It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quantum vacuum plasma thruster

page: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: stormbringer1701

I know how to access the data.


NASA should not close threads because of that, they should ban members and remove unfounded responses.





yeah except the first version of that thread got locked. and they did ban several members and forbid other members from posting in the new thread. they (the admins and mods) are on a hair trigger there because they have to protect NASA's image and they are paranoid about anything remotely fringey looking. you post about your junk yard salvaged ice maker repurposed as an antigravity device in your garage and you are gone.




posted on Feb, 6 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Ok but at ATS the whole idea of generating a warp bubble by organizing the electrical activity of the brain. In a way parallel to what is being suggested as occurring in a certain NASA Scientist Garage, could result in a wormhole?

Forget it ATS shuts down threads like that in a Heartbeat.
ny

Any thoughts?



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 11:36 PM
link   
amplifying vacuum energy:

www.sciencedaily.com...



posted on Feb, 8 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Thanks for the link
'

I also wanted to thank all concerned for responding.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   
Dr Rodal posted a nice summary of the NSF AC EM thread contributors contributions to advancing understanding of NASA Eagleworks' EM drive results. there are several fully credentialed scientists and engineers as well as interested semi-qualified and laymen onlookers contributing to that thread. some are even working at replication. thus far several theories have been put forward and discarded as not fitting the data while a couple have been selected as not being contradicting physics and fitting the experimental data.

i am citing Dr' Rodals summary post in it's entirety.



This thread has resulted in great synergy between NSF contributors and Paul March at NASA, and I wanted to take this opportunity to name a partial list of accomplishments and thank everybody that has contributed -including a few humble persons who privately asked me not to list their numerous valuable contributions -(please forgive me if I am missing important contributions, tell me what I missed, or if you disagree, what I should correct):

Consideration was made of whether the experimental measurements of thrust force were the result of an artifact. Dr. Rodal, one of the contributors, solved the nonlinear, fully coupled system of differential equations (including magnetic damping) of an inverted torque pendulum with Mathematica to examine whether parasitic modes or nonlinear dynamics could be involved. Chaotic motion and strange attractors were also examined. Comparison with the experimental results showed that none of these nonlinear dynamics effects were involved in the experimental measurements at NASA Eagleworks, and therefore a nonlinear dynamics cause was eliminated. Dr. Rodal (in the US) also conducted Power Spectral Density and Autocorrelation analysis of NASA's experimental data and worked with another contributor, @frobnicat, (in France) to examine the dynamics of the experimental response. They concluded that indeed NASA's experimental measurements exhibited the expected response of NASA's torque pendulum as excited by an initial thrust force impulse followed by a thrust force response during the 30 to 40 sec length of the experiments. Dr. Rodal analyzed possible thermal instability (thermal buckling of the flat ends) as a cause for the measured thrust and reported this at NSF and at ResearchGate (www.researchgate.net... _EFFECT). A thermo-mechanical effect (thermal buckling) is shown that occurs in less than 1 second (for the copper thickness employed for the microwave cavity), with a temperature increase of a degree C or less and that results in forces of the same magnitude as reportedly measured by NASA. Moreover, this thermal instability produces forces in the same direction as measured, and it will occur in a vacuum (since the heating can be due either to induction heating from the axial magnetic field in a TE mode or resistive heating due to the axial electric field in a TM mode). However, this effect can only explain the initial impulsive force and cannot explain the longer 30 to 40 second measured force. Thus the thrust force measured for up to 40 second is not nullified by this explanation either.

Thermal expansion effect as posited by a team from Oak Ridge National Labs for another propellant-less set of experiments was also eliminated as a possible source by the NSF contributors because it would result in forces in the complete opposite direction as the forces measured by NASA.

One of the participants in the NSF forum is Dr. McCulloch (an academic from the UK), who independently developed a tentative theoretical explanation for the EM Drive: assuming that photons have inertial mass, which is caused by Unruh radiation, whose wavelengths must fit inside the EM Drive cone, more Unruh waves fit in at the wide end of the EM Drive, so photons traveling along the axis would always gain mass going towards the wide end and lose it going the other way. This is equivalent to expelling mass towards the wide end, so the EM Drive must move towards its narrow end to conserve momentum. This agrees with the (forward) direction of movement of the EM Drive in reported NASA experiments. Dr. McCulloch derived a simple formula to predict the thrust force and published his theory in the journal Progress in Physics (www.ptep-online.com...). In his blog and published paper he acknowledges the help from NSF participants (@aero, and @Fornaro) in estimating the geometrical dimensions of the EM Drives tested in the US, UK, and China.

Another participant in the NSF forum, @Notsosureofit (a Ph.D. in physics who worked with a world renowned authority in General Relativity and also at NASA) developed and posted an analysis of the EM Drive thrust considering an accelerating frame of reference caused by a dispersive cavity resonator and obtained a formula to predict the thrust of the EM Drive that takes into account the electromagnetic mode shape of the EM Drive (unlike the formulas of McCulloch and Shawyer that do not explicitly include mode shape information).

@frobnicat and Dr. Rodal conducted statistical analyses of the experimental data. @frobnicat wrote a computer program that included hundreds of possible combinations of the experimental parameters (such as power input, frequency, Q (quality factor of resonance), geometrical dimensions, etc.) to the first few powers. Interestingly the best fitting formulas were similar to the theoretically derived formula by Notsosureofit and also McCulloch's formula.

NSF contributor TMEubanks examined whether the EM Drive could be coupling to the (Dark Matter) Axion background. He concluded that this is very unlikely (by up to 20 orders of magnitude) due to the findings of the Axion Dark-Matter experiment, looking for yoctowatts (10^-24) of RF power in the 2 - 20 micro-eV range, precisely the range of the EM Drive, by tuning the cavity's resonant frequency to the axion mass. There is simply no way that the Drive is coupling to the axion background - the ADMX would see a whopping signal.

Dr. Rodal obtained an exact solution for the electromagnetic modes in a cavity with similar geometry as the NASA's EM Drive using Mathematica and the theory of spherical waves developed by the Russian/American scientist Schelnukoff. The resulting equations are very similar to the ones posted by Greg Egan (gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au...) . Dr. Rodal calculated the natural frequency for electromagnetic modes tested in the EM Drive, from this exact solution, to compare with the NASA predictions by Frank Davies NASA/JSC/EP5 using Finite Element Analysis with the computer code COMSOL. The exact solution results calculated by Dr. Rodal at the NSF forum are only 1% different from the NASA calculations using COMSOL. This confirms the validity of NASA's COMSOL analysis, and that the finite element mesh used was fine enough to result in predicted frequencies that are less than 1% from the exact solution, hence confidence can be had on those calculations. The validity of NASA's COMSOL calculations has been simultaneously confirmed by experimental comparison with the IR thermal camera image produced for mode shape TM212.


to be continued in next post



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 06:23 PM
link   

NSF member @aero is using MIT's Finite Difference computer code MEEP to calculate the force produced by evanescent waves escaping from the EM Drive and interacting with the stainless steel vacuum chamber. This work is in progress.

Despite considerable effort at NSF to dismiss the reported thrust as an artifact the EM Drive results have yet to be falsified. After consistent reports of thrust measurements from EM Drive experiments in the US, UK, and China, at thrust levels several thousand times in excess of a photon rocket, and now under hard vacuum conditions, the question of where the thrust is coming from deserves serious inquiry.


The last bit is the summary of results so far. major results. there was of course much more that was discussed throughout two huge threads like this. Also note this thread has Dr Paul March participating and handing the NSF AC crew not only data not avialable in articles on the em drive but able to talk on the science and engineering involved and the experimenters thinking. the thread has direct participation by one of Dr White's fellow experimenters/engineers on the QVPT Shayer/Cannae EM drive evaluation.



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 07:48 PM
link   
But directly from Paul March they need to double the thrust measurements before they can ask for replication results because the facility they want to independently verify thier experimental results at (i believe this was the Glen laboratory) does not have sufficient sensitivity to detect thier thrust signal at sufficient sigma to unambiguously verify thier current results.


olks:

The Eagleworks Lab is still working on the copper frustum thruster that was reported on last summer at the AIAA/JPC. We have now confirmed that there is a thrust signature in a hard vacuum (~5.0x10^-6 Torr) in both the forward direction, (approx. +50 micro-Newton (uN) with 50W at 1,937.115 MHz), and the reversed direction, (up to -16uN with a failing RF amp), when the thruster is rotated 180 degrees on the torque pendulum. However we continue to fight through RF amplifier failures brought on by having to operate them in a hard vacuum with few $$$ resources to fix them when they break, so the desired data is coming along very slowly. We are still working on obtaining enough data though that will allow us to go to Glenn Research Center (GRC) for a replication effort in the next few months. However that will only happen if we can make the thrust signature large enough since the GRC thrust stand can only measure down to ~50uN, so we have to get the thrust signature up to at least 100uN before we can go to GRC.




posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 04:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: [post=18973369]stormbringer1701 NASA's image and they are paranoid about anything remotely fringey looking. you post about your junk yard salvaged ice maker repurposed as an antigravity device in your garage and you are gone.
Yes nasa is touchy about those things, as they say don't propose anythinh that defies the laws of physics.
Dunno, maybe national security issue of sorts



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 05:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: [post=18973369]stormbringer1701 NASA's image and they are paranoid about anything remotely fringey looking. you post about your junk yard salvaged ice maker repurposed as an antigravity device in your garage and you are gone.
Yes nasa is touchy about those things, as they say don't propose anything that defies the laws of physics.
Dunno, maybe national security issue of sorts
while it is true that they rightly or wrongly deny plainly fringey things a forum; that is not quite the full information i was conveying. it's not only those pesky levitating hotel ice makers that get unceremoniously booted but far far more innocuous but not quite mainstreamed concepts. and that is bad. you cannot really do anything truly new if you will not even admit to the possibility. and i mean for things that aren't violation of physics but may be an extension or stretch of known physics. they are barely tolerating the EM thruster thread and thier own scientists and engineers are the ones testing it. of course that has now changed a bit ( for that one topic) as the NSF thread has come to the attention of NASA bigwigs now as per the forum Adminstrator own post:


Firstly, I want to thank people on here for really focusing this thread, especially after the first thread had some problems. I can tell you it has the attention of some big hitters at NASA - who I've invited to post in this thread (at least one is already, but I'm not allowed to name him).

It has also been suggested we look at summarizing the progress made in this thread into a news article. Obviously, this is out of my comfort zone of things like current launch vehicles, but I'm going to sit down this weekend and read every single post in this thread. ;D

Regardless, as I've always said, there's so many members here who would be able to write better articles than I, because they are well versed in the specific subject - which is half the battle. That is even more the case with this thread.

So, per the suggestion, I'm looking to crowd source members posting in this thread to look at being part of creating an article to cover this subject. I already have one offer to be part of that team and if you're interested in helping out, then please PM me and we'll set up a joint PM between all interested people as we go.....because probably setting up a thread (private or otherwise) to build it.

This is a 81,000 viewed thread, but that's over time and the news site article is where you can get that in a day. The benefit to all is it would get it into a much wider audience and likely bring in a lot more folk who may be able to help with the thread, by nature of the news site being interlinked with the forum.


this is the dude that waffle stomps any fringey stuff before it can draw a breath on that forum.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 06:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: [post=18973369]stormbringer1701 NASA's image and they are paranoid about anything remotely fringey looking. you post about your junk yard salvaged ice maker repurposed as an antigravity device in your garage and you are gone.
Yes nasa is touchy about those things, as they say don't propose anything that defies the laws of physics.
Dunno, maybe national security issue of sorts
you cannot really do anything truly new if you will not even admit to the possibility. .
That is the main drawback with MS.
Good post. I take it you are talking of some nasa forum. Never visited any other forum myself



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Hey
I wanted to thank you personally for your contribution to this thread..



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 06:30 PM
link   
you're welcome. i hope the qvpt and em thruster thing turns out to be something new and useful.



posted on Feb, 24 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701


I know about some really Fringe ideas concerning, "negative sound" and billions, trillions and even quintillion's of decibels with the idea that sound like that can push against Planks space-time. But given the issues we have discussed it seems at least, to me anyway, that we already have something like this active, with respect to satellite technology in place.

I do not have anyway of confirming that for the record.


edit on 24-2-2015 by Kashai because: content edit



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   
grenade! /lob/

phys.org...



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 01:30 AM
link   
grenade lob! forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

this theory connects the QVPT to some sort of indirect gravitic effect



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
grenade lob! forum.nasaspaceflight.com...

this theory connects the QVPT to some sort of indirect gravitic effect
Interesting theory, but bending space not possible imo.



posted on Apr, 5 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
Paul March left an Easter egg in the NASA EM drive thread this morning:




Now Per the newly authored Q-V plasma simulation code that Dr. White just finished, the equal bidirectional Q-V plasma flow for the Cannae cavity comes from the high-Q pancake section with a Q of ~9,000 for the un-slotted version of the cavity. However due to the high E-field region created n the throat of the RF feed, this cylindrically shaped high E-field volume acts as an obstruction to the Q-V plasma flow. This E-field obstruction created in the PTFE cylinder then accelerates the Q-V plasma around it in a Bernoulli like effect that accelerates the Q-V plasma flow coming from the main pillbox cavity. This unbalanced and accelerated Q-V plasma flow that goes away from the large pill box cavity in the direction of the RF input section is what generates the NET thrust in our model.

Next, using this new Q-V plasma simulation tool that utilizes the instantaneous E&M fields from COMSOL for one complete RF cycle in 5 degree increments as its input file, we are now seeing why we need the PTFE or HDPE dielectrics in the frustum while using near pure sine wave power levels below ~100W in the ~2.0 GHz frequency range to generate detectable thrust, and why Shawyer and the Chinese didn't while pumping 80W to 2,500W using magnetron RF sources. We think the reasons are two fold.

The first is that Shawyer and the Chinese both used magnetron RF sources for their experiments. An RF source that generates large AM, FM and PM modulation of the carrier wave with typical FM modulation bandwidth on the order of at least +/-20 MHz. (These time rate to change of energy modulations increase the Q-V density in our model.)

The second reason we found running these 3D Q-V plasma simulations for the EMPTY copper frustum, was that increasing the input power tends to focus the Q-V plasma flow from near omnidirectional from the frustum at low powers, to a much more jet like beam at higher powers measured in kW to tens of kW-rf. In fact the simulation for the 100W run predicted only ~50uN for our pure RF system with dielectric, while the 10kW run predicted a thrust level of ~6.0 Newton without a dielectric in the cavity. And at 100kW-rf it was now up to ~1300 Newton, but the input power to thrust production nonlinearity was starting to taper off around 50kW. Of course these Q-V plasma thrust predictions are based on the Q-V not being immutable and non-degradable, a feature we admit is not widely accepted by the mainstream physics community, at least at the moment.


Lastly, due to the above non-linear thrust scaling with input power predictions, we have started the build up of a 100W-to-1,200W waveguide magnetron RF power system that will drive one of our aluminum RF frustum cavities. Initially the test rig will follow Shawyer's first generation test rig that used a tetter-totter balance system in air only to see if we can generate similar thrust levels that Shawyer reported using a hermetic sealed box, which were in the ~16 to 300 milli-Newton range dependent on the Q-Factor of the frustum.

BTW, the reason we included the "what-if" Eagleworks can make this thing work solar system trajectory section on our 2014 JPC paper was that we have to continually tell management the value proposition for why they should fund our research, much in the same way we have to convince Chris Bergin here at NSF we really will be talking about space applications for these Q-Thruster like devices, once we get our hands around the physics they are using. However when we do, the solar system and beyond will be ours for the picking...

edit on 5-4-2015 by stormbringer1701 because: bolding



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 12:53 AM
link   
more from Paul March:




Dr. Rodal:

The dimension for the 1.48 GHz TM010 pillbox cylindrical cavity used in the warp-field interferometer test are in the second presentation I sent you privately earlier this week that was authored by Frank Davies. I'm appending the pertinent interior dimensions data from same below.

Height: 2.845” (72.26 mm)
Diameter: 6.103” (155.02 mm)
Material: Aluminum 6061-T4
Conductivity: 2.265E+07

Next for ACES-High, a clarifying statement on the Q-Thrusters aka EM drives verses the Q-V based warp-drives. They are one and the same thing except the warp drive requires a different more toroid-like topology, with much, much higher E-field intensities and perhaps somewhat higher operating frequencies as well. So the Eagleworks lab considers our Q-thruster research a necessary pathway to the design of an operational warp drive. The question then becomes how much energy are we going to have to switch and at what operating frequency needed to warp space-time into an Alcubierre drive like warp-bubble that is big enough to encompass our ship and that can generate a contraction in space-time that is equivalent to a 10X, 100X or even a 1,000X increase in the at rest vacuum speed of light?

Lastly, the Eagleworks Lab's next paper on the Q-V entitled "Dynamics of the Vacuum" will be out on the NASA NTRS internet servers just any day now. I've already provided this forum a one page abstract and introduction for this paper, but I need to agree with those that are saying that in the end analysis, the seat of all mater and space is nothing more than waves and various vortices AKA elementary particles in the Q-V. And we also think from our ongoing work that gravity is an emergent phenomenon that is nothing more than a Q-V flow field between other Q-V entities. So when the EM-Drive creates a thrust like phenomenon, what is really happening is that the EM-drive configuration is just setting up these Q-V flows via magneto-Hydro-Dynamics (MHD) like rules that translate into our 4D universe as space-time distortions or differential gravity gradients surrounding the drive.

And my parting comment tonight is from the Star Trek TNG Universe: "Engage"

Best, Paul M.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Funny that he is quoting Star Trek at the end, because his post certainly reads like Star Trek technobabble.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Extremely interesting thread. Posting so I can easily find it again.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join