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

    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    The only way to really test the EM drive is to see if it works in a weightless state (microgravity) either in orbit or some sort of 'vomit comet' . I better try harder to win the lottery.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGrimer
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    Posted By: DerrickA

    While I suspect this is your own (Frankmospheric?) term for Vacuum energy, .


    It is totally distinct from vacuum energy. No one has suggested, for example, that vacuum energy is holding liquid water together with a pressure of 4000 atmospheres. It's called the Beta- because there is a host of atmospheres nested one inside the other. The Alpha- , the air, is nested inside the Beta-, the Beta- inside the Gamma- and so on.
    Going the other way we have osmotic pressures of things dissolved in water which can be arranged in some hierarchical sequence no doubt.

    I don't expect people to agree with me but I do expect them to understand what I am saying and why I am saying it just as by bringing up the phenomena of acoustic cooling you seem to understand what Shawyer is saying and why he is saying it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGrimer
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    CWatters:China was going to build and test the EM drive in 2008..

    < http://www.universetoday.com/2008/10/09/is-the-impossible-emdrive-possible/ >

    "Now the researchers at China's Northwestern Polytechnical University (NPU) in Xi'an say they have confirmed the Emdrive theory, and have gotten funding to build the device."

    Perhaps we should wait and see how they get on.


    There you are. That's got Beta-atmosphere written all over it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Posted By: GrimerGoing the other way we have osmotic pressures of things dissolved in water which can be arranged in some hierarchical sequence no doubt.


    Why water? I thought this was some kind of universal theory.
  1.  
    A reactionless drive...being built in China. It's not our old friend the helibox guy is it? Sounds right up his alley.
  2.  
    Shawyer's results are artifacts.
    For a real microwave thruster, check out the research of John Brandenberg (yes, that Brandenberg) and John Klein.
    Their work is solid and there is enough rigorous analysis that, were Shawyer's "effect" present, they would have noticed it, long ago.
    http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1420619
    http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5956938/description.html

    Unfortunately for Shawyer, the MET efficiently uses reaction mass, and achieves a specific impulse of over 800 seconds.
    That's not a pea-shooter.
    •  
      CommentAuthorGrimer
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: GrimerGoing the other way we have osmotic pressures of things dissolved in water which can be arranged in some hierarchical sequence no doubt.


    Why water? I thought this was some kind of universal theory.
    Because water has the mot data in terms of quantity and quality. However, if you check the many other liquids Bridgman examined you will find the same form of relation, i.e. power laws from some absolute pressure type datum.
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009 edited
     
    Hi All
    Just dropped in from over 'there'. I think that if antigravity is possible it would have to involve the nucleus of atoms as that is where virtually all the mass is. I know that work was carried out at GE's Aerospace division back in the late 60's early 70's involving elements with unpaired nuclear spin (the nucleus has net angular momentum) where a net external dynamic mass field was claimed to be created by the alignment of such nuclei in metals, and that such fields were detectable as temperature decreases inside indium / arsenide crystals as well as being mechanically detectable in gyro detectors comprised of the same type metal balanced on a knife edge.
    It was postulated that if this dynamic force field were made to undulate sinusoidally inside such metals with a torriodal shape, an anti-parallel gravitational field force vector would result.
    • CommentAuthorcwatters
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Here is someone other than Shawyer speculating about em drives (1984)...

    http://www.ccpm.com/electrody.pdf

    Quotes:

    As the electromagnetic energy is allways contained witnin a closed waveguide, its is natural to expect that forces will eventuall cancel out. This does not deem to be the case as Stratton suggests, but there is a definite force always pointing in the negative direction of propagation. <snip>

    The application of this effect brings to mind a flying cavity. Also, velocities larger than the speed of light now appear to be possibe as the force is not applied on the object from outside - like in a particle accelerator - but is an integral part of the vehicle.
    •  
      CommentAuthorQuanten
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Posted By: sonoboyHi All
    Just dropped in from over 'there'. I think that if antigravity is possible it would have to involve the nucleus of atoms as that is where virtually all the mass is. I know that work was carried out at GE's Aerospace division back in the late 60's early 70's involving elements with unpaired nuclear spin (the nucleus has net angular momentum) where a net external dynamic mass field was claimed to be created by the alignment of such nuclei in metals, and that such fields were detectable as temperature decreases inside indium / arsenide crystals as well as being mechanically detectable in gyro detectors comprised of the same type metal balanced on a knife edge.
    It was postulated that if this dynamic force field were made to undulate sinusoidally inside such metals with a torriodal shape, an anti-parallel gravitational field force vector would result.


    I can't get hold of the name , but if I remember correctly when they made more precise experiment they found no effect beyond noise.
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Here is one patent in the name of the engineer. You may have to cut and paste as I've been having trouble posting active links. http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=ANwqAAAAEBAJ&dq=dynamic+force+field
    In this setup a crystal was claimed to be cooled 11 degrees centigrade by the influence of such a field..
    •  
      CommentAuthorTrim
    • CommentTimeOct 31st 2009
     
    Thanks for your links Al and CW.

    Clickable PDF http://www.ccpm.com/electrody.pdf
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009 edited
     
    Here's another one from the same Aerospace engineer. Be sure to read the other one I posted the location of too. In fact it would be best to read that one first. The usual copy and paste. I don't know why they don't post as active links:
    http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=_9sqAAAAEBAJ&dq=gravitational+field+secondary
    Write or wrong it's far more interesting that some of the other stuff that gets the hell hammered out of around here or the other place....
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009 edited
     
    [quote][cite]Posted By: sonoboy[/cite]Here's another one from the same Aerospace engineer. Be sure to read the other one I posted the location of too. In fact it would be best to read that one first. The usual copy and paste. I don't know why they don't post as active links:
    http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=_9sqAAAAEBAJ&dq=gravitational+field+secondary
    Write or wrong it's far more interesting that some of the other stuff that gets the hell hammered out of around here or the other place....[/quote]

    You have to enclose the url in BBCode tags, and make sure the "format comments as BBCode" radio button is checked, just below the text window. Like this:
    [url]http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=_9sqAAAAEBAJ&dq=gravitational+field+secondary[/url]
    (BBCode button off)
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009 edited
     
    You have to enclose the url in BBCode tags, and make sure the "format comments as BBCode" radio button is checked, just below the text window. Like this:
    http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=_9sqAAAAEBAJ&dq=gravitational+field+secondary
    (BBCode button on)
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     
    OK Al. Thanks
  3.  
    Ahh. These are the Wallace patents and inventions.

    Unfortunately they do not work.

    You may be interested in Robert Stirniman's review of the Wallace inventions. Much easier reading than the patents themselves, and with interesting background material.
    http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/TheWallaceInventions.pdf
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     
    That was a positive sounding article. Where have you seen these patents refuted?
  4.  
    As Stirniman reports, there is considerable doubt whether Wallace actually constructed and tested some of the embodiments of the inventions. Further, the effects reported, even by Wallace, are of a very small S/N ratio. In addition, all attempts at replication of the Wallace results have failed to support his theories. Of course, negative results don't prove anything either way. But...
    I am aware of some very good attempts at replication, but unfortunately I am unable to discuss them, beyond the fact that results were null.

    However, don't let that stop you from pursuing your own replication of Wallace's inventions. When it comes time to start testing, I can give you some good advice as to how to proceed.

    Stirniman also mentions the Tampere experiments of Evgeny Podkletnov, I believe. There is much I can say, and have said, about those, as well.
    • CommentAuthorsonoboy
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     
    Yes, the full antigravitational version was never completed at GE as far as I know (the embodiment in the torriod), but the other devices were constructed. I spoke with a colleague of his about ten years ago.