Lorenz force law allow a bootstrap field in a superconducting magnet and a trapezoidal/microwave solenoid resonant field such an interaction?
C) How can one track CoE in a micro interaction from a planetary/solar scale frame of reference?
D) Why does angular momentum transfer to such interactions (as it clearly does)?
E) Does the impulse scale with flux or class/kind of interaction?
F) What determines duration of transient, or is it just a Dirac delta (e.g. dimensionless)?
G) What gates isotropic impulses of such massively anisotropic potentials?
Answers in any experiment to any of these would restrict the/other hypothesis.
Wouldn't that reasoning work both ways. We do have several competent, capable DIY people building these things. Most (if I remember right) have reported substantial 'surges' in 'thrust.' At least one, Shell, has apparently focused on this issue. Hence, wouldn't more data on this from the EM Drive physical tests affect or point to answers for some of the other questions?
My biggest problem is the proposed 1.54kN/kW...
Really ?? kilo-Newtons ? 
1540 Newtons per kiloWatt?
And all this while we have yet to see a solid milli-Newton scale result ??
Not that I do not want to believe it could work, but this sure doesn't make it sound "believable"..
It rather falls in the category of "wishful thinking" instead of "engineering optimism"...
I challenge one of the devout skeptics to use Shawyer's own design specs and equations, and an EM simulation of the cavity, to prove that, unless Shawyer also has a secret breakthrough in vacuum-arc suppression, any single bucket-cavity so far seen will be incapable or producing over around 10 N of thrust before breaking down.
The best accelerator superconducting cavities are limited to under a gigawatt by vacuum breakdown, which amounts to a few newtons of radiation pressure.
So even with a superconducting cavity of a Q of 300 billion and a kilonewton/kilowatt force generated, any single cavity couldn't be powered by over a watt or so RF input before it starts burning.
No hover cars, unless you have some real good insulation I haven't heard of.
But that isn't to say hundreds of buckets couldn't be assembled in space, or better yet, a large cavity operating at a lower frequency with a reduced power density/field intensity that would amount to a breakthrough in interplanetary transport.
OKAY --- *blows whistle*
Let me ask the big couple of questions nobody else has asked yet.
When and where can I buy one, and how much will it cost?
No, seriously though there is a surprisingly low amount of skepticism right now for such ground breaking claims. Is it now really happening?
I think the skepticism is more severe than ever..and rightly so.
However, the optimist in me says that the reason we've not seen 2nd gen experimental results from Shawyer is that the work has been classified by the UK government. This seems to be confirmed by Shawyer's quote in this recent article regarding the use of Emdrive in a fictional TV series titled "Salvation":
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/could-emdrive-save-planet-world-ending-asteroid-strike-1634279
"People in the space and aviation industry I know on the other side of the pond love it. It's a beautiful way of getting it out to the public without anyone being put in jail for releasing classified information. In the show's view, this is a very advanced technology that only American super brains can work out. It's wonderful, I love it actually!"
This is why the DIYers are so important. My hope is that monomorphic or Shell can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the effect is real or not.
What you say is quite true to what people in news industry told me. The reporters that spoke directly to the Shawyer can not tell / share everything he told them. I wrote about this here on NSF too. Any interview with the Shawyer needs to go trough the check with the military guys before it is released. Usually around 30% to 50% is changed.
Of course people rightly claim that we did not yet see anything yet. Well, except few videos of rotating device one of them in BBC documentary. We also never received an offical commentary for that "smoking gun" video from the Eagleworks lab. Until we see some proof relased to the public it will be called crackpot science, magic and who knows what else.
I guess I am one of very few here who does not find it strange that they (military) want to keep it under wraps for now. They done it with some famous techs in the past. Like that B-2 stealth bomber or more recently X-37B (I do not think they are testing EmDrive there yet).
What you say is quite true to what people in news industry told me. The reporters that spoke directly to the Shawyer can not tell / share everything he told them. I wrote about this here on NSF too. Any interview with the Shawyer needs to go trough the check with the military guys before it is released. Usually around 30% to 50% is changed.
...
I guess I am one of very few here who does not find it strange that they (military) want to keep it under wraps for now. They done it with some famous techs in the past. Like that B-2 stealth bomber or more recently X-37B (I do not think they are testing EmDrive there yet).
This isn't how it would work if what you are describing was real. Military wouldn't let someone (Shawyer) go say what they want to the media, and then the media report is filtered afterward. They would restrict what is said in the first place, and if it is serious enough, the only releases of any information to people in the media would be pre-screened before the media sees them.
Claims like the one you just made that don't fit with what would actually be the case if the military were involved increase the reasons people doubt any claim that the military is involved.
OKAY --- *blows whistle*
Let me ask the big couple of questions nobody else has asked yet.
When and where can I buy one, and how much will it cost?
No, seriously though there is a surprisingly low amount of skepticism right now for such ground breaking claims. Is it now really happening?
The skepticism is definitely in place, it's just well worn territory by now after ten threads. The latest grandiose claims of thrust are mostly background noise against test data, the theoretical physics, and third party replication efforts.
I'd love to be proven wrong, but until I see some concrete demonstration of the latest claims I'm afraid I'm going to be of the opinion that R Shawyer is a raving fantasist.
I wish people would stop repeating time and again the error of speaking as if Shawyer is the only show in town. There are a number of dedicated experimentalists and theorists working in this area, by repeatedly ignoring them you are doing them a disservice.
I am referring solely and entirely to the claims made here
http://www.emdrive.com/3GEmDrive.pdf, I am doing other experimentalists and theorists the very great service of not lumping them in with this stuff which appears quite unlikely given the results that others are getting. These are some of the most extraordinary claims I have ever seen, they require Sagan's extraordinary evidence.
What you say is quite true to what people in news industry told me. The reporters that spoke directly to the Shawyer can not tell / share everything he told them. I wrote about this here on NSF too. Any interview with the Shawyer needs to go trough the check with the military guys before it is released. Usually around 30% to 50% is changed.
...
I guess I am one of very few here who does not find it strange that they (military) want to keep it under wraps for now. They done it with some famous techs in the past. Like that B-2 stealth bomber or more recently X-37B (I do not think they are testing EmDrive there yet).
This isn't how it would work if what you are describing was real. Military wouldn't let someone (Shawyer) go say what they want to the media, and then the media report is filtered afterward. They would restrict what is said in the first place, and if it is serious enough, the only releases of any information to people in the media would be pre-screened before the media sees them.
Claims like the one you just made that don't fit with what would actually be the case if the military were involved increase the reasons people doubt any claim that the military is involved.
You can always write to the reporters that published the news to check that. That is if you can create enough trust with them.
What you say is quite true to what people in news industry told me. The reporters that spoke directly to the Shawyer can not tell / share everything he told them. I wrote about this here on NSF too. Any interview with the Shawyer needs to go trough the check with the military guys before it is released. Usually around 30% to 50% is changed.
...
I guess I am one of very few here who does not find it strange that they (military) want to keep it under wraps for now. They done it with some famous techs in the past. Like that B-2 stealth bomber or more recently X-37B (I do not think they are testing EmDrive there yet).
This isn't how it would work if what you are describing was real. Military wouldn't let someone (Shawyer) go say what they want to the media, and then the media report is filtered afterward. They would restrict what is said in the first place, and if it is serious enough, the only releases of any information to people in the media would be pre-screened before the media sees them.
Claims like the one you just made that don't fit with what would actually be the case if the military were involved increase the reasons people doubt any claim that the military is involved.
I would thought in these cases the person in question would either be given a prepared script or not allowed to speak at all & just a press release put out.
Very nearly finished with printing and assembling all the parts. Last piece will be finished in 14 hours, which will bring the total print time for all parts to 192 hours (8 days). I was able to incorporate 20 custom printed clips to help keep all the pieces together. This made the adhesion process a breeze. All said and done, I will have used ~$70 worth of filament.
@Monomorphic did you ever get any more than a couple of disparate runs from you previous frustrum and power setup? Eg multiple runs in all the different orientations and different power levels. I was looking forward to some more comprehensive results, that one could draw some conclusions from, but they haven't seen the light of day? Hoping that this new frustum can provide them.
@Monomorphic did you ever get any more than a couple of disparate runs from you previous frustrum and power setup? Eg multiple runs in all the different orientations and different power levels. I was looking forward to some more comprehensive results, that one could draw some conclusions from, but they haven't seen the light of day? Hoping that this new frustum can provide them.
I have two main goals to accomplish before I do a methodical series of test runs as described: spherical end-plates and an increase from 2W to 20W. Roger Shawyer emailed me about my initial results a few months ago and encouraged that I go with spherical end-plates to increase the thrust. The 2W amp and pre-amp is very inefficient. It takes 7A to get that 2W while the new amp will output 30W at 10A.
I have a hard deadline of November 1 as I will be presenting most the data then. So expect a flurry of work between now and then, with October being VERY busy.
That sounds great! I for one just hope you're not too busy so that you can share regular updates with us!
What you say is quite true to what people in news industry told me. The reporters that spoke directly to the Shawyer can not tell / share everything he told them. I wrote about this here on NSF too. Any interview with the Shawyer needs to go trough the check with the military guys before it is released. Usually around 30% to 50% is changed.
...
I guess I am one of very few here who does not find it strange that they (military) want to keep it under wraps for now. They done it with some famous techs in the past. Like that B-2 stealth bomber or more recently X-37B (I do not think they are testing EmDrive there yet).
This isn't how it would work if what you are describing was real. Military wouldn't let someone (Shawyer) go say what they want to the media, and then the media report is filtered afterward. They would restrict what is said in the first place, and if it is serious enough, the only releases of any information to people in the media would be pre-screened before the media sees them.
Claims like the one you just made that don't fit with what would actually be the case if the military were involved increase the reasons people doubt any claim that the military is involved.
I would thought in these cases the person in question would either be given a prepared script or not allowed to speak at all & just a press release put out.
Yes, as I said that would be a typical situation, Chrochne describing something completely different is plenty of evidence that what he described never actually happened.
Giving Chrochne the benefit of the doubt that he is not making stuff up, one possibility is that Shawyer reviewed and revised the news story before release. The military involvement could then either be a lie Shawyer told the media, or a misunderstanding or miscommunication that that happened further down the line.
My biggest problem is the proposed 1.54kN/kW...
Really ?? kilo-Newtons ? 1540 Newtons per kiloWatt?
And all this while we have yet to see a solid milli-Newton scale result ??
Not that I do not want to believe it could work, but this sure doesn't make it sound "believable"..
It rather falls in the category of "wishful thinking" instead of "engineering optimism"...
I challenge one of the devout skeptics to use Shawyer's own design specs and equations, and an EM simulation of the cavity, to prove that, unless Shawyer also has a secret breakthrough in vacuum-arc suppression, any single bucket-cavity so far seen will be incapable or producing over around 10 N of thrust before breaking down.
The best accelerator superconducting cavities are limited to under a gigawatt by vacuum breakdown, which amounts to a few newtons of radiation pressure.
So even with a superconducting cavity of a Q of 300 billion and a kilonewton/kilowatt force generated, any single cavity couldn't be powered by over a watt or so RF input before it starts burning.
No hover cars, unless you have some real good insulation I haven't heard of.
But that isn't to say hundreds of buckets couldn't be assembled in space, or better yet, a large cavity operating at a lower frequency with a reduced power density/field intensity that would amount to a breakthrough in interplanetary transport.
Hi mwvp,
Accelerator cavities, basically a big donut for the H field with a hole through the middle for the accelerative E field, have no reflecting end plates.
They are very different beasts than EmDrive cavities that increase end plate radiation pressure via multiple reflections.
Interesting video about a BAE photonic thruster that shows how multiple reflections do increase radiation pressure:
Question to think about:
Why does end plate radiation pressure, in a constant diameter circular waveguide, decrease as diameter decreases? Photon velocity is always c and photon momentum p = E / c. Yes E does drop, so very slightly after each inelastic end plate absord then emit event and yes photon wavelength does very slightly increase, due to lower E at the end plate emit event. However this is not what causes end plate radiation pressure to drop as waveguige diameter drops.
A few breadcrumbs are attached.
But I hope you can agree that no matter the increased kinetic energy in the exhaust, the chemical energy released (rocket power) can be uniform from the perspective of the rocket. I'm suggesting that's what matters. Everything else is perspective dependent. We wouldn't say an accelerating EMDrive or MEGA drive has to use increased electrical power because it's going faster. We shouldn't say that for a rocket as well.
Just to be clear, Bob, are you claiming:
a.) Both an accelerating rocket and an EM drive conserve momentum and energy in all frames of reference
or
b.) Neither an accelerating rocket nor an EM drive conserve momentum and energy in all frames of reference
or
c.) Something else entirely
(C) but I agree with (a). I am saying within the small change regime, a chemical rocket can double it's velocity without having to quadruple its fuel burn. It's about double. That kind of looks like a constant input power to constant acceleration relationship. Or use a laser beam to power a sail. In the low velocity regime, shine the beam for a certain time and get a delta v. To get twice the delta v, shine it for twice as long, not four times as long.
All said and done, I will have used ~$70 worth of filament.
1540 Newtons per kiloWatt? 