Monomorphic - I recall you being negative about these results, ascribing the measured force to thermal effects. But the thermal signal is present and rising when the force measurement is solidly zero. The temperature is also stable when measured force is rising.Am I mis-characterising your position, or if not can you comment on why you see thermal effects as the most likely explanation of this data.

Quote from: Ricvil on 07/12/2018 01:15 amPs: The Tx3xx "mode" is suspect in this theory.In addition to Tx3xx, perhaps TM11x could also be a candidate. Using the same naming convention, I would expect TM11x could have been labelled Tx11x.

Ps: The Tx3xx "mode" is suspect in this theory.

Quote from: Monomorphic on 07/13/2018 11:36 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 07/12/2018 01:15 amPs: The Tx3xx "mode" is suspect in this theory.In addition to Tx3xx, perhaps TM11x could also be a candidate. Using the same naming convention, I would expect TM11x could have been labelled Tx11x.Yep.But in "Tx3xx" case, TM and TE visual distinction is much more clear.Perhaps, this clear "visual distinction" may be an artifice.These graphs are eigensolutions of electromagnetic equations, and if there are two eigenmodes per frequency ( degenerated) then that eigensolutions may be a linear combination of TE and TM localized modes , with arbitrary weights(or arbitrary orientation on subspace spanned by the degenerated eigenvectors).When degenerated states arises in a eigenproblem, in general, there is a additional linear operator where the degenerated states has different eigenvalues for each eigenvector.So, what would be the operator for differentiate TE states from TM states?The answer may be a "duality/chirality" generator in some spinnor representation of electromagnetic fields (see the attached article).

Quote from: Ricvil on 08/06/2018 03:26 amQuote from: Monomorphic on 07/13/2018 11:36 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 07/12/2018 01:15 amPs: The Tx3xx "mode" is suspect in this theory.In addition to Tx3xx, perhaps TM11x could also be a candidate. Using the same naming convention, I would expect TM11x could have been labelled Tx11x.Yep.But in "Tx3xx" case, TM and TE visual distinction is much more clear.Perhaps, this clear "visual distinction" may be an artifice.These graphs are eigensolutions of electromagnetic equations, and if there are two eigenmodes per frequency ( degenerated) then that eigensolutions may be a linear combination of TE and TM localized modes , with arbitrary weights(or arbitrary orientation on subspace spanned by the degenerated eigenvectors).When degenerated states arises in a eigenproblem, in general, there is a additional linear operator where the degenerated states has different eigenvalues for each eigenvector.So, what would be the operator for differentiate TE states from TM states?The answer may be a "duality/chirality" generator in some spinnor representation of electromagnetic fields (see the attached article).This is not a classic degenerated state of two field patterns with their own solutions at the same frequency. These are patterns that are only present in the frustum of the cone due to the topology. The pattern on the end plate of a cylindrical version is located on the side wall of the conical shape.

Quote from: X_RaY on 08/06/2018 07:37 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 08/06/2018 03:26 amQuote from: Monomorphic on 07/13/2018 11:36 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 07/12/2018 01:15 amPs: The Tx3xx "mode" is suspect in this theory.In addition to Tx3xx, perhaps TM11x could also be a candidate. Using the same naming convention, I would expect TM11x could have been labelled Tx11x.Yep.But in "Tx3xx" case, TM and TE visual distinction is much more clear.Perhaps, this clear "visual distinction" may be an artifice.These graphs are eigensolutions of electromagnetic equations, and if there are two eigenmodes per frequency ( degenerated) then that eigensolutions may be a linear combination of TE and TM localized modes , with arbitrary weights(or arbitrary orientation on subspace spanned by the degenerated eigenvectors).When degenerated states arises in a eigenproblem, in general, there is a additional linear operator where the degenerated states has different eigenvalues for each eigenvector.So, what would be the operator for differentiate TE states from TM states?The answer may be a "duality/chirality" generator in some spinnor representation of electromagnetic fields (see the attached article).This is not a classic degenerated state of two field patterns with their own solutions at the same frequency. These are patterns that are only present in the frustum of the cone due to the topology. The pattern on the end plate of a cylindrical version is located on the side wall of the conical shape.Yep, this is not the classic.My claim is: these are two degenerated modes (same frequency) localized at two different points(each one at neighborhood of each flat endplate).I think they are two ghost modes, one TE and other TM.

Quote from: Ricvil on 08/06/2018 08:50 pmQuote from: X_RaY on 08/06/2018 07:37 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 08/06/2018 03:26 amQuote from: Monomorphic on 07/13/2018 11:36 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 07/12/2018 01:15 amPs: The Tx3xx "mode" is suspect in this theory.In addition to Tx3xx, perhaps TM11x could also be a candidate. Using the same naming convention, I would expect TM11x could have been labelled Tx11x.Yep.But in "Tx3xx" case, TM and TE visual distinction is much more clear.Perhaps, this clear "visual distinction" may be an artifice.These graphs are eigensolutions of electromagnetic equations, and if there are two eigenmodes per frequency ( degenerated) then that eigensolutions may be a linear combination of TE and TM localized modes , with arbitrary weights(or arbitrary orientation on subspace spanned by the degenerated eigenvectors).When degenerated states arises in a eigenproblem, in general, there is a additional linear operator where the degenerated states has different eigenvalues for each eigenvector.So, what would be the operator for differentiate TE states from TM states?The answer may be a "duality/chirality" generator in some spinnor representation of electromagnetic fields (see the attached article).This is not a classic degenerated state of two field patterns with their own solutions at the same frequency. These are patterns that are only present in the frustum of the cone due to the topology. The pattern on the end plate of a cylindrical version is located on the side wall of the conical shape.Yep, this is not the classic.My claim is: these are two degenerated modes (same frequency) localized at two different points(each one at neighborhood of each flat endplate).I think they are two ghost modes, one TE and other TM.Not at all. Maybe we're just looking at the problem from different angles, but two different modes, TM & TE, would change their eigenfrequencies differently, while reducing the small end plate. I.E. the eigenfrequencies of different modes (one TE and another TM) would shift to different values when reducing the diameter of the small end plate, even if they lay at the same frequency for a special shape. Regarding the simulations is this not the case.To me it seems a pure geometrical property, a deformation of the field due to the very shape (and related to the boundary conditions) of the frustum as compared to the cylindrical cavity.

Quote from: flux_capacitor on 07/31/2018 03:38 pmThe Traveller,According to the two previous pages, it seems that:1) you still base your understanding of the propellantless propulsion effect of the EmDrive in the same origin as Shawyer's, i.e. the existence of a force resulting from a non-zero sum of all radiation pressures upon materials within the cavity.but:2) you however now refute Shawyer's claim that the radiation pressure is greater at the big end, saying it would be the opposite: that the radiation pressures on side walls + small end combined are greater than the radiation pressure on the wide end, resulting in the EmDrive being pushed by this forward radiation pressure, small end leading. So no more invisible "thrust force" directed in the opposite, rear direction without matter ejected, that Shawyer yet introduced to try to mimic his system with classical Newtonian action-reaction.You argue based on the momentum exchange with all walls and the photon incident angle varying across the tapered section.Shawyer bases his "EmDrive theory" on Cullen's experiments and his 1952 paper, extrapolating measurement made with open cylindrical waveguides to tapered closed cavities, since he assumes that a closed tapered cavity is the same as a series of many shallow cylindrical open waveguides of decreasing diameter connected the one after the others (from the point of view of travelling waves, hence a pulsed operation).Therefore Shawyer claims that the radiation pressure (and the group velocity) of microwaves is greater on the big end of the EmDrive than on the small end, which seems sound, but doing so he may neglect the wall component, which should add and sum up to zero (he claims this zero sum is indeed the case for a standing wave, but not for travelling waves).Cullen showed (eq. 15 in his paper) that: F = 2P/c ( λ / λ_{g} )Since λ < λ_{g} (always) and the smaller the waveguide diameter, the longer the guide wavelength λ_{g}, it is easy to show that the force due to the radiation pressure of microwaves at the same input power acting on a plate in a wider waveguide is greater than the force acting on a plate in a narrow waveguide.So do you now disagree with Cullen; or do you agree with him but saying instead that what is going on in open cylindrical waveguides cannot be extrapolated to closed tapered cavities?You should take the energy density per area into account. According to the work of Dr. Rodal we know that the field strength in the area of the smaller end plate is much larger than at the bigger plate. However, the total amount of incident power at the small end plate plus the equivalent vector component at conical sidewall should be the same per area unit squared, -F (small end plus sidewall vector component in this direction) +F (at the large plate), ...from a pure topological point of view.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=37642.0;attach=1030954However I think for traveling (reflected) waves there is a time related difference related to the reflection on both ends. I guess the reflection at the smaller side has a broad band characteristic compared to the big end. I.e. the wave is partly reflected before it reaches the small plate (partially earlier times). If the big end is flat there is also a phase dependent time dependent reflection involved. But for a proper curved big plate and a small end below cutoff the time difference of the reflected signal should be located at the small end. So maybe a time-delayed reflection of the incident wave at a undersized small end combined with a spherical big end plate leads to a nice net force because of the time delayed reflection at one end only?Just a thought.. It is hard to think about such problems while the room temperature is still way over 30°C/86°F

The Traveller,According to the two previous pages, it seems that:1) you still base your understanding of the propellantless propulsion effect of the EmDrive in the same origin as Shawyer's, i.e. the existence of a force resulting from a non-zero sum of all radiation pressures upon materials within the cavity.but:2) you however now refute Shawyer's claim that the radiation pressure is greater at the big end, saying it would be the opposite: that the radiation pressures on side walls + small end combined are greater than the radiation pressure on the wide end, resulting in the EmDrive being pushed by this forward radiation pressure, small end leading. So no more invisible "thrust force" directed in the opposite, rear direction without matter ejected, that Shawyer yet introduced to try to mimic his system with classical Newtonian action-reaction.You argue based on the momentum exchange with all walls and the photon incident angle varying across the tapered section.Shawyer bases his "EmDrive theory" on Cullen's experiments and his 1952 paper, extrapolating measurement made with open cylindrical waveguides to tapered closed cavities, since he assumes that a closed tapered cavity is the same as a series of many shallow cylindrical open waveguides of decreasing diameter connected the one after the others (from the point of view of travelling waves, hence a pulsed operation).Therefore Shawyer claims that the radiation pressure (and the group velocity) of microwaves is greater on the big end of the EmDrive than on the small end, which seems sound, but doing so he may neglect the wall component, which should add and sum up to zero (he claims this zero sum is indeed the case for a standing wave, but not for travelling waves).Cullen showed (eq. 15 in his paper) that: F = 2P/c ( λ / λ_{g} )Since λ < λ_{g} (always) and the smaller the waveguide diameter, the longer the guide wavelength λ_{g}, it is easy to show that the force due to the radiation pressure of microwaves at the same input power acting on a plate in a wider waveguide is greater than the force acting on a plate in a narrow waveguide.So do you now disagree with Cullen; or do you agree with him but saying instead that what is going on in open cylindrical waveguides cannot be extrapolated to closed tapered cavities?

It was a time domain simulation?

Quote from: Ricvil on 08/09/2018 08:15 pmIt was a time domain simulation?No this is not a finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) analyses, it is a simulation based on boundary-element-method (BEM) using FEKO-software.

开放式半环耦合不是最佳，采用短路闭环耦合更好，Q值超过50000

Quote from: X_RaY on 08/10/2018 03:30 pmQuote from: Ricvil on 08/09/2018 08:15 pmIt was a time domain simulation?No this is not a finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) analyses, it is a simulation based on boundary-element-method (BEM) using FEKO-software.The big plate was spherical or flat in that simulation? That chaotic poynting vector over a full cycle was a simulation transient, or that persist over a long range of time?