Mach Effect progress

[vnbt4]

I think we will see some form of practical sublight drives in less than 10 years if there is any truth to the results in the video. I would like to build one of there qvpt to see if it isn't a fake.

[GIThruster]

I trust Paul March that the results are not fake, but I would note to you, Sonny had null results on both the warp experiments and on the DC thrusters. So far as I'm aware, everything that has worked, has been a Mach Effect thruster cast under another name. There has been no evidence that the QVF model, nor the QThruster work. What works is the MLT, based on Woodward's M-E theory.

If the 4N/kWe thrust figures are repeatable as constant thrust, a 300 KW Brayton system could act as an amazing, 1,200N thrust space tug:

http://energy.sandia.gov/wp/wp-content/ ... ystems.pdf

That is an astonishing amount of thrust for a constant thrust system, and no propellant needed. Indeed, this would open up our entire planetary system for exploration and exploitation.

Anyone who wants to do replication work should write me and I'll help you along, but you need to understand, just setting up the thrust balance and instrumentation will take about 9-12 months and some serious pesos. Add to that power equipment and the thruster ends up being the cheapest part of the experiment. If you're game, let me know. There are ways to reduce the budget, but you can't skimp on the balance itself. However, I may be able to help with that too.

[hanelyp]

you can't skimp on the balance itself.

If you want to be completely rigorous:

- The AC driver is on the thrust balance with the thruster. This cancels the effect of shuffling energy between the thruster and the rest of the circuit. Only clean DC and very low power control signals are fed to the device.

- The balance is designed to measure the DC component of the thrust and is relatively insensitive to the driver frequency. I'm thinking a damped torsion balance with a low resonant frequency.

I remain skeptical. Experimental rigor to cleanly separate the desired signal from noise will be necessary to convince me. The setup I've seen to date has too many potential ways for the signal to be contaminated for my tastes.

[GIThruster]

You don't want to feed DC to the balance arm, because that will cause coupling. AC time averages to zero.

Tell us what you know about the balance. Just seems way odd that people like Bruce and Duncan (and 100 others) have watched every step for years very carefully, and with PhD's from Penn State and Oxford, you'd think they'd pick up on all this contamination that you have without knowing anything about the setup. Likewise, Jim with 50 years experience in studying experimental physics, you'd think he'd know a thing or two.

Honestly. . .after years of this ridiculous sort of bravado (from others, not you), I have very little patience for it left. You simply do not know what you are talking about. Jim's data is six sigma and he can measure precisely to several orders magnitude past the thrust signature. If you don't understand this, you simply do not understand what the setup is all about.

I don't know what you think a DC component to the thrust" is, but the ARC Lite is damped and has a period of about 7 seconds. It is truly a world-class instrument, and for you to assume you could casually improve upon it is em. . .incorrect.

[williatw]

He did toward the end in response to an audience question touch briefly on an issue that had been mentioned here over a year ago:

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2215&hilit=radiati ... start=1275

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1406 ... you-arrive

That of particles becoming trapped in the warp field over time during the trip and then violently released at the end of the journey when you disengage the field, in a cone of deadly planet destroying lethal particles, blasting your destination world. He seem to indicate that both the oscillation nature of the warp field would preclude this, and that any particle (or photon) would just pass through the field hopefully missing the ship and then exiting the rear and back into space behind the ship, not trapped none the worse for wear.

[hanelyp]

You don't want to feed DC to the balance arm, because that will cause coupling. AC time averages to zero.

The coupling from a DC feed over a closely spaced pair or coaxial cable is effectively zero. I'm proposing DC feed to avoid even the specter of an artifact from energy being feed into and out of the system as the reactance element is driven back and forth.

... Jim's data is six sigma and he can measure precisely to several orders magnitude past the thrust signature. ...

along with the rest of that complaint its sounding way too much like the warmists defending their horridly flawed models with claims of perfection. Pardon me if I won't accept a single research team as enough for that claim.

the ARC Lite is damped and has a period of about 7 seconds.

That is vastly better than the ME devices I've seen anything about. Where can I see more details?

[GIThruster]

You don't want to feed DC to the balance arm, because that will cause coupling. AC time averages to zero.

The coupling from a DC feed over a closely spaced pair or coaxial cable is effectively zero. I'm proposing DC feed to avoid even the specter of an artifact from energy being feed into and out of the system as the reactance element is driven back and forth.

It's very common for people to make this complaint who haven't had a detailed look at the experimental setup. The system is designed the way it is for practical reasons. When you look at how the system works, you find it addresses your concerns better than would a DC source on the beam. For instance, Jim uses the thruster itself as a dummy load, by reorienting the thruster vertically. The ARC Lite only measures horizontal forces. By reorienting the thruster, one can draw power in exactly the same way as when the thruster can actually push the arm, so if there is still a signal, it is noise. This is just one of many controls used to isolate spurious sources.

Second reason is, because to put a remote power source (self-contained) on the beam that still provided all the variability needed for the current scientific controls, is a very, very expensive project that would require funding. Right now, all work is funded out of pocket. Miniaturized power supplies with PLL, high speed auto Z matching, and remotely adjustable voltage, frequency, etc., is a TRL6 or 7 activity. Jim is at TRL4.

I suggest you look at the details of how the system works. It's an excellent system.

the ARC Lite is damped and has a period of about 7 seconds.

That is vastly better than the ME devices I've seen anything about. Where can I see more details?

Jim's been using the ARC Lite since 2006. If you'd like to be placed on his private email list shoot me a note explaining your background, interest and with an email address and I'll forward it to Jim. And again, Jim is completely transparent about this stuff. He posts each week with details of the work, answers questions, and has lots of engineers looking over his shoulder, in addition to the other physicists in the lab and occasional slave labor. . .er. . .I mean student.. There's no slight of hand here. This is the second best source for details of the experimental setup; the email list being the best:
http://www.amazon.com/Making-Starships- ... +Stargates

[djolds1]

I trust Paul March that the results are not fake, but I would note to you, Sonny had null results on both the warp experiments and on the DC thrusters. So far as I'm aware, everything that has worked, has been a Mach Effect thruster cast under another name. There has been no evidence that the QVF model, nor the QThruster work. What works is the MLT, based on Woodward's M-E theory.

If the 4N/kWe thrust figures are repeatable as constant thrust, a 300 KW Brayton system could act as an amazing, 1,200N thrust space tug:

http://energy.sandia.gov/wp/wp-content/ ... ystems.pdf

That is an astonishing amount of thrust for a constant thrust system, and no propellant needed. Indeed, this would open up our entire planetary system for exploration and exploitation.

3.75 to 18 Newtons/ KWe. Fantastic performance, if true.

[GIThruster]

I think the largest impulse was 110 uN, which translated to ~4N/kWe. That was however, not sustained thrust. I think Paul said 30-50uN sustained, which is still easily high enough thrust efficiency to open up our planetary system for exploitation.

[hanelyp]

For instance, Jim uses the thruster itself as a dummy load, by reorienting the thruster vertically.

Which does not address the issue which prompts me to propose feeding DC into the instrument on the balance: Even excluding ME, feeding AC to a capacitor being pushed back and forth may be expected to produce a small force if the phase relationship is correct.

Second reason is, because to put a remote power source (self-contained) on the beam that still provided all the variability needed for the current scientific controls

I have a hard time believing such a complex supply is needed to clearly demonstrate the effect under study if the extraneous noise artifacts are dealt with.

Jim's been using the ARC Lite since 2006.

I looked up the device. Color me not impressed by the RF feed design. Very poor electrical isolation. Depending on various factors I can't be sure it isn't producing the force measured.

[GIThruster]

Which does not address the issue which prompts me to propose feeding DC into the instrument on the balance: Even excluding ME, feeding AC to a capacitor being pushed back and forth may be expected to produce a small force if the phase relationship is correct.

Yes it does. If there were a spurious source from the feed of any sort, it would have been identified by subtracting the vertical rotation signature from the horizontal. There is no spurious contribution. When you're noting the back and forth motion could produce a force, I presume you mean something like a Dean Drive effect. There are other protocols used to eliminate that possibility, which I believe are in the book. I would just note to you, if you were inferring the thruster should be driven with DC, all I can say is, that would disable it completely. If that's what you were thinking, you don't understand how the thrusters work. Mach Effects cannot be created by DC, and they cannot be rectified into useful force with DC. Dr. White's QVF model predicts DC thrust effects. Woodward's M-E theory does not.

I have a hard time believing such a complex supply is needed to clearly demonstrate the effect under study if the extraneous noise artifacts are dealt with.

Believe it. The test equipment is intended for doing science. What you're talking about is far less involved than what is required to do good science. For example, it is necessary to vary the voltage to see if the supposed thrust signature varies as theory predicts it should. So the ability to vary voltage is a necessary ability to provide that necessary scientific control. Likewise with the ability to sweep or not, etc.

I looked up the device. Color me not impressed by the RF feed design. Very poor electrical isolation. Depending on various factors I can't be sure it isn't producing the force measured.

The shielding is fine. With PhD EE's from Oxford and PSU looking over Jim's shoulder, as well as extremely accomplished EE's like Paul March doing the same, you can rest assured that your judgement here is hasty. You need to investigate the system better before making useful judgements in this regard.

[ladajo]

For instance, Jim uses the thruster itself as a dummy load, by reorienting the thruster vertically.

Which does not address the issue which prompts me to propose feeding DC into the instrument on the balance: Even excluding ME, feeding AC to a capacitor being pushed back and forth may be expected to produce a small force if the phase relationship is correct.

I think you may be missing the point here about needing to feed a modulated oscillating waveform to the cap. That is what the test is about. If you DC charge it, you do not get the the heart of the issue regarding the phased mass/inertia divergencies theoretically created by the cap charge/discharge cycles.

The device seeks to find a frequency that creates a resonance between mass/inertia shifts as it physically accellerates itself on axis. The better the resonance the stronger the thrust. Last I talked to Paul about it all, he was still talking about baby steps and better controls. With out looking back at that last exchange, I think he was also talking about upping the input freqs as well.

No I am not on Jim Woodward's email distro, as I have not asked to be. I am following it via Paul off and on.

[GIThruster]

Which brings up one of the challenges. If the circuit is not in electrical resonance, the voltage and current are out of phase and the power into the cap is just not there at the right time to produce M-E. So it needs to be Z-Matched. If the M-E generation and rectification are not in phase, there can be M-E but no thrust. Fortunately in the current design, the 1w signal that generates the 2w M-E, and the 2w rectification are locked into phase because it is the PZT that creates that phase relationship.

In the case of PMN, which has no piezo response; the thruster needs to be fed a 1w + 2w signal: the first to get M-E generation at 2w, and the second to get rectification of M-E into net force. With the next series of thrusters, Jim should be able to vary the phase between the 1w and 2w components of the drive signal, and while generating M-E, switch off the thrust, or reverse it entirely.

At least that is the plan. And note too, PMN has a much higher k and standoff, so should produce much larger thrusts. However, it needs to be sintered in a lead oxide atmosphere for it to go into the perovskite phase. If not, it goes into both perovskite and pyrochlore phases. The perovskite phase has a k of ~20,000. The pyrochlore is only 200. So it's very important to do the sintering properly, or the results will suffer.

[hanelyp]

Which does not address the issue which prompts me to propose feeding DC into the instrument on the balance: Even excluding ME, feeding AC to a capacitor being pushed back and forth may be expected to produce a small force if the phase relationship is correct.

Yes it does. If there were a spurious source from the feed of any sort...

I'm not thinking about the same kind of spurious signal you are here. I'm thinking about the mass equivalent of the energy in the capacitor. This being pushed back and forth one way would produce a signal in the balance different from pushing it in a different direction.

Mach Effects cannot be created by DC, and they cannot be rectified into useful force with DC.

My proposal was DC feed converted to AC by oscillators located on the balance.

I looked up the device. Color me not impressed by the RF feed design. Very poor electrical isolation. Depending on various factors I can't be sure it isn't producing the force measured.

Sorry but the shielding is very impressive.

Looking at a photo of the device, the feed blatantly violates what is practically rule One of RF design: keep the area enclosed by circulating current as small as practical. As such, the feed may be expected to induce currents in any nearby conductors, and be attracted to any nearby ferromagnetic materials.

[Diogenes]

you can't skimp on the balance itself.

If you want to be completely rigorous:

- The AC driver is on the thrust balance with the thruster. This cancels the effect of shuffling energy between the thruster and the rest of the circuit. Only clean DC and very low power control signals are fed to the device.

- The balance is designed to measure the DC component of the thrust and is relatively insensitive to the driver frequency. I'm thinking a damped torsion balance with a low resonant frequency.

I remain skeptical. Experimental rigor to cleanly separate the desired signal from noise will be necessary to convince me. The setup I've seen to date has too many potential ways for the signal to be contaminated for my tastes.

I agree. A fully independent drive system would do much in the way of convincing skeptics that the effect is real.


I initially thought that perhaps some powerful LION batteries could serve as the power source, but then I recalled that many of these experiments are done in vacuum, and that complicates using batteries. At the very least, a vacuum proof container would be needed for them.


An alternative idea comes to mind. If I remember properly, the drive systems are in the kilohertz to a few mhz range. Again, if I recall properly, the piezo drive is at one frequency, and the capacitor drive is at another, with one of the frequencies being the double of the other.


How about direct drive with RF coupling? All you would need is an impedance matched rf tank circuit coupled to the piezo stack, and a different one coupled to the capacitors. In fact, the capacitors could be the lump capacitance in one of the tank circuits, though I not sure if that would work for the piezo stack, but it might.


For that matter, if the phasing doesn't need to be varied beyond 180 degrees, (good enough for forward and reverse) you could drive both loads from the same tank coupling with one of them using a passive frequency doubler configuration.


The only down side is that it might get messy tuning everything where it needs to be, balancing loads, and eliminating any cross coupling.


The plus side is that it is probably the lightest weight power system which can be devised for coupling power in the few kilowatt range. For a sensitive balance, that might be a very powerful incentive to take that route.