EM Drive

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

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

Re: EM Drive

Post by kurt9 »

Dr. White did two sets of experiments based on his theory starting about 10 years ago. The first set produced null results within the sensitivity of his interferometer measurement setup that was deemed necessary by his theory. He then increased the measurement sensitivity of his interferometry by a factor of a thousand, way beyond that which his theory said was needed for a definitive measurement and then performed another set of experiments. He still got a null result. This was around '12 I think. It reasonable to conclude his theory, and the theory this presentation is based on, is wrong.

Dr's Woodward and Fearn, working on their Mach Effect Thruster, got side-tracked for a couple of years with doing a set of experiments to answer once and for all all of the vacuum energy schemes. Their experiments effectively discredited the various vacuum energy/ZPE once and for all. This was a couple of years after White's experiments mentioned above. Another side results of Woodward and Fearn's Mach Effect work over the years is that they have established that there are no possible links between electromagnetism and gravity/inertia. This is the reason why their "Mach_lorenz" thruster scheme that was proposed during the oughts did not work (If it had, we really would have "star-trek" like transportation by now and all of the people involved would be trillionnaires). This is also significant because it discredits all of the anti-gravity schemes, all of which are based on there being such a link between electromagnetism and gravity/inertia.

My point is that I consider Woodward and Fearn's work to be real. But everything else in this milieu is fantasy.

Carl White
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by Carl White »

The thing that started Roger Shawyer off was his observations of certain perturbations in satellite orbits. I wonder whether anyone ever came up with a plausible explanation for them.

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

Re: EM Drive

Post by kunkmiester »

No one ever did an audit of other satellites to see if the oddity he found was more consistent.
Evil is evil, no matter how small

williatw
Posts: 1867
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: EM Drive

Post by williatw »

Carl White wrote:The thing that started Roger Shawyer off was his observations of certain perturbations in satellite orbits. I wonder whether anyone ever came up with a plausible explanation for them.
kunkmiester wrote:No one ever did an audit of other satellites to see if the oddity he found was more consistent.

If it is obviously a fraud and and/or fantasy then why did DARPA commit a million bucks last year to test the idea? DARPA test on the EmDrive started late last year. Probably allot more money/equipment/resources than Sonny White (or Woodard) had to play around with.
Last edited by williatw on Sun Dec 08, 2019 10:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

williatw
Posts: 1867
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: EM Drive

Post by williatw »

kurt9 wrote:Dr. White did two sets of experiments based on his theory starting about 10 years ago. The first set produced null results within the sensitivity of his interferometer measurement setup that was deemed necessary by his theory. He then increased the measurement sensitivity of his interferometry by a factor of a thousand, way beyond that which his theory said was needed for a definitive measurement and then performed another set of experiments. He still got a null result. This was around '12 I think. It reasonable to conclude his theory, and the theory this presentation is based on, is wrong.
I hadn't heard that White ran a 2nd series of test with more sensitive measuring equipment that would have detected the laser beam distortion; last I heard he said the first thing, that his detector wouldn't be able to discern the result he thought he would get even if it worked the way he hoped. He just ran it hoping for the best.
kurt9 wrote: Another side results of Woodward and Fearn's Mach Effect work over the years is that they have established that there are no possible links between electromagnetism and gravity/inertia. This is the reason why their "Mach_lorenz" thruster scheme that was proposed during the oughts did not work (If it had, we really would have "star-trek" like transportation by now and all of the people involved would be trillionnaires). This is also significant because it discredits all of the anti-gravity schemes, all of which are based on there being such a link between electromagnetism and gravity/inertia.
Since we don't really have as far as I know any really good accepted theories as to what the hypothetical link between electromagnetism and gravity/inertia is I don't see how anyone could definitively rule out any connection. Lacking such that only suggested yield would be the result of experimental trial and error. I thought we were on the verge in the last few years of developing better super conductors capable of handling sustainable electromagnetic fields strengths much stronger than previously possible; would think you would have to run many different tests at many different (increasing) field strengths and different configuration(s) (oscillating or otherwise) to make such a blanket statement.

kurt9 wrote:My point is that I consider Woodward and Fearn's work to be real. But everything else in this milieu is fantasy.
Did Sonny White as far as you know get any results from his "Q-Thruster" idea? The idea that "virtual particles" that winked into existence briefly and then winked out of existence could still be used to generate thrust with a properly configured electromagnetic field. I think that was part of his explanation for why he thought the Shawyers' EM Drive worked.

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

Re: EM Drive

Post by kurt9 »

I think you're right that White may not have fully tested his Q-thruster concept. I know at the time NASA gave him money and specifically told him to focus on the warp interferometry experiments, both of which resulted in null results as far as I recollect. I do know that Paul March has worked with Harold White on some of this, Paul March who has a long working relationship with Dr. Woodward.

I must admit that I am biased more towards Woodward's Mach work than White's work, partly because Woodward's theories ultimately derive from Relativity and White's from quantum theory. I consider Relativity to be the more fundamental of the two theories. Woodward has been much more open with his work than White.

The Q-thruster concept is essentially a vacuum energy scheme.

Post Reply