Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 506055
  • *Total Topics: 15116
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 7
  • *Total: 9

Author Topic: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours  (Read 44631 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2015, 05:40:21 AM »
Yes, I was not too impressed with the way it was written either.  At some point in the article, a guy is quoted saying something like...well...we can not really confirm nor deny if it works from these tests...which does not really jive with the whole upsetting of the laws of conservation of energy thing.

I just copied and pasted the headline from the article for the topic title but really...that headline is a little too optimistic at this point.  I really hope it does work and, I hope that the tests are done correctly and verified by others.  Then, we might really have something.

Bill
It would be nice if I were wrong on this one.  But I remain confident that there is nothing to this.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2015, 04:10:40 PM »
Here you can find some information about Prof. Dr. Martin Tajmar and his research:

http://tu-dresden.de/die_tu_dresden/fakultaeten/fakultaet_maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/forschung/folder.2007-08-21.5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/breakthrough_propulsion_physics  (many papers can be downloaded as PDF-files)

The drive mentioned in the article from The Independent seems to be this one:

Tajmar, M. and Fiedler, G.,
 "Direct Thrust Measurements of an EMDrive and Evaluation of Possible Side-Effects",
 AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference, AIAA-2015-4083, Orlando, July 27-29 (2015)

http://tu-dresden.de/die_tu_dresden/fakultaeten/fakultaet_maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/forschung/folder.2007-08-21.5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/JPC%20-%20Direct%20Thrust%20Measurements%20of%20an%20EM%20Drive%20and%20Evaluation%20of%20Possible%20Side-Effects.pdf

Does it work? Probably not! If it did work convincingly, the University would make much more noise in order to get funds. It would be big news in Europe.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2015, 05:08:58 PM »
@Mark E
Quote
It would be nice if I were wrong on this one.  But I remain confident that there is nothing to this.


I believe you are wrong and that we are about to make a leap in technology. Think of it this way, the airplane did not come about because of the invention of wings, propellers or more powerful engines. It came about when people came to understand we could accelerate a volume of air and use the inertia of this volume to produce a force. It came to be when we understood the fluid we call air could be rendered semi-rigid and we could act upon it.


This technology is really no different and it is supposed that we cannot act on an empty space using the same kind of thinking that concluded we could not act on air. As such it comes as no surprise that your argument is the exact same one used 100 years ago. That is you cannot act on something which is not present...but there is something present Mark.


Personally I find it strange that some who proclaim to know so much understand so little. Think of it this way, all particles which make up matter are known to absorb and radiate energy in discrete packets symmetrically. Where do you think this energy comes from?, if it is a proven theory and it is then where do you think this absorbed energy comes from and where is it radiated to?. Rather than dumb down matter to the level of bulk tangible objects we should understand matter as we know it is fluid and made of billions if not trillions of particles, fields and motion.


Now if extremely short wavelength electromagnetic waves could interfere with the energy we know is always being absorbed and radiated at the particle level then this continuous process at that level may become asymmetrical which may produce a force. However you never thought of that did you?, you never thought to consider that the energy input may act on a deeper level than the simple surface effects you seem preoccupied with.


This is the future and it started with nano-technology and the understanding that we can engineer the inherent properties of matter rather than simply accepting them as they are. Why we already have nano-materials which can have strong magnetic properties in one instance and a few micro-seconds later have absolutely no magnetic properties. how does this relate to your understanding of ferromagnetism?, when we can simply turn an inherent material property on and off at will?. You see you have made many assumptions based on simplistic examples which are so out of context they have literally no application.


You cannot compare one apple to another apple which can manipulate it's inherent properties at will because the comparison is completely out of context... context matters. We will engineer and manipulate materials at the atomic level in the future and we will have the ability to change the inherent properties of matter to suit our needs... it's called progress.


"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." -
Albert Einstein



AC

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2015, 05:08:58 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2015, 05:51:09 PM »
@All


Here is the nature of the problem at hand as I see it.


Now I have a rock and a balloon on a table and Mark tells me energy is always conserved and there is nothing I can do to change this fact with respect to the rock and balloon. At which point I say this is true in the sense that if I do nothing then nothing will happen or work in equals work out as it stands... then I say watch this.


At this point I fill the balloon with helium and tie the rock to it and it starts to rise and the wind carries it away and out of sight. Then I say.... what you said is true however the balloon and rock are now interacting with external energy I did not input because I have changed the properties of the system. The force imparted by the wind over a very great distance was not my doing I simply changed the variables and properties to change the result.


So yes Mark is correct and work in equals work out and energy is always conserved when applied in the right context which is constrained. However it does not apply to a change in properties which allows the system to interact with the external environment. My input filling the balloon with helium has no direct relation to the force acting on the balloon over any distance.


As such the simple argument that nothing can happen is false because as always it is dependent on the variables and context in which they are applied. We cannot use the most basic example to explain a more complex one which interacts with the external environment... that is absurd.


The only question we need ask here is ... Is our energy input to change a physical property equivalent to the work which may be performed due to the change in properties as it relates to it's environment?. In the case of the balloon, rock and helium it is not equivalent in which case we might consider other ways in which we could apply this same thought.




AC


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2015, 08:45:25 PM »
@Mark E

I believe you are wrong and that we are about to make a leap in technology.
You are welcome to that view.  We should know for certain within a few months.  As the tests have gotten cleaner, the apparent thrust has gotten smaller, strongly suggesting that when the tests are really clean the apparent thrust will vanish completely.  Reliable data will tell the story either way.
Quote
Think of it this way, the airplane did not come about because of the invention of wings, propellers or more powerful engines.
Well actually manned flight did come about when power to weight ratio became high enough and the Wright brothers worked out a viable control scheme.
Quote
It came about when people came to understand we could accelerate a volume of air and use the inertia of this volume to produce a force. It came to be when we understood the fluid we call air could be rendered semi-rigid and we could act upon it.
Bernoulli came a couple hundred years before the Wright brothers.  His principle was key, but without an engine with a good enough power to weight ratio powered flight was still an impossibility.
Quote


This technology is really no different and it is supposed that we cannot act on an empty space using the same kind of thinking that concluded we could not act on air. As such it comes as no surprise that your argument is the exact same one used 100 years ago. That is you cannot act on something which is not present...but there is something present Mark.
You may think so, but again: reliable data tells the tale.  Reliable data is not yet on Shawyer's side, and the building body of evidence suggests that it won't ever be.
Quote


Personally I find it strange that some who proclaim to know so much understand so little. Think of it this way, all particles which make up matter are known to absorb and radiate energy in discrete packets symmetrically. Where do you think this energy comes from?, if it is a proven theory and it is then where do you think this absorbed energy comes from and where is it radiated to?. Rather than dumb down matter to the level of bulk tangible objects we should understand matter as we know it is fluid and made of billions if not trillions of particles, fields and motion.
If you think you have superior physical theories to those in present use, you are free to articulate them and execute experiments where you expect they will distinguish themselves.
Quote


Now if extremely short wavelength electromagnetic waves could interfere with the energy we know is always being absorbed and radiated at the particle level then this continuous process at that level may become asymmetrical which may produce a force. However you never thought of that did you?, you never thought to consider that the energy input may act on a deeper level than the simple surface effects you seem preoccupied with.
If, and if, and if some more.  If you have an idea then find a way to test it to see if it has merit.
Quote


This is the future and it started with nano-technology and the understanding that we can engineer the inherent properties of matter rather than simply accepting them as they are.
Nano technology utilizes material characteristics with finer control than at larger scales.  The underlying materials themselves do not change.
Quote
Why we already have nano-materials which can have strong magnetic properties in one instance and a few micro-seconds later have absolutely no magnetic properties. how does this relate to your understanding of ferromagnetism?, when we can simply turn an inherent material property on and off at will?. You see you have made many assumptions based on simplistic examples which are so out of context they have literally no application.
You allege that I think one thing or another or assume one thing or another.  I would like to see citations that support those claims.
Quote


You cannot compare one apple to another apple which can manipulate it's inherent properties at will because the comparison is completely out of context... context matters. We will engineer and manipulate materials at the atomic level in the future and we will have the ability to change the inherent properties of matter to suit our needs... it's called progress.
Technology does march on.
Quote


"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." -
Albert Einstein



AC
Magical thinking is also counter productive.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2015, 08:45:25 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #20 on: July 30, 2015, 08:54:45 PM »
@All


Here is the nature of the problem at hand as I see it.


Now I have a rock and a balloon on a table and Mark tells me energy is always conserved and there is nothing I can do to change this fact with respect to the rock and balloon. At which point I say this is true in the sense that if I do nothing then nothing will happen or work in equals work out as it stands... then I say watch this.


At this point I fill the balloon with helium and tie the rock to it and it starts to rise and the wind carries it away and out of sight. Then I say.... what you said is true however the balloon and rock are now interacting with external energy I did not input because I have changed the properties of the system. The force imparted by the wind over a very great distance was not my doing I simply changed the variables and properties to change the result.


So yes Mark is correct and work in equals work out and energy is always conserved when applied in the right context which is constrained. However it does not apply to a change in properties which allows the system to interact with the external environment. My input filling the balloon with helium has no direct relation to the force acting on the balloon over any distance.


As such the simple argument that nothing can happen is false because as always it is dependent on the variables and context in which they are applied. We cannot use the most basic example to explain a more complex one which interacts with the external environment... that is absurd.


The only question we need ask here is ... Is our energy input to change a physical property equivalent to the work which may be performed due to the change in properties as it relates to it's environment?. In the case of the balloon, rock and helium it is not equivalent in which case we might consider other ways in which we could apply this same thought.




AC
Your analogy breaks down unless you can come up with a "momentum wind" that acts on something that does not eject propellant.

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2015, 09:22:32 PM »
The QV really doesn't enter into the claims as Shawyer makes them.  Special relativity does though.


The vacuum only slightly enters into the equation as Shawyer is currently presenting it to the public.  For example, turn the fan around on the sailboat and it goes from a closed system to more of an open system while increasing it's performance and efficiency.  Same thing with the EmDrive.  Convert the EmDrive into an open system and the thrust is greatly increased along with it's efficiency.  In an open system, we can greatly increase the tiny vacuum effect, thus greatly increasing it's thrust.  The technical details shows how to convert this effect into an open system.  I'll post the details in my next few posts.


Gravock

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2015, 09:22:32 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2015, 09:26:18 PM »
I may be wrong but I am fairly sure I read that the actual thrust from one of the devices under discussion was measured as a few hundred millinewtons. It would take several weeks to accelerate a bicycle from 5 mph to 10 mph.


Yes, but not in the open system that is currently being hidden from the public.


Gravock

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2015, 09:36:06 PM »
Your analogy breaks down unless you can come up with a "momentum wind" that acts on something that does not eject propellant.

Here'e the "momentum wind" you've asked for that can act on something that doesn't eject propellant.

The lenard/cathode rays can escape through an outer aluminum layer of the cathode ray tube and will ionize the air. The cathode rays do not directly produce the vacuum. It's the ability of the surrounding medium to absorb the disassociated molecules after they are deformed or ionized by the cathode/lenard rays. The quicker the deformed molecules or ions are absorbed into the surrounding atmosphere, the greater the intensity of the vacuum; the greater the thrust available to the craft.  The positive ions are attracted near the surface of the craft, and the negative ions are repelled away from the craft.  The surrounding atmosphere then absorbs these displaced ions at an extremely fast rate which leaves behind a vacuum.

.......continuing

Gravock






Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2015, 09:36:06 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2015, 09:41:19 PM »

Gassiot, in the middle of the nineteenth century, made the first unsuccessful attempts to pass electricity through rarefied gases. After him, Plucker invented the tube which was later used by Geissler for his experiments, from which the name "Geissler tubes" is derived.  Other scientists of world fame, like Crookes, also carried out experiments with considerable success, which resulted in considerable progress in the field of physics.


In a Geissler tube the atmospheric pressure is reduced to between 1 and 3 mm. of mercury. If the tube contains air and the anode and cathode ends of it are put into contact with the positive and negative poles of a high tension electric current, the whole tube lights up with a violet light, with the exception of a space at the cathode end where the light is blue and separated from the remaining violet light by a dark band.


Various effects are brought about by changing the gas pressure inside the tube, such as the appearance of dark bands which are known as Faraday bands; the disintegration of gas molecules, liberating hydrogen; changes in the colour of the light to green, yellow, red, etc. Crookes succeeded in proving the mechanical action of cathode rays by bombarding rotary blades with them and setting them in motion. Similar experiments with spheres painted black produced the same result.


There was, however, one great difficulty which dogged the steps of science: cathode rays could not leave the tube of rarefied air since they were incapable of passing through any substance. The scientists asked themselves what effect cathode rays had on the ordinary atmosphere.


It was then that Lenard, Nobel prize winner in physics in 1905, working on Hertz' previous experiments, made an aluminium "window" on the opposite side to the cathode which projected the rays outside the tube where they could be studied with ease. He proved that these "Lenard rays" could be propagated in the atmosphere as easily as in the rarefied air of the tube, causing atmospheric phenomena of a similar nature. He proved that the passage of electrons through the dense air of the atmosphere appeared to open up a tunnel giving rise to strong ionization of the particles with considerable air turbulence and luminous effects which varied according to the voltage used.


However, he could not completely comprehend the nature of the phenomena as he did not know that they were the result of a disturbance in the atmosphere and ether. The most important thing as far as we are concerned, is to know whether or not ionization causes a drop in atmospheric pressure. It is now well known from meteorology that heavy ions cause low pressure, they often bring about devastating cyclones.


It is known that the emission of a single particle of medium velocity can produce in the first centimeter of its trajectory through the atmosphere as many as 24,400 ions. The number gradually increases as the particle proceeds along its trajectory. Even using a low voltage, the electrons moved through space at a speed of between 25,000 and 50,000 miles per second.


Later it was observed that by using 250,000 volts, the electrons moved at 150,000 miles per second. In one experiment 900,000 volts was used, but the speed of the electron was not noted. It is also well known that the higher the voltage used, the greater is the number of ions produced, sometimes as many as 2 million ions appearing in the first centimeter of the electron's trajectory.


Subsequent experiments showed that the electrons emanating from cathode ray tubes could break down the atmosphere and set free hydrogen which then also became ionized.  It may well be that these rays break the atmosphere down completely, and set free the nuclei, which they subsequently join up with, thus producing the amount of hydrogen that has been observed.


Madame Curie was able to calculate the speed of ions as 1.3 cm. per electron volt in dense atmosphere, and 6.7 cm. per electron volt when the ionic movement took place in pure hydrogen. This shows that a high voltage would result in a higher electron speed and that in the upper atmosphere the speed would be greater.  The vacuum creating effect is, however, not strictly due to the intrinsic speed of the ion, but to the atmosphere's ability to absorb ionized particles.


While negative ions are absorbed by the atmosphere, the positive ones move towards the negatively charged surface of the saucer, at which point the electrons pass into the vacuum.  In an ordinary cathode ray tube the electric current reaches a saturation point which shows that all the atmospheric particles contained within the tube have been ionized. This is due to the limited amount of electrolyte within the confines of the tube. In the case of the flying saucer the electrolyte is made up of the whole atmospheric envelope of the Earth which never reaches saturation point. The ionized "bubble" surrounding the saucer is attracted and absorbed by the surrounding atmosphere with tremendous force and in its place only a vacuum is left, into which the saucer moves, impelled by the atmospheric pressure of 1.033 kg. per cm2.


........continuing


Gravock

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #25 on: July 30, 2015, 09:49:18 PM »
In order to go straight up, then the vacuum is produced on the top portion of the craft, and the craft will be impelled into the vacuum from the atmospheric pressure underneath.  The craft will always be facing a wall of less than 1 atmospheric pressure as it moves, thus there is no worry for structural damage, fatigue, or being torched.  In addition to this, sound doesn't travel in a vacuum, thus there is no sonic booms associated with these crafts.  There's no g-forces when an object is pulled from the front and is pushed from the back with an equal force.

Gravock

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #25 on: July 30, 2015, 09:49:18 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #26 on: July 30, 2015, 10:02:26 PM »
If there's low pressure on one side, the other side is subject to the full atmospheric pressure.   With an atmospheric pressure of 1.033 kg. per sq. cm. we can calculate the force operating on a saucer of 20 m. diameter is equal to 3,278,272.8 kg.The cathode rays intersect the anode rays at an angle of 45 degrees. This is achieved by using high voltage and current.  If you wish to go very fast, then use an absolute vacuum.  Use a semi-vacuum to move more slowly. The intensity of the vacuum is proportional to the current used and is controlled by a rheostat. If you want to follow an undulating course, then use a pulsing current.

Gravock

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #27 on: July 30, 2015, 10:05:32 PM »
Brown-Biefield effect. There's a thrust in a capacitor toward the negative charge plate too. The plasma produces a magnetic field.


Other than the Brown-Biefield effect being misunderstood, you are absolutely correct!


Gravock

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3256
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2015, 01:43:59 AM »

It's amazing how a simple aluminum window can easily convert the EmDrive from a closed system to an open system, just like turning the fan 180o on the boat with a sail.  By hiding the aluminum window from the public, then it falsely gives the perception that it is a closed system, and then it no longer supports the claims made for the open system with the window.

Gravock

Offline Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
Re: 'Impossible' rocket drive works and could get to Moon in four hours
« Reply #29 on: August 01, 2015, 02:14:17 PM »
"Perhaps" Tesla's valve could be used for this purpose.

 

OneLink