Copped from NSF:
X-Ray Propulsor: Physical Principle for an Electromagnetic Propellantless Propulsion System
Martins is a colleague of Pinheiro:
viewtopic.php?t=1943&sid=aea3e7f79bf751 ... 8986da8a9f
X-Ray Propulsor
Skipjack wrote:Without having read more than a few sentences, I cant help feeling reminded of the infamous EM- drive- thingy that appeared and disappeared again a few years ago.
I saw the name Townsend Brown. Approach with great caution. He was an advocate of the Aether theory, and he attempted to directly refute Einstein.
His work is often cited by the asymmetrical capacitor people.
My Initial response is a crackpottery warning.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
Small world:
My kid's dentist in VA was Townsend Brown's son, Townsend Brown Jr.
No joke.
You just never know what you will find sometimes...
And no, I never asked him about his dad. I figured he had probably had enough of that over the years for me to add to it.
My kid's dentist in VA was Townsend Brown's son, Townsend Brown Jr.
No joke.
You just never know what you will find sometimes...
And no, I never asked him about his dad. I figured he had probably had enough of that over the years for me to add to it.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
Way to overblow a non-issue. His name is mentioned once and only as a reference to the origin of asymmetric capacitors. The author acknowledges that Townsend did not publish his results or provide a theory for what he observed.Diogenes wrote: I saw the name Townsend Brown. Approach with great caution. He was an advocate of the Aether theory, and he attempted to directly refute Einstein.
His work is often cited by the asymmetrical capacitor people.
My Initial response is a crackpottery warning.
I must be missing something here. It looks based on the diagrams and reading that they're going to get a propulsive force by way of a spark? Wouldn't the electron(s) leaving the cathode apply a force opposite their direction of flow in the spark toward the anode. Said force being nullified by the force of the completion of the spark at the anode pushing equally in the direction of the current?
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Yup.
Put this sort of "thruster" in a paper box and you show there's no net thrust.
That's why you have to start with a solution that doesn't violate conservation of any kind. M-E physics answers all the conservation questions. All other nonsense physics--ZPF included--involve impossible "new physics".
frick that nonsense. Woodward's academic volume will be out on Springer soon. Lets wait on that and stop thinking these stupid, shitty ZPF solutions are worth the lunch buy at Burger King.
Put this sort of "thruster" in a paper box and you show there's no net thrust.
That's why you have to start with a solution that doesn't violate conservation of any kind. M-E physics answers all the conservation questions. All other nonsense physics--ZPF included--involve impossible "new physics".
frick that nonsense. Woodward's academic volume will be out on Springer soon. Lets wait on that and stop thinking these stupid, shitty ZPF solutions are worth the lunch buy at Burger King.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
There's no mention of ZPF in the paper. The title is a giveaway: "X-ray Propulsor".
From scanning the paper, my understanding is that X-rays generated by electron bremsstrahlung are the "exhaust". The author claims thrust in the newton range, which seems way too much to me. He equates linear momentum with electromagnetic momentum:
mv = qA, where A is the magnetic vector potential.
Is this legitimate? I don't know, but the idea seems to be interesting enough to warrant some discussion.
Regards,
M.R.F.
From scanning the paper, my understanding is that X-rays generated by electron bremsstrahlung are the "exhaust". The author claims thrust in the newton range, which seems way too much to me. He equates linear momentum with electromagnetic momentum:
mv = qA, where A is the magnetic vector potential.
Is this legitimate? I don't know, but the idea seems to be interesting enough to warrant some discussion.
Regards,
M.R.F.
Speaking of vector potential, a most interesting paper by Martins and Pinheiro:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/080 ... 3721v2.pdf
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/080 ... 3721v2.pdf
Not the same concept as ZPF.Remarkably, the experimental findings by Graham and Lahoz[23] implies that the vacuum is the seat of “something
in motion”, in the way how Maxwell envisaged the “aether”. More recently, it was shown that a medium in uniform
motion with velocity v plays the role of the vector potential, while the charge is proportional to Fresnel’s dragging
coefficient for light in moving media [24]. In the framework of general relativity, Keech and Corum [25] have shown
that an electric null current is accompanied by a neutral fluid current, and it is this null fluid that transports the
energy instead of the electromagnetic field.
Reasoning along this line of thought we thus attribute to the vector potential the property of the velocity of a
“fluid” embedded in the physical vacuum. We recall that the physicality of the vector potential is now well proven
experimentally [26].