Mach Effect progress

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

ScottL
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by ScottL »

If the EmDrive worked, you'd still need rockets to lift you into space. The EmDrive isn't projected to scale to ever be a launch system, nor even to get out of Earth's gravity well. Once out far enough, however; if calculations are correct, it was be cheaper than an Ion Thruster given enough time.

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by Skipjack »

ScottL wrote:If the EmDrive worked, you'd still need rockets to lift you into space. The EmDrive isn't projected to scale to ever be a launch system, nor even to get out of Earth's gravity well. Once out far enough, however; if calculations are correct, it was be cheaper than an Ion Thruster given enough time.
Not according to the inventor Roger Shawyer, who claims we will have flying cars soon. Again, I will believe any and all of that when I see it. Would be wonderful, but I cant help doubting it.

hanelyp
Posts: 2255
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by hanelyp »

Unless performance drops with speed you can't escape WMD potentials should these drives have useful thrust.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.

ScottL
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by ScottL »

Skipjack wrote:
ScottL wrote:If the EmDrive worked, you'd still need rockets to lift you into space. The EmDrive isn't projected to scale to ever be a launch system, nor even to get out of Earth's gravity well. Once out far enough, however; if calculations are correct, it was be cheaper than an Ion Thruster given enough time.
Not according to the inventor Roger Shawyer, who claims we will have flying cars soon. Again, I will believe any and all of that when I see it. Would be wonderful, but I cant help doubting it.

I should have been more specific. The majority of those who believe in the effect (not all mind you) have largely dismissed Shawyer's reason for the effect. Based on their claim (not Shawyer's) this isn't going to lift us from the ground. EW's leaked paper doesn't instill much confidence that the "thrust/power" ratio is significant enough.

krenshala
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:20 pm
Location: Austin, TX, NorAm, Sol III

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by krenshala »

Any useful tool is equally useful as a weapon.

jnaujok
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:19 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Contact:

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by jnaujok »

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a big gun." - Howard Tayler - 70 Maxims of Maximally Efficient Mercenaries (#24)
http://www.schlockmercenary.com

kurt9
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by kurt9 »

Woodward and Fearn's Mach Effect work is demonstrably real (having been duplicated by three independent labs) and the EMDrive is not quite as real. The big question now is if the thrust can be scaled upto 1 G or more. If so, rockets and airplanes go away and are replaced by "flying vehicles". If not, we still have a great space drive for getting around the solar system, but will still need rockets for Earth to LEO launch. The Mach Effect equations suggest such scalability. The issue is materials. The colossal dielectric and electrostrictive material being developed would be necessary. Since the Mach Effect is essentially electro-mechanical at high voltages, materials life-times are a serious issue here.

kunkmiester
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by kunkmiester »

Building a commercial device is engineering, an we've done similar engineering before. Piezo electric stuff an capacitors are known, and it will simply be a matter of time to get reliable systems.
Evil is evil, no matter how small

D Tibbets
Posts: 2775
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:52 am

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by D Tibbets »

Correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that the [EDIT:- current, not original] thrust levels versus energy input is at least a million times less than originally claimed based on the more recent test results margins for error. As such, even if the physics works, thrust will be much less than even current ion thrusters per input energy amount (admittedly needed reaction mass may be less). As such, acceleration would be very slow and time to a target would be prolonged compared to even ion thrusters with their reaction mass included.

Theoretically, acceleration to interstellar speeds (say 20% the speed of light) might be possible with a fusion reactor providing the power. But if it takes you a thousand years to reach that speed it is not useful.

Dan Tibbets
Last edited by D Tibbets on Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
To error is human... and I'm very human.

JoeP
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:10 am

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by JoeP »

D Tibbets wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that the original thrust levels versus energy input is at least a million times less than originally claimed based on the more recent test results margins for error. As such, even if the physics works, thrust will be much less than even current ion thrusters per input energy amount (admittedly needed reaction mass may be less). As such, acceleration would be very slow and time to a target would be prolonged compared to even ion thrusters with their reaction mass included.

Theoretically, acceleration to interstellar speeds (say 20% the speed of light) might be possible with a fusion reactor providing the power. But if it takes you a thousand years to reach that speed it is not useful.

Dan Tibbets
Yep. If it is as weak as a photon drive, then it might be useless as a practical engine. However, if it is a real effect, and once the physics are worked out, then it might be engineered to scale up to something efficient enough to beat ion drives. Should be interesting to watch, even if the probability is low for something useful and not measurement error/noise.

birchoff
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:11 pm

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by birchoff »

D Tibbets wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but my impression is that the original thrust levels versus energy input is at least a million times less than originally claimed based on the more recent test results margins for error. As such, even if the physics works, thrust will be much less than even current ion thrusters per input energy amount (admittedly needed reaction mass may be less). As such, acceleration would be very slow and time to a target would be prolonged compared to even ion thrusters with their reaction mass included.

Theoretically, acceleration to interstellar speeds (say 20% the speed of light) might be possible with a fusion reactor providing the power. But if it takes you a thousand years to reach that speed it is not useful.

Dan Tibbets
I am assuming your quoting performance up to the leaked paper. If that is true then I believe your ignoring the fact that the authors explicitly stated that they have done nothing to optimize thrust. Their experiment has been focused on proof of concept. If the 1mN/KW extrapolation is valid then it is likely optimization could increase the possibile performance.

kunkmiester
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by kunkmiester »

I don't know about em drive, but as I recall, Mach effect has a couple of orders of magnitude of improvement available from better materials, drivers, etc. That can be had.
Evil is evil, no matter how small

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by TDPerk »

kunkmiester wrote:I don't know about em drive, but as I recall, Mach effect has a couple of orders of magnitude of improvement available from better materials, drivers, etc. That can be had.
Given the drastic improvement to be had from an increase in frequency, I have to think a MEMS implementation is called for even with relatively crappy materials--but with materials that don't degrade with use/temperature--would be a worthy goal.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

kunkmiester
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by kunkmiester »

I recall they were limited in how high they could drive both in frequency and power, both of which would boost thrust. They were also looking at capacitance materials with higher values, K I think was the letter they used. That and frequency were supposed to scale exponentially as I recall.
Evil is evil, no matter how small

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Mach Effect progress

Post by TDPerk »

kunkmiester wrote:I recall they were limited in how high they could drive both in frequency and power, both of which would boost thrust. They were also looking at capacitance materials with higher values, K I think was the letter they used. That and frequency were supposed to scale exponentially as I recall.

Seems like the very small caps which would be on a MEMS system makes those problems easier.

Freq should be easily made quite high.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

Post Reply