Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

  1.  
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: Andrew Palfreymanhttp://www.linkedin.com/groups/Propellantless-propulsion-FTL-discussion-4534122.S.260139325

    Serrano claims about 30 N/KW



    Inertialess and FTL. What nonsense!
  2.  
    Inertialess is not claimed. FTL is not claimed. Unless he thinks so, in which case I agree with you.

    All I care about is experimental results at this point.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2013
     
    Posted By: Andrew PalfreymanInertialess is not claimed. FTL is not claimed. Unless he thinks so, in which case I agree with you.

    All I care about is experimental results at this point.


    The first post in that forum claims them, unless I am misreading. I haven't read as far as any experimental results, if they are there.
  3.  
    Yes, fair enough. He has no physics to back up his results. I have known about him for about a decade.
  4.  
    Serrano claims about 30 N/KW

    No? He claims 3 mN with 2 uA input and believes he can scale up, from what I can tell on that page.
  5.  
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013 edited
     
    I did, mostly. The only actual report of thrust I saw was the 3mN figure, wasn't it?

    I mean, 30 N/kW is more than my RC helicopter makes, by a long shot.
    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    My expectations are low but as usual I really hope it works.
  6.  
    Input power is not quoted. All-up mass is not quoted. An electrical current value by itself is meaningless, of course. I've got a post pending asking these questions. It can at least be said that the critical (over-unity) velocity is 83 m/s, since this depends only on the N/KW figure. This corresponds, e.g., to the tangential velocity of a 1 metre radius wheel at 5000 rpm.

    He has passed the first sanity check - the entire apparatus is self-contained. He raises red flags with the mention of high interest all around. However, he states that he doesn't want it disappearing into the black, so we'll just have to see how much he opens the old kimono.
  7.  
    Posted By: alsetalokinI did, mostly. The only actual report of thrust I saw was the 3mN figure, wasn't it?

    I mean, 30 N/kW is more than my RC helicopter makes, by a long shot.
    Oops, I missed that. So it looks like Pin = 3/24 = 0.125 Watts. If we knew the all-up mass, we could calculate the acceleration, the time to over-unity, and the distance to be travelled to over-unity.

    ETA: With 2 uA current and 1/8 Watt, the real part of the input impedance is 3E10 Ohm (30,000 MegOhm). That's very, very high - unobtainium even for an insulator? Even a low Q capacitor at LF and small C looks odd (r goes as the inverse of f, C and Q). For example:
    Qmin = 1, Cmin = 1 pF yields f = 5 Hz

    It stinks already.

    Maybe it's a hi-Z op amp input. The AD8221 has Rin = 1E11 Ohm || 2 pF. At any f >~= 1 Hz, the 2pF is the lower impedance. Vin can be 2.3 - 18V so we'll pick 10 V, and with Iin=2uA we have Zin = 5E6 Ohm. The frequency at which 2 pF has this reactance is 20 KHz. Sounds more reasonable now. Looks like audio into an op amp. But what's on the output? :)
  8.  
    Hot air.
  9.  
  10.  
    Posted By: alsetalokinHot air.
    yabut hermetically sealed hot air, within a Faraday cage.

    Still, if you mean a buoyancy change, that is definitely a possibility. As the device heats up, it displaces more air due to increased volume, and appears to lose weight. Duncan observed this with his Coke Can Woodward rig, on a Mettler sensitive to 10 ug. He used a can because of the Mettler weight limit and of course that meant thin sides yada yada. But Serrano's claiming it's cool. Duncan was dissipating around 80 Watts. Serrano's dissipating at most 1/8th Watt.

    It looks easy enough to build. 3 mN of thrust vertically corresponds to a weight change of about 300 mg.

    ETA: Scratch the buoyancy remark. It is touted to work in a vacuum.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    Has Naudin ever failed to make an outlandish claim work? What are the odds...?
  11.  
    Naudin's rig is the usual crap. He put it in the Lifters section - nuff said. He builds beautiful and wonderfully-documented stuff, and then fucks it all up.

    I'm a-gonna read that there patent....

    Straight Biefeld-Brown. But on his LinkedIn group, he says
    The Biefield Brown Effect is a separate but related phenomenon to what we do. They use similar principles but the physical effects are not consistent with the description of what a Biefeld Brown Asymmetric capacitor does. Perfect example is that the Biefield Brown Effect requires a working medium to Ionize and expel to produce a conventional force with. Biefeld Brown is pressure dependant, o(u)r technology is not.

    He's a terrible engineer. The 2002 patent shows a graph labelled "currant" and a curve showing negative power.

    It's quite hard to see how to build this thing. It looks like alternating caps with high-k and air. And some details about segments and cells which I don't get.
    • CommentAuthorjoshs
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013
     
    You need to return to "Electra Springs". That will set you straight ... to sleep.
  12.  
    does not compute
    • CommentAuthorjoshs
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2013 edited
     
    Posted By: Andrew Palfreymandoes not compute
    This is because you deprive yourself of the fountain of misinformation that spews forth from the center of Paradiso Whackado.

    If you ever suffer insomnia: "Return to Elektra Springs": http://www.futurestates.tv/episodes/return-to-elektra-springs
  13.  
    o god