-
#1600 by Alex_O on 03 Oct, 2019 19:37
-
==That was my question to you -(there was a translator mistake, I did not ask a question), Sorry.
It happens, no problem. I think I see what you meant there now.Thank. The work of the Nobel laureate showed that the process of emission of a photon by an excited atom can depend on environmental parameters - for example, on the size of the resonator (note, I used the term "for example", that there may be additional options)
No, that Nobel prize is about a single atom with a single electron in an excited state placed in a small quantum mechanical system, it has no application or relevance to what we are discussing here. The delays you are talking about have nothing to do with that research.
In this case, if I understand correctly, there may be time delays. I also saw descriptions of the effects of signal delays in fiber optic technology, where there is a term - delay line. Since I drew attention to the term period of fluctuations, I began to think - how to break it.
I thought that there could be “delays” in the resonator, in the physics of the reflection of EM waves from a conductor. I remember two terms - the phase velocity of propagation of an EM wave in a waveguide and the group velocity. Phase - the speed of movement of the crests of the wave - it does not transfer energy. Group velocity is the velocity of a wave packet — it transfers energy.
The Russian article discusses the phenomenon of delayed emission of an excited atom due to the cavity walls. I see this simply as algorithm number 1. Yes, it’s somehow not right, but it’s just a source of inspiration, silly thoughts and new (possibly even progressive) ideas.Quote
I immediately go on, I have a solid wall of the drive, and said wow, it turns out there is solid physics, which will allow us to build a special machine on the surface of this wall, the device - what will happenQuoteI suggest once again to ponder this situation. An excited atom is in a vacuum, no one “touches” it (the cavity walls are a centimeter away from the atom!), We are not exposed to it by any external electromagnetic fields. We only limit the vacuum around it - and this is already enough to prevent or, conversely, contribute to the emission of a photon.
1) to catch the photons incident on the walls that are about to create eddy currents on the free electrons in the wall.
2) magically slow down / accelerate (freeze) these electrons and create a time delay (I don’t know why
and maybe come up with something else.
3) to hold in a temporary trap a portion of photons that has already come to the wall, and a portion of photons that already wants to bounce off the wall.
4) the goal is to catch a few photons and increase the EM field strength at the wall boundary several times.
5) I don’t know how, maybe just in a thin layer of the cavity wall to take and slow down the speed of light. I immediately remembered that F = 2P/c , and said - I found an algorithm on how to increase the pressure on the wall on one wall of the resonator, without spending additional energy from the side of the RF source, without violating the conservation of momentum. All you need to catch and hold the photons for a split second by changing the group velocity in the "thin layer".
What does it all mean. Let's divide the general task into two parts. Part 1 - learn how to create increased radiation pressure on the cavity walls. Learning to create on the same walls, in a symmetric resonator, is just a different pressure. I even once drew a photon rocket project where there is a trap for photons. (See picture 1)
Then Part 2 is to find an algorithm, the idea is how to build a car that will work on a pressure differential We don't have this idea yet, so what? We solve the problem in stages. The main thing is to prove that you can create higher pressure in the local area.
Comment. In a simulation of an antenna with a dipole with two reflectors, I see that if the reflectors are very close to the antenna - that the antenna is "unlucky and unable" to emit EM waves in the far zone. It looks like a complete analog of the passing atom from the Nobel Prize.
=====My thought has no boundaries, I specifically remove the boundaries for thought and try to come up with the most stupid questions. (I was taught this at the university).
There are situations where that is helpful, but not when you let it get to the point of 1+1=3, and the next step you need to do (which you should be able to do without bouncing every idea off me) is check if what you came up with makes any sense at all.
I read 10 volumes of the most complete physics and 300 more speculative works in physics. I did not see in the textbooks a working idea for building a motor for a spaceship. Therefore, we should discuss as much as possible even the most stupid thoughts, even if 1 + 1 = 3.I am creating a stupid new question - is it possible to use group velocity (delay algorithm) to create different radiation pressure on the end walls of the resonator.
No, delays would not change the forces. Your end result of asymmetric forces with no exhaust still breaks conservation of momentum by definition.
Is it possible to intervene in the physics of reflection from the conductor of the incident wave, so as to create stronger asymmetry in the flows of incident and reflected energy. Above I see an example of such an intervention - using "geometry". What is radiation pressure? This is the force acting on free charges in a conductor from the side of an electric and magnetic field.
1. If, as a result of “energy retention on the surface”, the intensities of these fields are greater, the pressure force will also be greater.
2. If, as a result of "energy retention on the surface", the intensities of these fields are less, the pressure force will also be less.
3. There are two end walls in the resonator - if there is more energy on one and less on the other, then there will be a rocket thrust.
Am I reasoning right? Am I not trying to deceive the law of conservation of momentum?
OK item until 3 omitted. Let's first build a tube or box and learn how to simply change the pressure of a photon gas in it, where the resonance geometry is just an important, but not the last condition. (It’s immediately clear why Emdrive failed in replicas, right?)
Let's discuss the first picture. Photons fly out of the waveguide and create reactive traction. I want (a silly thought) that this thing does not fly backwards (like a sail) but forward (with a mouthpiece forward). Like the Sun, it is such an optical tweezers that it attracts the solar sail, and does not repel it. Can you come up with this? if so, it will be very cool. It somehow can be connected with metamaterials, as the 1st option.Please look at the two pictures below? This is the idea of a rocket from a thin waveguide that floats in the rays of light. What could be here? Where will such a rocket fly? I have more stupid questions for these rockets:).
The first one as drawn would not produce any force, however in reality, the exit being smaller than the entrance means that the exiting photons would not leave in a straight line, but would be spread out across a range of angles. A bit of momentum would therefore transfer to the device, but there is an existing device called a solar sail (basically a giant mirror) that would be much more effective.
The second one would work, although the force would be close to equal in the horizontal and vertical directions, with the horizontal force being slightly stronger if anything (for same reasons as why the previous picture would generate a tiny bit of force). The second one would actually generate comparable force to a solar sail, but a solar sail would be lighter for collecting the same amount of energy.
And in the second picture - I added another knee, and I want this thing to be motionless or almost motionless (in zero gravity), that if it is like a sail, then this sail almost does not work. But reliably emits photons back to the Sun. (See picture 2)
-
#1601 by meberbs on 03 Oct, 2019 23:45
-
I immediately go on, I have a solid wall of the drive, and said wow, it turns out there is solid physics, which will allow us to build a special machine on the surface of this wall, the device - what will happen
1) to catch the photons incident on the walls that are about to create eddy currents on the free electrons in the wall.
2) magically slow down / accelerate (freeze) these electrons and create a time delay (I don’t know why and maybe come up with something else.
3) to hold in a temporary trap a portion of photons that has already come to the wall, and a portion of photons that already wants to bounce off the wall.
4) the goal is to catch a few photons and increase the EM field strength at the wall boundary several times.
5) I don’t know how, maybe just in a thin layer of the cavity wall to take and slow down the speed of light. I immediately remembered that F = 2P/c , and said - I found an algorithm on how to increase the pressure on the wall on one wall of the resonator, without spending additional energy from the side of the RF source, without violating the conservation of momentum. All you need to catch and hold the photons for a split second by changing the group velocity in the "thin layer".
The magic device (could just be a dielectric material with an extreme dielectric constant) in this case is attached to the wall and absorbs momentum from the photons as soon as it "stops" them. There are different ways to add up the momentum between the fields that are from photons, and the fields that are from the charged particles in the mirror interfering with the photon motion, as well as the momentum of the particles themselves, however any correct result still conserves momentum (remember that has been proven for the general case.) That means you can simply consider the photons as part of the wall until they get reflected and are freely emitted. This in no way increases the force on the wall. Concentrating energy towards one end of the cavity is a situation that I already explained why it is useless, please don't waste my time by making me explain it again for your newest minor variation.What does it all mean. Let's divide the general task into two parts. Part 1 - learn how to create increased radiation pressure on the cavity walls. Learning to create on the same walls, in a symmetric resonator, is just a different pressure. I even once drew a photon rocket project where there is a trap for photons. (See picture 1)
Total internal reflection does not work in the manner depicted in that picture, but ignoring that and assuming you made something where photons followed a similar path to what you drew, there is a bigger problem.
Your formula F=N*W/c is wrong in such an obvious way that it seems that you made no attempt to apply even the most basic critical thinking to what you wrote. At this point in the conversation, I find it rude that you keep wasting time without even trying to think about what you wrote. You are simply ignoring that half of the reflections are in one direction, and half are in the opposite direction, with the total being an odd number, so with one left over, you just get a simple photon rocket, no factor of N.Comment. In a simulation of an antenna with a dipole with two reflectors, I see that if the reflectors are very close to the antenna - that the antenna is "unlucky and unable" to emit EM waves in the far zone. It looks like a complete analog of the passing atom from the Nobel Prize.
The Nobel prize is about quantum mechanics, you refuse to acknowledge basic facts about electromagnetism and simple mechanics, please just drop the Nobel prize, even if there is an analogue there, it will not help your understanding and is a waste of time to discuss here.
This is the new physics section. If you are going to insist on assuming something that is straight wrong, you have given up on physics and logic, and are living in a magical fantasy land.There are situations where that is helpful, but not when you let it get to the point of 1+1=3, and the next step you need to do (which you should be able to do without bouncing every idea off me) is check if what you came up with makes any sense at all.
=====
I read 10 volumes of the most complete physics and 300 more speculative works in physics. I did not see in the textbooks a working idea for building a motor for a spaceship. Therefore, we should discuss as much as possible even the most stupid thoughts, even if 1 + 1 = 3.Let's discuss the first picture. Photons fly out of the waveguide and create reactive traction. I want (a silly thought) that this thing does not fly backwards (like a sail) but forward (with a mouthpiece forward). Like the Sun, it is such an optical tweezers that it attracts the solar sail, and does not repel it. Can you come up with this? if so, it will be very cool. It somehow can be connected with metamaterials, as the 1st option.
Assuming you mean the first picture of your previous post, then the answer is simply no, that would break conservation of momentum. If you wanted to use a solar sail to get to Mercury you could, but this would be related to sailing techniques of how to sail into the wind (taking zig zag angles) combined with orbital mechanics. The sail boat requires reaction from the water to make that work, a spacecraft would use the fact that for orbital mechanics, to lower your perigee, it is best to apply a force against the direction of orbital motion, rather than straight at where you want to go.And in the second picture - I added another knee, and I want this thing to be motionless or almost motionless (in zero gravity), that if it is like a sail, then this sail almost does not work. But reliably emits photons back to the Sun. (See picture 2)
No, it certainly does work, solar sails have been tested, and your new picture behaves just like one, minus the fact that it would be less mass efficient than a big flat mirror, and the waveguide pieces would induce a bit of loss. You changed the direction of momentum of the photons, so to conserve momentum, your device must take on the difference in momentum. -
#1602 by Alex_O on 04 Oct, 2019 16:45
-
Please excuse me. This was an old picture created to discuss the possibility of photon reflection without transmitting momentum from a photon to a reflective surface. The trajectories of photons are shown conditionally, the formula for calculating the force uses magic. I just forgot about it, and I apologize for offering this magic, I promised not to do it. This picture is like a flag on a hill (a flag that serves as a signal for the gathering place of soldiers before and during the battle). Of course, in known physics such an algorithm is not possible in principle. But I still like this picture. Since it inspires erosion in a wide range of new ideas. How to get no from 1 + 2 = 3, not a new physics. And how a star motor can work.What does it all mean. Let's divide the general task into two parts. Part 1 - learn how to create increased radiation pressure on the cavity walls. Learning to create on the same walls, in a symmetric resonator, is just a different pressure. I even once drew a photon rocket project where there is a trap for photons. (See picture 1)
Total internal reflection does not work in the manner depicted in that picture, but ignoring that and assuming you made something where photons followed a similar path to what you drew, there is a bigger problem.
Your formula F=N*W/c is wrong in such an obvious way that it seems that you made no attempt to apply even the most basic critical thinking to what you wrote. At this point in the conversation, I find it rude that you keep wasting time without even trying to think about what you wrote. You are simply ignoring that half of the reflections are in one direction, and half are in the opposite direction, with the total being an odd number, so with one left over, you just get a simple photon rocket, no factor of N.
Here is a small part of this thinking. I will just set an example, and this is a scientific method. The photon flew out of the photon rocket and .. flew away. He can no longer benefit people. If people come up with a way to bring the photon back, for energy recovery - it will be beautiful and elegant. (The term recuperation is widely used in technology, for example, for charging electric car batteries during braking, there is an example of an eDumper electric hauler with a lifting capacity of 121 tons, which you never need to charge ).
How to return a photon? very simple, you need to think about, for example, the 5th dimension of Kaluza (let me thank Dr. L. L. Williams for his excellent report EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION OF THE KALUZA THEORY OF GRAVITY AND ELECTROMAGNETISM at the 2016 BREAKTHROUGH PROPULSION WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS conference)
Or here's an even simpler way. Suppose any body exists in 4 or more dimensions. Suppose any body is presented in nature as a multidimensional quantity, and there are versions, copies, manifestations of the body in different dimensions. To rotate a photon 180 degrees in three dimensions of a photon rocket, you can try to use as a mirror that part of a multidimensional mirror (a copy of the mirror) that is available in another dimension. For example, a mirror can exist in the present tense, in the past tense and in the future. Please, this is a question about technology - to use the idea of pushing away from a mirror for a photon reversal, which is already in the past. Moreover, there is already evidence that in experiments with quantum mechanics they saw something that is very similar to the strange movement of a photon in time; (If it is convenient, I can simply show the original theoretical support at the concept level, but with falsification).
Thanks dear meberbs, I gathered a lot of ideas for conducting special simulations during our conversation, I now have to spend a lot of time building simulations. Accept my gratitude, our conversation was very useful. I would like to go into the world of the simulator, and return already with the results. Thank. -
#1603 by X_RaY on 08 Oct, 2019 19:20
-
#1604 by Bob012345 on 09 Oct, 2019 17:15
-
Shawyer has a new abstract which seems to have some interesting information.
http://www.emdrive.com/IAC2019Abstract.pdf
-
#1605 by SeeShells on 11 Oct, 2019 16:26
-
Something like Woodward and his team envisions but with a little twist.Quote
Burns, David (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, United States)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190029657
Abstract: A new concept for in-space propulsion is proposed in which propellant is not ejected from the engine, but instead is captured to create a nearly infinite specific impulse. The engine accelerates ions confined in a loop to moderate relativistic speeds, and then varies their velocity to make slight changes to their mass. The engine then moves ions back and forth along the direction of travel to produce thrust. This in-space engine could be used for long-term satellite station-keeping without refueling. It could also propel spacecraft across interstellar distances, reaching close to the speed of light. The engine has no moving parts other than ions traveling in a vacuum line, trapped inside electric and magnetic fields.
Publication Date: August 19, 2019
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20190029657.pdf
Shell
-
#1606 by Bob012345 on 11 Oct, 2019 16:51
-
Something like Woodward and his team envisions but with a little twist.
QuoteBurns, David (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, United States)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190029657
Abstract: A new concept for in-space propulsion is proposed in which propellant is not ejected from the engine, but instead is captured to create a nearly infinite specific impulse. The engine accelerates ions confined in a loop to moderate relativistic speeds, and then varies their velocity to make slight changes to their mass. The engine then moves ions back and forth along the direction of travel to produce thrust. This in-space engine could be used for long-term satellite station-keeping without refueling. It could also propel spacecraft across interstellar distances, reaching close to the speed of light. The engine has no moving parts other than ions traveling in a vacuum line, trapped inside electric and magnetic fields.
Publication Date: August 19, 2019
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20190029657.pdf
Shell
Thanks. As they say hope springs eternal but I have to say not very much hope in this case.... -
#1607 by demofsky on 12 Oct, 2019 06:33
-
Something like Woodward and his team envisions but with a little twist.
QuoteBurns, David (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL, United States)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190029657
Abstract: A new concept for in-space propulsion is proposed in which propellant is not ejected from the engine, but instead is captured to create a nearly infinite specific impulse. The engine accelerates ions confined in a loop to moderate relativistic speeds, and then varies their velocity to make slight changes to their mass. The engine then moves ions back and forth along the direction of travel to produce thrust. This in-space engine could be used for long-term satellite station-keeping without refueling. It could also propel spacecraft across interstellar distances, reaching close to the speed of light. The engine has no moving parts other than ions traveling in a vacuum line, trapped inside electric and magnetic fields.
Publication Date: August 19, 2019
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20190029657.pdf
Shell
Thanks. As they say hope springs eternal but I have to say not very much hope in this case....
FWIW I see this approach as being more tuneable than a stack of piezoelectric materials. VERY early days for this though. -
#1608 by TheTraveller on 12 Oct, 2019 06:53
-
Please consider that in the public arena no one has built, excited and tested an EmDrive as per Roger's detailed information.
EVERY build was a GUESS at how to build, excite and test an EmDrive.
That situation has now changed.
Roger has released very detailed information on how to build, excite and test a Flight Thruster.
http://www.emdrive.com/flighthrusterreportissue2.pdf
Plus now Roger has detailed a simple to build Balance Beam test rig which he 1st mentioned in his Shrivenham paper and he references in his IAC abstract.
http://www.emdrive.com/IAC2019Abstract.pdf
http://www.emdrive.com/shrivenhampresentation2019.pdf
My verification plans are moving forward.
I'm working with Yonlit to supply the Rf amp.
1 x 150W 3.5-3.6GHz Rf amp with both DB9 RS485 comms, they supply PC software to control the apm, and DB15 with direct controls. The DB15 is needed for pulse width & reputation rate control.
https://www.yonlit.com/productinfo/290920.html
2 x 100W thermal heat sinks with dual fans.
https://www.yonlit.com/newsinfo/269749.html
1 x Suitable 110/240 50/60Hz power supply.
Similar to those used in their dual amp 19" rack mount.
https://www.yonlit.com/productinfo/334721.html
To be clear I'm not ordering the dual amp 19" rack mount.
Just asked them to supply a suitable PSU for the 150W amp.
Test rig is designed to be KISS, yet follow Roger's balance beam build.
So guys please throw stones at the KISS test rig as to how false positives can be generated.
Not nice to hold back now and do it after the test data is released.
Yes testing will be done with the EmDrive in both small end Up & Down positions.
And YES the Rf amp's position will be adjusted so it's N type is in line with the thrusters N type.
Remember we are talking 50mN / 5g of thrust, not 100uN / 0.01g.
BTW thruster resonance freq tracking is done via a PC program I wrote.
The Rf amp has inbuilt forward & reflected power detection plus RS485 comms to get that data back to the laptop.
Additionally the freq generator can be controlled from the PC in +- 1kHz steps.
As the Rf amp has a 31dBm attenuator in +- 1dBm steps, fairly simple to do initial resonance freq adjustment at say 1W and then ramp up the power, while ensuring resonance lock is maintained.
This eliminates the need for a circulator and the added losses.
Plus the RF amp can handle a VSWR <= 3:1, after which it self protects & shuts down.
Same effect for thermal overload, self protects itself.
Nice amp.
-
#1609 by Star One on 12 Oct, 2019 15:29
-
I’ve created a separate thread for this.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=49246.msg2003947#msg2003947 -
#1610 by Vlad Kri on 12 Oct, 2019 15:43
-
GRAVITSUP
Design and operation features of the engine of unsupported movement of the "gravitsup" class design.
Free access. It can not be patented and is the property of mankind.
Hello, friends.
I am an independent researcher and I want to share with you the results of my work.
Having built dozens of laboratory facilities and conducted hundreds of experiments, I got confirmation of my theory.
https://www.youtube.com/user/KrivirotkoVV
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/1
And today I will introduce you to the basic principles of designing an unsupported motion engine using electromagnetic waves in a closed cavity.
1. Mandatory elements of GRAVITSUP is the receiver of electromagnetic waves and an additional screen adjacent to one of its sides. (picture 1)
2. The shape of the receiver should provide the maximum possible total energy of electromagnetic waves, at a minimum distance from the screen. (picture 2)
3. All other structural elements of the GRAVITSUP and the mechanism to which it belongs may affect its operation. To reduce the negative impact, they should either be hidden from the receiver behind the screen, or taken to the maximum possible distance from the receiver, or balanced by other elements relative to the receiver. (picture 3)
4. The thrust in the GRAVITSUP is directed from the screen towards the receiver, increasing with increasing amount of electromagnetic radiation in the receiver.
5. GRAVITSUP and does not consume energy to create traction. Energy is consumed for the initial filling of the receiver and to compensate for losses during reflections.
Explanations and illustrations.
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/?photo=151
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/?photo=152
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/?photo=153
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/?photo=154
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/?photo=155
https://gravitsup.ucoz.net/photo/?photo=156
About EM Driver:
EM Driver cannot be made to work. That scanty thrust, which find out by highly sensitive devices, is the maximum that you can get from such a design. The cause of thrust in EM Driver is the difference in disk area on the wide and narrow sides of the cone. On both discs there is a thrust directed inside the receiver. And the large disk pulls harder (picture 4). But this difference is so small that the EM Driver design does not make sense to use for traction. EM Driver is just a laboratory device that shows the possibility of using electromagnetic waves to obtain an unsupported pulse.
If you want to convert your EM Driver into GRAVITSUP, cover the wide disk with a lead screen (picture 5). To increase power, reduce the height of the receiver.
The influence of foreign objects is clearly visible in the experiments of Martin Tajmar, Dresden University of Technology. The steel plate, which is part of the balance, affects the operation of the laboratory sample (picture 6 and 7). You can check. If this plate is made of porous plastic, then the results will change radically. Thrust => 0
-
#1611 by meberbs on 12 Oct, 2019 18:16
-
GRAVITSUP
You have not actually provided any "theory" that I can find, certainly nothing in your post other than an apparent claim that lead is magical and defies momentum conservation if added to one end of an emDrive.
Design and operation features of the engine of unsupported movement of the "gravitsup" class design.
Free access. It can not be patented and is the property of mankind.
Hello, friends.
I am an independent researcher and I want to share with you the results of my work.
Having built dozens of laboratory facilities and conducted hundreds of experiments, I got confirmation of my theory.
Your videos show lots of wires that can result in false positive signals from interaction with magnetic fields.EM Driver cannot be made to work. That scanty thrust, which find out by highly sensitive devices, is the maximum that you can get from such a design. The cause of thrust in EM Driver is the difference in disk area on the wide and narrow sides of the cone. On both discs there is a thrust directed inside the receiver. And the large disk pulls harder (picture 4). But this difference is so small that the EM Driver design does not make sense to use for traction. EM Driver is just a laboratory device that shows the possibility of using electromagnetic waves to obtain an unsupported pulse.
Your first sentence here is correct, but towards the end you make the mistaken assumption that the emDrive demonstrates any useful force at all. This has not been shown by experiments, and there is no consistent theory that expects any force to be produced by the emDrive. (You, like Shawyer, ignore the sidewalls) -
#1612 by Vlad Kri on 12 Oct, 2019 19:16
-
I was not going to provide any theory.These are rules that anyone can verify and only after verification can we talk about theory.And Yes, of course I see a lot of false signals in my laboratory research.I have learned to distinguish false positives from true results.I am grateful to you for the attention you have given me.But to continue the conversation does not make sense until other researchers confirm the correctness of my rules.All the best to you And thank you for your time.
-
#1613 by meberbs on 12 Oct, 2019 20:41
-
I was not going to provide any theory.
What most people hear when you say this is that there actually isn't any theory, because you have no reason to hide the theory especially after statements like "Free access. It can not be patented and is the property of mankind.."These are rules that anyone can verify and only after verification can we talk about theory.
This is backwards, you can't verify a theory when you don't know what it is.And Yes, of course I see a lot of false signals in my laboratory research.I have learned to distinguish false positives from true results.
That is not how it works, you don't magically "distinguish" them, many are indistinguishable unless you understand exactly what they are and eliminate them. You do not appear to have done this.I am grateful to you for the attention you have given me.But to continue the conversation does not make sense until other researchers confirm the correctness of my rules.All the best to you And thank you for your time.
In that case there is no conversation to have because there is nothing to confirm the correctness of, you have provided no theory to confirm and the "rules" you listed (#1-5 in your first post) are either too qualitative to mean anything (emDrive experiments already have used high Q cavities, but they don't work) or they are meaningless unverifiable statements about a magic "screen." None of them are verifiable due to either vagueness or the lack of numbers. Either you need to provide an actual theory or you are just wasting time. -
#1614 by Vlad Kri on 12 Oct, 2019 23:12
-
My photos and videos are no worse than from Roger.
We can talk about theory only when they listen to us, and not invent objections. Therefore, when everyone is tired of dancing with a tambourine around the wastebasket Someone will build GRAVITSUP. And then we continue the conversation. -
#1615 by meberbs on 13 Oct, 2019 00:46
-
My photos and videos are no worse than from Roger.
No worse than useless is not a helpful statement. Shawyer is an example of how not do do science.We can talk about theory only when they listen to us, and not invent objections. Therefore, when everyone is tired of dancing with a tambourine around the wastebasket Someone will build GRAVITSUP. And then we continue the conversation.
No one can listen because you are refusing to talk, and if you refuse to listen to any objections, then your complaint here would be hypocritical. -
#1616 by Mark7777777 on 13 Oct, 2019 02:24
-
GRAVITSUP
Design and operation features of the engine of unsupported movement of the "gravitsup" class design.
[snip]
1. What was the maximum amount if thrust you recorded?
2. Do you think you could add voice-over voice narration to your YouTube videos so people can hear from you about what you showing?
-
#1617 by Vlad Kri on 13 Oct, 2019 03:05
-
In the best experiments without interference, the angle of rotation of the torsion balance is 2-3 degrees for GRAVITSUP 2-6 small volume series . And the rotation angle for the large GRAVITSUP series 1.2 is 5-7 degrees. False signals were recorded on video with more powerfu. Part of the magnetic fields part of the thermal expansion.GRAVITSUP
Design and operation features of the engine of unsupported movement of the "gravitsup" class design.
[snip]
1. What was the maximum amount if thrust you recorded?
2. Do you think you could add voice-over voice narration to your YouTube videos so people can hear from you about what you showing?
And also the video on which there are measurements on the scales also captures false signals. False waveform videos have also been added for the experiment archive . -
#1618 by Vlad Kri on 13 Oct, 2019 03:10
-
If I resume experiments in the spring, I will record a video with comments.
-
#1619 by Monomorphic on 13 Oct, 2019 15:01
-
If I resume experiments in the spring, I will record a video with comments.
There are a few issues with the design of the test rig that I can see.
First, you are not using liquid metal contacts for main power. This is a big no no as flexing and twisting of the wires can cause a false positive. It also looks like you may not have twisted all of your pairs. This can lead to lorenzt forces on the wires.
You are also using a bare magnetron with heat sink interacting with the air. Best to cover the heat sink, but then you will have overheating problems.
Have you confirmed resonance inside the cavity with an infrared camera?
and maybe come up with something else.