Quote from: Crispy on 11/29/2021 08:34 amWhen other reactionless drive threads get shut down without mercy, I'm astonished that this one is still here tbh.Because this thread provides a respectful place to share thoughts on a technology that has not been falsified. We could have an equally controversial thread on whether or not the Big Bang occurred as described in the Standard Model.For my own part, I am of the opinion that this topic has generated enormous interest (some generated by posters in this thread), and the possibility of a reactionless thruster would open the stars to humanity, so I'm willing to put up with some level of handwaving in pursuit of the topic.IMHO, a dedicated thread where hand-waving is discouraged and sober mathematics are pursued has almost no downside other than somehow offending people such as yourself. This topic has remained remarkably self-constrained over a number of years, and we are now on thread 12. Please contribute to either the falsification or proof of the topic or move on.
When other reactionless drive threads get shut down without mercy, I'm astonished that this one is still here tbh.
I have of course discussed the results of Tajmar et al. at the Dresden University of Technology state.But I asked why there is no thrust?
And it is obvious that this physics (adapter) must work at some subtle, microscopic level, at some frequency, according to a special algorithm.
Quote from: Alex_O on 11/29/2021 04:15 pmI have of course discussed the results of Tajmar et al. at the Dresden University of Technology state.But I asked why there is no thrust? Well, current physics predicts no thrust. And we get no thrust. So... The Dresden results have no mystery in them at all. Current physics stands. That is how science works. QuoteAnd it is obvious that this physics (adapter) must work at some subtle, microscopic level, at some frequency, according to a special algorithm.Well, the 'obvious' thing is always the thing in the physics textbook, and that predicts the Dresden results perfectly. So, why do you still think there is new physics here, if "a laboratory experiment of the highest possible purity" supports the standard model so accurately? And why point to Tajmar et al, saying "it worked", if their results refute the idea that anything novel is happening here?
This means that the Tajmar et al. solved the problem of building a stand, where all known false signals were eliminated. "It worked" - it means that the task of building the stand has been successfully solved.
This means that now we need to do some research on how to create an emdrive thrust. Above, I made an absolutely reasonable assumption that it is necessary to study the resonators of a traveling wave. I also roughly showed the direction of research - where to dig. What to search. This is the problem of influencing the physical vacuum, of processing the vacuum, so that in a modified (modified) vacuum to create "flows" that will carry away the impulse from the drive outside.
Let's focus on discussing these particular ideas.
Quote from: Alex_O on 11/29/2021 05:47 pmThis means that the Tajmar et al. solved the problem of building a stand, where all known false signals were eliminated. "It worked" - it means that the task of building the stand has been successfully solved.Ah, I understand now. We now have a good system for testing for very small thrusts. And that's good to have. I agree .Quote from: Alex_O on 11/29/2021 05:47 pmThis means that now we need to do some research on how to create an emdrive thrust. Above, I made an absolutely reasonable assumption that it is necessary to study the resonators of a traveling wave. I also roughly showed the direction of research - where to dig. What to search. This is the problem of influencing the physical vacuum, of processing the vacuum, so that in a modified (modified) vacuum to create "flows" that will carry away the impulse from the drive outside.Well, why do you think this is the direction to look? Now that we've worked out how to measure the forces, and found none? If the reasons people had for thinking that something unexpected was happening here are gone, why do you think this direction is worth pursuing?Quote from: Alex_O on 11/29/2021 05:47 pmLet's focus on discussing these particular ideas.
Because this thread provides a respectful place to share thoughts on a technology that has not been falsified.
Vortex-laser microprocessingA microneedle with a height greater than 10μm and a diameter less than 0.3μm is formed by deposition of only a few laser pulses onto a metal.December 16, 2010 Takashige Omatsu
I have prepared a picture to illustrate the idea of traveling waves.
Here's an example of a pump.Gears and their teeth are short packets of EM waves that move in a traveling wave resonator.But the oil pump needs a body, the movement of oil is created by the flow of oil along the body. Without a housing (and in a void), this pump will not work.
QuoteVortex-laser microprocessing
Vortex-laser microprocessing
"it is necessary to make oil (suspension) from emptiness (from vacuum)"Okay, let's say we spent 1000 J and created a portion of oil (suspension). Then we want to use the rest of the energy and hit that portion of oil (suspension) with the EM field.It is also clear that we want to have on board a nuclear reactor with a capacity of 2 MW, and an engine with a specific thrust of 3000 N / KW. To create a continuous thrust force of 3 MN for a rocket weighing 10 tons.And it’s immediately clear that we have a problem and we must solve it.