-
#440
by
rfmwguy
on 04 Mar, 2021 19:54
-
Yeah musta ruffled some feathers. Thats the way it always was about that concept. Usually someone has courage enough to explain deletion...politics...haha
-
#441
by
rfmwguy
on 05 Mar, 2021 00:13
-
This was an excellent summary John, thanks. They've always been touchy about criticism. Apparently mega supporters convinced nasa to get 2 levels of naic testing. Lots of resources spent on what has been a 30 year pet project...longer than emdrive.
Too bad, always felt em was the key since I look at space as a medium filled with photons of one sort or another. Interacting with them is the key IMO, not using an electromechanical vibrator.
Too bad independent emdrive testing stopped to chase a less likely alternative.
Rfmwguy just had his post deleted mere minutes ago:
From that PDF, the Executive Summary:
All they did in the ES is talk about the materials they used in different designs, and a "number of tests to determine which design was better for force generation". Who knew aluminum and other stuff could create propellantless thrust with not even a hat tip to the geometry of those materials, or a summary of the principles involved.
"We may not yet have a space-ready device, but we are close to one."
The Introduction promises the kraken:
"The goal is demonstration of a propulsion system that, when scaled, is capable of supporting missions to the stars with travel times that are some reasonable fraction of a human lifetime."
They remind us that "accelerations that appear as the result of observer acceleration are not proper accelerations", in case we move away from the apparatus and are confused about whether or not the apparatus is itself moving.
They mention several of their collaborators and their various activities, some of which include modeling the behavior of the device.
They go on to touch on "spectator matter"; Brans’ spectator matter argument notes that .. it is possible to determine whether you are in a lab on the surface of the Earth, or in a rocket ship accelerating at one “gee” in deep outer space simply by checking the charge to mass ratios of elementary particles in your lab." This bit reminded me of my all too short discussion with the dearly departed meberbs about differentiating these conditions and the pertinence of violating the Equivalence Principle.
They mention Rodal's work which appears to suggest that the device might have a detectable effect in the vicinity of black holes. They do not mention the number of orders of magnitude difference between "elementary particles in your lab" and black holes.
While the "issue of whether inertia is a gravitational effect in general relativity is one of non-negligible contention", they do not mention the "negligible" thrust achieved by their device. But hey. "It looks to be a work in progress for at least several more months. Perhaps more."
"Mach effect impulse engines, however, do not violate the Equivalence Principle. Even with your impulse engine running, you still have to go look out a window to tell where you are." Certainly engines which do not exist do not violate physics. One is left to wonder how confident they are in the accuracy of their observations of "elementary particles in your lab" that they had previously held out to negate the need to "go look out a window". That was up to page eleven.
"Then there was the virus." But of course.
I skipped to Page 143, where they swiped my Acronym! MAGA.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=48855.msg2007727#msg2007727
I prefer to call it the MAch Gravitational Anomaly [MAGA] effect
-
#442
by
D_Dom
on 05 Mar, 2021 16:25
-
...
-
#443
by
Monomorphic
on 18 Mar, 2021 15:14
-
-
#444
by
edzieba
on 19 Mar, 2021 10:02
-
And more tellingly:
Our data limits any anomalous thrust to below the force equivalent from classical radiation for a given amount of power.
Or in other words: even
if the EM Drive is later proven to work at very low thrust levels, a photon rocket will always be a better option.
-
#445
by
Iggyz
on 21 Mar, 2021 10:45
-
And more tellingly:
Our data limits any anomalous thrust to below the force equivalent from classical radiation for a given amount of power.
Or in other words: even if the EM Drive is later proven to work at very low thrust levels, a photon rocket will always be a better option.
You are missing the point and comparing apples and oranges (propellant-less vs. propellant). If the EmDrive is proven to work, two fundamental laws of physics are at least slightly wrong. This alone will reset the minds of millions of scientists, engineers and even artists, politicians and business people. Its impact will be huge.
-
#446
by
RonM
on 21 Mar, 2021 14:03
-
And more tellingly:
Our data limits any anomalous thrust to below the force equivalent from classical radiation for a given amount of power.
Or in other words: even if the EM Drive is later proven to work at very low thrust levels, a photon rocket will always be a better option.
You are missing the point and comparing apples and oranges (propellant-less vs. propellant). If the EmDrive is proven to work, two fundamental laws of physics are at least slightly wrong. This alone will reset the minds of millions of scientists, engineers and even artists, politicians and business people. Its impact will be huge.
Moving the goal posts doesn't help. Roger Shawyer did experiments that showed thrust orders of magnitude higher than what has been falsified by the TU Dresden experiments. That proves Shawyer's results were experimental error. The EM drive doesn't work.
-
#447
by
Alex_O
on 23 Mar, 2021 21:03
-
Newest Emdrive test results from TU Dresden. Results were negative.
"This provides strong limits to all proposed theories and rules out previous test results by more than three orders of magnitude."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350108418_High-Accuracy_Thrust_Measurements_of_the_EMDrive_and_Elimination_of_False-Positive_Effects
Excellent work of the Dresden team, which convincingly confirms that a simple microwave resonator, where standing EM waves are created, will not work. Like an ordinary car that travels along the road due to the exchange of momentum with the planet, Emdrive must learn to exchange momentum with the universe.
The photonic rocket does this, but Emdrive can do it Q times better by increasing the energy density in the local (near) zone. As a result, the task is reduced to finding a suitable physical effect, which will allow cavities with a high energy density to simply radiate an impulse towards the universe.
It seems to me that people should focus their efforts in finding a recipe that will improve the physics of impulse transmission from the inner system of the spacecraft - to the outer, to the universe.
-
#448
by
Peon
on 24 Mar, 2021 18:31
-
-
#449
by
Bob Woods
on 26 Mar, 2021 15:30
-
I’m no scientist, but doesn’t the Navy’s “UFO patent” look like an Em Drive?
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10144532B2/en
It's an
attempt at an EM drive. Patents are filed to protect potential intellectual property rights. Navy's been working on it for years which was all discussed in prior threads.
We'd all love for a drive to be proven, that's why we come here. But we don't believe in fairies, only science.
-
#450
by
TheTraveller
on 31 Mar, 2021 15:44
-
Hi Phil
I am giving a talk to APEC on 3rd April at 12:00 US PT. Registration for the conference is free at
www.altpropulsion.com. Will cover Theory, Engineering, Applications of EmDrive & why Dresden & Toulouse will never measure thrust with their NASA type cavities.
Roger
-
#451
by
TheTraveller
on 01 Apr, 2021 05:13
-
Enjoy
Roger will present from 12 to 2 which includes a question & answer session.
So guys here is your chance to directly ask Roger questions
-
#452
by
TheTraveller
on 01 Apr, 2021 12:46
-
So who here will be attending and asking Roger questions?
-
#453
by
francesco nicoli
on 01 Apr, 2021 13:17
-
It's over, TT, no offense, but the latest results are clear. Let's stop wasting everyone's time, shall we?
-
#454
by
dchill
on 01 Apr, 2021 14:12
-
As a lay person/observer I've always felt there must be a connection between the few observed EM Drive "successes" and either dark matter or dark energy. Is it possible that this recent paper out of the University of Copenhagen might be a clue to such a connection? It describes a model that has dark matter exerting a force that could explain the expansion rate of the universe previously accounted for by models relying on dark energy:
"Specifically, this model has no cosmological constant, instead the dark matter particles have an extra force proportional to velocity squared, somewhat reminiscent of the magnetic force in electrodynamics."
Summary:
https://www.science.ku.dk/english/press/news/2021/new-study-sews-doubt-about-the-composition-of-70-percent-of-our-universe/ Paper:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.07792.pdfI apologize if this has already been discussed, since I'm only a periodic visitor to this topic's forum.
It seems like if this model or its derivatives might provide some clues how to "tune" an EM drive experiment some day.
Just my 2 cents...
-
#455
by
TheTraveller
on 01 Apr, 2021 14:28
-
It's over, TT, no offense, but the latest results are clear. Let's stop wasting everyone's time, shall we?
So you have no interest in listening to Roger as he explains why Tajmar, NASA & others got it so wrong? Roger did offer to help Dr. White but that offer was turned down.
Likewise he visited Tajmar & team, trying to explain why they were having issues measuring thrust. Seem they also felt he had nothing to offer.
Strange that when the inventor offers to help others to measure thrust, they turn down his offer?
Now Roger is doing a public presentation, where those that doubt him can ask questions & you say why bother as the jury is in?
-
#456
by
Bob Woods
on 01 Apr, 2021 15:28
-
If Roger's drive worked, he'd have enough money by now to buy Amazon.com.
-
#457
by
Rondaz
on 01 Apr, 2021 17:23
-
-
#458
by
Frogstar_Robot
on 01 Apr, 2021 17:56
-
The way I see it is that it is another win for science. The fact we have robust theories of the universe that can handle any manner of "edge cases" is a huge benefit. In theory, it means we don't have to waste time investigating things that are never going to work. Unfortunately, not everyone gets the memo.
-
#459
by
darkenfast
on 01 Apr, 2021 19:49
-
It's over, TT, no offense, but the latest results are clear. Let's stop wasting everyone's time, shall we?
So you have no interest in listening to Roger as he explains why Tajmar, NASA & others got it so wrong? Roger did offer to help Dr. White but that offer was turned down.
Likewise he visited Tajmar & team, trying to explain why they were having issues measuring thrust. Seem they also felt he had nothing to offer.
Strange that when the inventor offers to help others to measure thrust, they turn down his offer?
Now Roger is doing a public presentation, where those that doubt him can ask questions & you say why bother as the jury is in?
The EM-drive saga is now in the category of "Hollow-Earth" theories. We don't keep having to prove, yet again, that the Earth is not hollow, with a miniature sun in the center. All this is now is someone trying to prop up their career after years of claims that cannot be demonstrated scientifically.
Give it up.