Author Topic: EM Drive Developments - related to space flight applications - Thread 12  (Read 233596 times)

Offline Alex_O

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Russia
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 33
So who here will be attending and asking Roger questions?

I will be here. I have a question, but I know the answer. Check it out?

The question is - here is the ideal microwave resonator. It is ideally connected to the ideal microwave source. He stands on ideal scales, and there are no experimental errors. And this perfectly built emdrive - it can't create the thrust of an emdrive rocket.

In order for emdrive to create rocket thrust, you need to make an additional correct setting. Such a setting is not found in the experiments of TU Dresden and others.

The principle behind this design can be different, but there is a common part. The energy of a high-quality resonator must be used to exchange momentum with the universe.


Offline Alex_O

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Russia
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 33
So who here will be attending and asking Roger questions?
I send to Tim, but  error

Quote
Tim, take my question to Roger, I don't speak English, sorry.
The question of energy balance.

Example:
1. There is a microwave generator with a power of 100 kW
2. There is an emdrive with a thrust of 1500 N / kW.
3. All iron weighs only 10 tons.
4. The iron will fly upward with an acceleration of 5 m / s.

What kind of acceleration graph? Is it a constant? Is this a straight line? Or is it complicated physics?

Question 2 - how many liters per minute are consumed by LH2 for cooling emdrive with a thrust of 1500N / kW? for 1 kW?

Tim didn't relay my question, Phil can you ask?

This is a test for truth or deception.

If the emdrive is working - that is, the exact value of the cooling mode, the temperature difference at the inlet and outlet, which depends on the consumption of the microwave energy by the emdrive.

In short, the LH2 consumption is the most accurate proof of whether the drive is working or not. I can explain better.
« Last Edit: 04/03/2021 09:59 pm by Alex_O »

Offline flux_capacitor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 708
  • France
  • Liked: 860
  • Likes Given: 1076
I think too that the EmDrive case may be definitely closed for all independent labs now. But for those who are still interested by what Shawyer said at the APEC conference, here are the two videos. Part 2 is Q&A session.

Interesting enough, Shawyer said that resonant cavities which have perfectly flat end plates and use a standing wave CANNOT produce any thrust because the forces on the end plates cancel out with the forces on the wall, something that has been repeated many times here on these forums.

Besides this information, always those slides with the same presentation over and over again about "2nd and 3rd gen" advanced aerial vehicles and space platforms despite no EmDrive has ever been shown to hover or produce any actual thrust besides parasitic effects. Moreover, still no experimental results of superconducting EmDrives after all these years, including the joint-venture with Gilo Industries. Very disappointing in the end. But what did we expect?



« Last Edit: 04/06/2021 01:12 pm by flux_capacitor »

Offline flux_capacitor

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 708
  • France
  • Liked: 860
  • Likes Given: 1076
A note on "standing waves" inside resonant cavities in the context of the EmDrive:

Larry Reed, who gathered all literature available about R. C. Jennison's experiments about inertia (and the effects of de Broglie matter waves) into the big book Quantum Wave Mechanics said similar things about the deleterious action of a standing wave naturally establishing inside resonant cavities:

"EmDrive experiments to date have erroneously attempted to use single frequency excitation which only serves to generate a standing wave which by definition end nodes do not move and, hence, no net thrust. Attempts to employ higher Q factor to create increased resonant force (i.e. pounding the resonator into submission) does not produce nodal dissonance to effect mass transport. Single frequency excitation of a resonator simply sets up an internal standing wave with negligible net thrust. Standing wave nodes stay put with no net mass transport regardless of resonant Q factor. Modulation of EM wave phase & frequency allows vast performance improvement."

As for Roger Shawyer, he claims that standing waves that pushes on the wall, established within flat-ended asymmetric cavities must be avoided in favor of pulsed transient propagating wavefronts in asymmetric cavities with shaped (domed) ends; while Reed claims that resonators using the effect of counter-propagating red- vs blue-shifted EM waves must rely on multiple EM generators providing different phase and frequencies for both directions to avoid any standing wave inside cavities that are not necessarily asymmetric (since in this case, the red- and blue-shifted waves are not induced by a changing waveguide diameter accros the resonator axis, but are directly produced by different EM emitters at both ends).

Offline Alex_O

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Russia
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 33
A note on "standing waves" inside resonant cavities in the context of the EmDrive:
To make a flight in space, emdrive must learn to exchange momentum with the universe. For example, the way a car does when the car drives on the surface of the planet. The car transmits an impulse to the external environment - to the planet. A car has a source of energy, an engine, a transmission and the main working body - a car wheel, right? Emdrive doesn't have these items, right?

I thought about wheels for emdrive, about a wheel that is made of matter  and that electromagnetic waves are also a kind of matter, right? A wheel made of electromagnetic waves does not differ in any way from a wheel of a car made of steel, the only difference is in the density of matter.

But a car wheel rotates slowly, and an electromagnetic wheel can rotate at the speed of light, right?

Then it was understood that the EMDrive design should create not only standing waves, but also the rotation of the electromagnetic wheel. Or caterpillars, if we see how the energy flows in the resonator begin to circulate somehow in a circle.

And curved end walls  will be useful for the correct circulation of energy flows in the emdrive resonator. I can explain more.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13254
  • UK
  • Liked: 3624
  • Likes Given: 220
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13254
  • UK
  • Liked: 3624
  • Likes Given: 220
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13254
  • UK
  • Liked: 3624
  • Likes Given: 220
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13254
  • UK
  • Liked: 3624
  • Likes Given: 220
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

Offline dchill

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Liked: 36
  • Likes Given: 1
I'm willing to be patient and take the long-term view that it's possible we're not at all understanding the mechanism at work.

Starting with this:
A note on "standing waves" inside resonant cavities in the context of the EmDrive:
... To make a flight in space, emdrive must learn to exchange momentum with the universe. ...

Let's pretend it's something along the lines of the Dark Matter recently theorized in this latest model:
... 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.pdf

If the pseudo-"magnetic force" is somehow dependent on the speed and direction of the dark matter, then they might be like waves in the ocean (but maybe more jumbled and multi-directional) and maybe an EM-drive is like trying to catch those waves with just the right paddling of your surf board.

If 10 blind surfers go out in the ocean and paddle around randomly on different "surf boards" designed with zero knowledge of what a wave might look like or what it is, and only two come back in and say they caught something that made them move forward, that still might be enough for me to believe there could be something called "waves".

I just hope all the free world funding for this doesn't get cut based on the latest blind surfer to step back on the beach, and then it's the Chinese that figure it out.

Offline sghill

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1661
  • United States
  • Liked: 2033
  • Likes Given: 3125
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

This is a historically and demonstrably false statement.
Anything the US- or any other military- is working on now was discussed in the open, researched in publicly accessible environments, and peer reviewed loooooooooooooooong before the technology becomes classified and goes dark.

Are there minor exceptions to this rule, of course! The difference between fundamental research and a field-deployable weapons system is vast.

But generally government R&D doesn't work like tv shows or spy movies.

But this statement is OT.
« Last Edit: 04/07/2021 01:18 pm by sghill »
Bring the thunder!

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13254
  • UK
  • Liked: 3624
  • Likes Given: 220
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

This is a historically and demonstrably false statement.
Anything the US- or any other military- is working on now was discussed in the open, researched in publicly accessible environments, and peer reviewed loooooooooooooooong before the technology becomes classified and goes dark.

Are there minor exceptions to this rule, of course! The difference between fundamental research and a field-deployable weapons system is vast.

But generally government R&D doesn't work like tv shows or spy movies.

But this statement is OT.
And nor is it accurate in any way. Though I do have to comment on your faith that everything is discussed in the open is frankly odd to say the least.

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 138
I'm willing to be patient and take the long-term view that it's possible we're not at all understanding the mechanism at work.

I think it is the other way round, Shawyer didn't stumble on a working mechanism which he subsequently sought to explain. He came up with a theory and then attempted to create a device to exploit. It seems though there is actually no working mechanism, so there's really nothing that needs explaining.
« Last Edit: 04/07/2021 03:02 pm by Frogstar_Robot »
Rule 1: Be civil. Respect other members.
Rule 3: No "King of the Internet" attitudes.

Offline Frogstar_Robot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 498
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 138
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.
I imagine the US military does have access to and or is working on more advanced technologies than are publicly known. Thankfully viable examples of such technologies will never be discussed on places like this for a good long time.

No, that is largely a popular myth, at least since the Second World War. On a recent military project, we were told our work was classified secret - even though the underlying algorithm was in the public domain, and the exact NATO specification is openly published and not classified.

Of course, the military does do blue sky thinking which is kept secret for obvious reasons. I am sure they would love to have a compact fusion reactor that could be deployed in the back of an army truck. That does not mean they are actually building the technology, or have access to prototypes.
Rule 1: Be civil. Respect other members.
Rule 3: No "King of the Internet" attitudes.

Offline TheTraveller

Roger makes comment on the Tajmar report.
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline TheTraveller

I'm willing to be patient and take the long-term view that it's possible we're not at all understanding the mechanism at work.

I think it is the other way round, Shawyer didn't stumble on a working mechanism which he subsequently sought to explain. He came up with a theory and then attempted to create a device to exploit. It seems though there is actually no working mechanism, so there's really nothing that needs explaining.

Roger observed an unexpected propulsion effect in a military satellite he was working on.
Developed a theory & a 1st swipe design.
Approached the company he was working with it.
Was told there was no budget to develop new propulsion systems for 10 years.
Resigned, took it home and built the "Experimental EmDrive" in his garage.
UK MOD came on board & funded the "Demonstrator EmDrive" plus a team to develop a theory.
« Last Edit: 04/07/2021 10:13 pm by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline TheTraveller

Roger makes comment on the Tajmar report.

Roger's comments about the lack of impedance matching, too high return loss, false high Q reporting & excited mode resulting in small end being in cutoff are correct & based on existing microwave engineering

In 2018 Roger visited Tajmar & team to help them get it right. This is the presentation he used.

http://www.emdrive.com/dresden2018.pdf

Roger uses the E sense port to attach to an MW power meter, carefully adjusts Freq & coupling match to obtain max stored energy. Then adjusts Freq up & down until measured stored energy falls to 50% of peak. This directly measures cavity energy bandwidth, calcs real Q & ensures the cavity is being properly excited & filled with energy before starting thrust measurements.

As far as I know, the Tajmar cavity didn't have an E sense port, so it seems none of the above was done.
« Last Edit: 04/08/2021 05:46 am by TheTraveller »
It Is Time For The EmDrive To Come Out Of The Shadows

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4428
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 6462
  • Likes Given: 35
I'm willing to be patient and take the long-term view that it's possible we're not at all understanding the mechanism at work.

I think it is the other way round, Shawyer didn't stumble on a working mechanism which he subsequently sought to explain. He came up with a theory and then attempted to create a device to exploit. It seems though there is actually no working mechanism, so there's really nothing that needs explaining.

Roger observed an unexpected propulsion effect in a military satellite he was working on.
Developed a theory & a 1st swipe design.
Approached the company he was working with it.
Was told there was no budget to develop new propulsion systems for 10 years.
Resigned, took it home and built the "Experimental EmDrive" in his garage.
UK MOD came on board & funded the "Demonstrator EmDrive" plus a team to develop a theory.
The big problem is that the "Experimental EmDrive" or "Demonstrator EmDrive" have never been demonstrated working. And while many have attempted to replicate the supposed results, Roger has been happy to tell anyone they have gotten their designs 'wrong', but has yet to provide the 'right' design. Given the design is supposedly a pretty simple cavity + RF driver, a single page blueprint (or CAD model, because this isn't the 80s) and RF frequency and amplitude spec (or even better, the waveform it should be fed) would suffice. This has not been forthcoming: there is no one document stating "an object of X dimensions fed by Y driving signal will produce Z force". Not has such a 'right' cavity and driver been built by Roger and tested by an independent third party.

Offline tea monster

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 588
  • Across the Universe
    • My ArtStation Portfolio
  • Liked: 795
  • Likes Given: 166
The problem with all this is 1. "I have come up with my own theory of physics to explain my device" is a big pill to swallow. Years down the line, no progress has been made to prove the theory, let alone prove a working device.

2. The device itself is a copper cone. This does not require a multi-million dollar research lab with superconducting magnets to prove it works. A small machine shop should have been able to come up with a test article that can prove it works by now.

Roger telling people that those who couldn't reproduce his results "Got the design wrong" is a huge red flag and echoes similar issues with the 'Dean Drive'.


 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0