pgtruspace's blog

about things that interest me.

EMF Thruster really Works

Artist concept of activity within thruster cavity that creates external thrust.

Figure

pictures of test device in front of vacuum  chamber.

Figure

A vacuum test campaign evaluating the impulsive thrust performance of a tapered radio-frequency test article excited in the transverse magnitude 212 mode at 1937 MHz has been completed. The test campaign consisted of a forward thrust phase and reverse thrust phase at vacuum with power scans at 40, 60, and 80 W. The test campaign included a null thrust test effort to identify any mundane sources of impulsive thrust; however, none were identified. Thrust data from forward, reverse, and null suggested that the system was consistently performing.

Read More: http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120

An EMF propulsion device that really works! Next will be a test in space. A renewed NASA will have a new toy. The paradigm of the “Fabric of Space” will need to be rewritten..again…pg

Also see Impossible EM Thruster

From paper;  Discussion  

    Before providing some qualitative thoughts on the proposed physics potentially at work in the tapered RF test articles, it will be useful to provide a brief background on the supporting physics lines of thought. In short, the supporting physics model used to derive a force based on operating conditions in the test article can be categorized as a nonlocal hidden-variable theory, or pilot-wave theory for short.

Pilot-wave theories are a family of realist interpretations of quantum mechanics that conjecture that the statistical nature of the formalism of quantum mechanics is due to an ignorance of an underlying more fundamental real dynamics, and that microscopic particles follow real trajectories over time just like larger classical bodies do. The first pilot-wave theory was proposed by de Broglie in 1923 [4], where he proposed that a particle interacted with an accompanying guiding wave field, or pilot wave, and this interaction was responsible for guiding the particle along its trajectory, orthogonal to the surfaces of constant phase. In 1926, Madelung [5] published a hydrodynamic model of quantum mechanics by recasting the linear Schrödinger equation into hydrodynamic form, where the Planck constant was analogous to a surface tension σσ in shallow-water hydrodynamics and vacuum fluctuations were the reason for quantum mechanics. In 1952, Bohm [6,7] published a pilot-wave theory where the guiding wave was equivalent to the solution of the Schrödinger equation and a particle’s velocity was equivalent to the quantum velocity of probability. Soon after, the Bohmian mechanics line of thinking was extended by others to incorporate the effects of a stochastic subquantum realm, and de Broglie augmented his initial pilot-wave theory with this approach in 1964 [8], adopting the parlance “hidden thermodynamics.” A family of models categorized as vacuum-based pilot-wave theories or stochastic electrodynamics (SED) [9] further explored the concept that the electromagnetic vacuum fluctuations of the zero point field represent a natural source of stochasticity in the subquantum realm and provide classical explanations for the origin of the Planck constant, Casimir effect, ground state of hydrogen, and much more.

It should be noted that the pilot-wave domain experienced an early setback when von Neumann [10] published an impossibility proof against the idea of any hidden-variable theory. This and other subsequent impossibility proofs were later discredited by Bell 30 years later in 1966 [11], and Bell went on to say in the preface of his 1987 book [12] that the pilot wave eliminated the shifty boundary between wavy quantum states on the one hand and Bohr’s classical terms on the other: said simply, there was a real quantum dynamics underlying the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics.

Although the idea of a pilot wave or realist interpretation of quantum mechanics is not the dominant view of physics today (which favors the Copenhagen interpretation), it has seen a strong resurgence of interest over the last decade based on some experimental work pioneered by Couder and Fort [13]. Couder and Fort discovered that bouncing a millimeter-sized droplet on a vibrating shallow fluid bath at just the right resonance frequency created a scenario where the bouncing droplet created a wave pattern on the shallow bath that also seemed to guide the droplet along its way. To Couder and Fort, this seemed very similar to the pilot-wave concept just discussed and, in subsequent testing by Couder and others, this macroscopic classical system was able to exhibit characteristics thought to be restricted to the quantum realm. To date, this hydrodynamic pilot-wave analog system has been able to duplicate the double slit experiment findings, tunneling, quantized orbits, and numerous other quantum phenomena. Bush put together two thorough review papers chronicling the experimental work being done in this domain by numerous universities [14,15].

In addition to these quantum analogs, there may already be direct evidence supportive of the pilot-wave approach: specifically, Bohmian trajectories may have been observed by two separate experiments working with photons [16,17]. Reconsidering the double slit experiment with the pilot-wave view, the photon goes through one slit, and the pilot wave goes through both slits. The resultant trajectories that photons follow arTruespacee continuous real trajectories that are affected by the pilot wave’s probabilistic interference pattern with itself as it undergoes constructive and destructive interference due to reflections from the slits.

In the approach used in the quantum vacuum plasma thruster (also known as a Q thruster) supporting physics models, the zero point field (ZPF) plays the role of the guiding wave in a similar manner to the vacuum-based pilot-wave theories. To be specific, the vacuum fluctuations (virtual fermions and virtual photons) serves as the dynamic medium that guides a real particle on its way. Two recent papers authored by members of this investigation team explored the scientific ramifications of this ZPF-based background medium. The first paper [18] considered the quantum vacuum at the cosmological scale in which a thought experiment applied to the Einstein tensor yielded an equation that related the gravitational constant to the quantity of vacuum energy in the universe, implying that gravity might be viewed as an emergent phenomenon: a long wavelength consequence of the quantum vacuum. This viewpoint was scaled down to the atomic level to predict the density of the quantum vacuum in the presence of ordinary matter. This approach yielded a predicted value for the Bohr radius and electron mass with a direct dependency on dark energy. The corollary from this work pertinent to the q-thruster models is that the quantum vacuum is a dynamic medium and could potentially be modeled at the microscopic scale as an electron-positron plasma. The quantum vacuum around the hydrogen nucleus was considered in much more detail in the second paper [19]. Here, the energy density of the quantum vacuum was shown to theoretically have a 1/r41/r4 dependency moving away from the hydrogen nucleus (or proton). This 1/r41/r4 dependency was correlated to the Casimir force, suggesting that the energy density in the quantum vacuum is dependent on geometric constraints and energy densities in electric/magnetic fields. This paper created a quasi-classical model of the hydrogen atom in the COMSOL Multiphysics software (COMSOL is not an acronym) that modeled the vacuum around the proton as an electron-positron plasma. These analysis results showed that the n=1n=1 to 7 energy levels of the hydrogen atom could be viewed as longitudinal resonant acoustic wave modes in the quantum vacuum. This suggests that the idea of treating the quantum vacuum as a dynamic medium capable of supporting oscillations might be valid. If a medium is capable of supporting acoustic oscillations, this means that the internal constituents were capable of interacting and exchanging momentum.

If the vacuum is indeed mutable and degradable as was explored, then it might be possible to do/extract work on/from the vacuum, and thereby be possible to push off of the quantum vacuum and preserve the laws of conservation of energy and conservation of momentum. It is proposed that the tapered RF test article pushes off of quantum vacuum fluctuations, and the thruster generates a volumetric body force and moves in one direction while a wake is established in the quantum vacuum that moves in the other direction.

A vacuum test campaign that used an updated integrated test article and optimized torsion pendulum layout was completed. The test campaign consisted of a forward thrust element that included performing testing at ambient pressure to establish and confirm good tuning, as well as subsequent power scans at 40, 60, and 80 W, with three thrust runs performed at each power setting for a total of nine runs at vacuum. The test campaign consisted of a reverse thrust element that mirrored the forward thrust element. The test campaign included a null thrust test effort of three tests performed at vacuum at 80 W to try and identify any mundane sources of impulsive thrust; none were identified. Thrust data from forward, reverse, and null suggested that the system was consistently performing at 1.2±0.1  mN/kW1.2±0.1  mN/kW, which was very close to the average impulsive performance measured in air. A number of error sources were considered and discussed. Although thermal shift was addressed to a degree with this test campaign, future testing efforts should seek to develop testing approaches that are immune to CG shifts from thermal expansion. As indicated in Sec. II.C.8, a modified Cavendish balance approach could be employed to definitively rule out thermal. Although this test campaign was not focused on optimizing performance and was more an exercise in existence proof, it is still useful to put the observed thrust-to-power figure of 1.2  mN/kW1.2  mN/kW in context. The current state-of–the-art thrust to power for a Hall thruster is on the order of 60  mN/kW60  mN/kW. This is an order of magnitude higher than the test article evaluated during the course of this vacuum campaign; however, for missions with very large delta-v requirements, having a propellant consumption rate of zero could offset the higher power requirements. The 1.2  mN/kW1.2  mN/kW performance parameter is over two orders of magnitude higher than other forms of “zero-propellant” propulsion, such as light sails, laser propulsion, and photon rockets having thrust-to-power levels in the 3.336.67  μN/kW3.33–6.67  μN/kW (or 0.00330.0067  mN/kW0.0033–0.0067  mN/kW) range.     G. G. SpanjersAssociate Editor

 

I guess they will need Aether for this thing to work.

As they only used 300 volts as the bias field, They will need to study Tesla’s work, as MUCH higher voltages will be needed to really get traction on the stuff of space. At least 100 times greater to get real traction.

 

Tesla’s dream of an EMF propulsion system will be achieved and humans will have their Truespace drive. The second gift from GOD for this era…pg

Advertisements

16 responses to “EMF Thruster really Works

  1. pg sharrow November 22, 2016 at 5:16 pm

    In theory;
    1 tenth of the speed of light acceleration should be the maximum possible acceleration rate.
    Apply 60 hp or 50 kilowatts to get 1G, 32 feet per second- per second, acceleration for 1000 pounds of mass. 1G acceleration for 40 days to achieve trans light speed…pg

  2. pg sharrow November 22, 2016 at 5:56 pm

    The demonstration of this device provides proof for my own device. The energies in operation inside the device influence the actions of the Aether outside the device to get “traction” in the Aether. Much higher voltages will be needed to “stiffen” that effect. I’m not sure that microwave frequencies are needed, RF of modest kilohertz should create the effect although higher frequency would result in faster speeds…pg

  3. Simon Derricutt March 26, 2017 at 12:26 pm

    pg – also worth looking at http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.fr/2014/01/mihsc-101.html which is somewhat mind-blowing but is probably a lot closer to being right than other cosmological ideas. Mike keeps finding more things that the equations explain/predict, and there are no fudge-factors involved. I think it’s crazy enough to be true, but still can’t understand how Unruh waves really work, in that they are instantly affected by the distance to the edge of the universe. Some mental agility needed.

  4. E.M.Smith March 26, 2017 at 12:38 pm

    My brain hurts…

    I’m going to re-read this a couple of times. It “feels right”, but there’s a lot of new perspective needed…

  5. p.g.sharrow March 27, 2017 at 10:03 pm

    @EMSmith; this has been a real headache for me for 30 years! Sometimes in engineering it has to look or feel right before it is right. 😉 there is something to this, electricity is the fundamental force.
    Need very high stress / bias voltage and high frequency field oscillation of polarity to get a real result. One of these days I need to try making artificial gravity…pg

  6. p.g.sharrow March 28, 2017 at 7:07 am

    @Simon; Read Mike McCulloch’s concept on mass/inertia, Unruh waves and Hawking radiation. Way too complex for me. Might just be the point of view. I am more of a “hammer” kind of guy. As an Electrician, I think more in EMF energies rather then exotic mathematical constructs of postulated waves. Waves of what? In what? Why add to the complexity of the explanation?

    It seems to me that mass/inertia is an external effect in the Aether caused by the electro-static stress between Mater and the Aether. Gravity is also a result of this stress.

    In the field of research of Atomic particles, EMF stress is used to “Warp the Dielectric” to induce acceleration. In electronics this is used to create capacitance. In the macro world, Gravity! From the atomic level this is all the same, Physical Mater attempting to center it’s self within it’s charge field.

    T. Townson Brown demonstrated that when plate capacitors are charged, they move in the direction of the positive pole. Mater acceleration caused by change in electro-static stress in it’s dielectric. Once put in motion it tends to stay in motion until acted on by an outside force. There must be an external connection with “the fabric of space” to cause this effect. As you know Electronic effects tend to manifest on the outer skin of the conductors, not inside! The above “can” is applying it’s action, outside not inside. In it’s material, not it’s internal void…pg

  7. E.M.Smith March 28, 2017 at 10:05 am

    I tend to think it is one level deeper than the electric force. That is derived of electrons, which are themselves made up of smaller bits. IMHO, the fundamental bit is the photon, as that is what everything ends up as when smashed enough…

    Yet electron motion can create photons and photons can create electric charge, so clearly these two are “joined at the hip”. The path from one to the other is what tends to elude me… (then again, Einstein got a Nobel – back when the really meant something – for his photovoltaic observations, so maybe it’s OK to think it complicated 😉

    IMHO, antennas hold some kind of key. The too create photons out of electrical motion, but very very low energy photons that have a very large spacial distribution (wavelength). Part of why I think the photon is a linear momentum object (travel at the speed of light, by definition) but with some residual rotational momentum (that wavelength thing…) and when you get the rotational momentum high enough you get “matter” as it “condenses” into a point. Then that spin drags space around with it a little and “Viola” (Voilà) you get gravity and the “music of the spheres”…

    I suspect there is a constant momentum at the core of all things. Make it all linear and in one small packet, you have a photon. Make it mostly rotational so lots of photons can stay near each other, you get particles, mass, and matter.

    How that would interact with Aether, I have no clue. How to get past that conceptual framework into actual reality and / or test any of the idea and / or extend it? Not got there yet (and not making progress either).

    Part of the key, I suspect, may be hiding in how an antenna works. We cause electrons to rush back and forth in a chunk of conductive matter. When their to-and-fro is resonant with the length of that matter, some photons leave at that size. Perhaps as that is when the electron can have one of the photons that make it up rotating at just that speed finds the rotation translated into linear as it travels down the wire and that sets it free… Think of a tire rotating to the right going down a road at just the same speed as a spot on it rotates to the left… the spot becomes linear instead of rotational and linear moving photons are light, not matter… so it leaves. At least, that’s the conceptual model I’m trying to fit…

    Or maybe I’m just making up porkies ’cause that’s what fits in my tiny little brain… 😉

    So bounce some photons around inside a can. Some will couple into that can and create electric flows, and that moves to the outer skin where some of it leaves as photons too? Did anyone measure outside the can for ANY AND ALL EMF? Could this just be a “light drive” at frequencies we are not watching? Put pressure on a cone from the outside, it moves toward the fat end…

  8. p.g.sharrow March 28, 2017 at 10:06 pm

    @EMSmith; I think you are at least 90% correct. I just added to that the concept that virtual particles are actually quanta of Aether in motion. A wave that looks like a particle. Get enough of those quanta of chaos organized into a singularity and a proton results, Real Mater. Electrons, photons , neutrinos and other ons are all the same thing with different electronic signatures due to their amount motion in 3 dimensions, travel, spin and wobble. Much like a bullet that dumdums.
    A researcher at the Lawrence Labs did a paper in 1987, IIRC, on the interchangeability of these “particles” by studying their “Tracks”. He claimed that in collisions between them they would change from one to another.
    I think that Aether is just quanta of charge in chaos (negative charge) packed tightly. Moorly said the Aether behaves as if it were packed like a gas at 10,000 psi. when he was measuring the speed of light through different materials.
    Protons on the other hand exhibit a deep lack of charge ( or positive charge) not neutral! and are polar magnetic like a bar magnet, and afflict the Aether with their apparent mass/inertia.
    Once you grasp the concept Aether as quanta of charge in chaos every thing just seems to fit together. The GOD particle that is the foundation of everything……………….even GOD…pg

  9. Simon Derricutt April 22, 2017 at 2:56 pm

    Something went wrong when I put that comment in, and it told me there was an error, and I assumed it hadn’t gone through so intended to maybe put it in again – I’m not quite certain it’s a friendly thing to drop that sort of concept on people. The system didn’t tell me there were replies, either. Sorry for not replying earlier, but I’ve been a little busy. I look when I’m poked in some way, as with the Korea post.

    Yep, Mike’s ideas make my brain hurt, too. He’s been developing it for the last 10 years and it’s mostly being ignored even though it’s without fudge-factors and he keeps finding other things that it predicts to a high degree of accuracy. The Unruh waves, as defined, are in fact standard EM waves and travel at light-speed. The waves that Mike is calling Unruh waves, though, need to be in resonance with the effective horizon and so can’t be EM and need to be instantaneous. That horizon is very long way away. I suppose that it’s actually a wave/resonance in the probability-wave of the matter, and if so that also means that that probability wave doesn’t stretch to infinity but only to the horizon. If you reached the page in Mike’s blog where he calculated the thrust that each of the known EMDrive experiments produced from the details he knew of the dimensions, it’s pretty impressive. A theory that is so clean and works that well must have some truth at the basis.

    For an antenna to radiate well, it’s necessary that it’s resonating since the coupling of the aerial itself to the environment is pretty small – it will however transmit if fed with AC of an off-resonance frequency, just not very well. By resonating, you get a lot higher effective voltage and a lot more electrons moving around faster. The inductance of a straight wire is appreciable, and I suspect it’s simply the momentum of the electrons. The resonance is also affected by the capacitance, so this is again the capacitance to the environment. Or the Aether if you wish to call it that. The name isn’t that critical, but the properties of it are. I don’t know if it consists of anything, and of course there are a number of different descriptions of how it may be constructed. I’m still in the state of not accepting any description of what it’s made of, and when one turns up that “feels right” and (more importantly) the predictions pan out then I’ll maybe follow it.

    The interesting thing about matter is that it appears to be two opposite photons joined together. When an electron and positron collide they produce 511keV gamma photons, and it’s reasonable to think that if those gamma-rays collide then they could produce an electron/positron pair. Presumably all particles have the same makeup, in that the photons that make them up have gained/lost some fundamental thing such as charge, spin etc.. Getting off-topic here. It’s just that there’s something there that’s just beyond our reach so far, and it will probably be fairly simple when we find out what it is.

    Still, the EMDrive does seem to actually work and produce thrust. If you accept Mike McCulloch’s explanation, then this is an indication that the universe is weirder than we thought and that momentum is quantised and thus not precisely conserved when we’re down at the very low acceleration range. This anomaly has in fact been seen by NASA and was unexplained. I expect that we’ll find a way to exploit it to get a star drive. Antigravity I’m not so sure about.

  10. p.g.sharrow April 22, 2017 at 8:37 pm

    @Simon’ I’m glad to see you come back to examine this further. This is a subject that I have been engrossed in for the last 25 years.
    What is the fundamental nature of the Universe? How is it that mass/inertia have effect? What is the cause of Gravity? What is Electro-Motive-Force (EMF)?
    Like Einstein and Tesla, it appeared to me that the activities of Photon and Electron had to give us the clues to every thing else. To build a working theory it appeared to me that we must discard all other theories and build from scratch fitting the known, proved parts together as we went. The standard Model was a big disappointment as some parts fit well and others not at all. How is it that no matter which direction we look, we seem to be in the middle of the known universe that packets of energy, photons, can cross with little loss of energy! Just what the hell IS a photon that can accomplish this feat? What is the stuff of space that allows this to happen? And how is it that photon “looks” to be both wave and particle?

    Charge in motion creates the effects of EMF, or at least that is what I learned in my schooling for Electric /Electronics. Got to start somewhere 🙂 So I started with “Charge”, In our world “charge” is negative, positive is a “hole” or lack of charge. A filled “hole” is neutral or plus-minus. What do you expect from an electrical geek!

    Charge seems to be quantified, all electrons seem to have the same amount of charge and all protons the same lack of charge. Marry the two and a neutron is created, +/- neutral.

    Then we get to “photons”, very strange creature, travels like a particle, wave and is detected like a wave, particle that can cross the universe and cause EMF effects that are undiminished by it’s travel.

    All the detection devices that I know of require the displacement of an electron to indicate an event has taken place, so right there we have prejudiced our detection results. They may be right or not.

    Realizing this, the data results might be skewed or may be a clue to how everything might be connected…pg

  11. Simon Derricutt April 23, 2017 at 3:09 am

    pg – things have been a bit hectic here, and I lose track of time passing. I’m getting the kit together to do sputtering in order to make the devices I need, which will take environmental energy and turn it into electricity for re-use. Not easy to do on a small budget. If you want, I’ll send you the technical details of what I’m doing – just keep it secret for a while since people who invest in it need to see a profit and otherwise won’t put the money up. Applies to EMS, too, if you want to know…. This is in its way a real perpetual motion system (that is, PM is not impossible and we actually have systems that exhibit it at the moment, but they are not seen for what they are), and I think I’ve figured out a way to improve the power-delivery by a few orders of magnitude so it’s actually useful. I’ll find out fairly soon if I’m simply deluded or have a commercially-useful device.

    My current answer to your questions is that I don’t know. There are bits of ideas that seem to work, but Mike McCulloch’s maths (and that the predictions are so good) makes the idea of the Holographic universe a bit more relevant. I do see that the whole universe is a single system that is totally interconnected and that there is thus a single clock, and that effects travel instantaneously even though light is also a limiting velocity for matter and EM signals. Gravity appears to be instantaneous, for example. I thus think the recently-published LIGO findings (collision of two black holes) are probably misinterpreted, and also that we don’t need a 4km tube for the LIGO but simply enough reflections. Like Michelson-Morley, the results are misinterpreted.

    Mike’s theory explains (in its way) why we seem to be in the middle of the universe – what’s outside it is beyond Rindler horizons and thus unknowable and can have no effect on us.

    It’s not just the photon that is a wave and particle at the same time – that applies to every particle. As such, we can calculate the DeBroglie wavelength of an electron in the Copper conduction bands (IIRC the energy is around 7eV and the wavelength is around 10 microns). That has implications as to how quickly you can change the material the electron is in without it noticing.

    Yep, detecting particles ends up moving electrons around, and lots of other stuff could be happening that we don’t have the capability to measure. It’s however easy to speculate on stuff you can’t measure and thus can’t prove whether it’s right or not. At the moment I’ll be sticking to stuff I can measure unless there’s strong evidence of *something else*.

    Still, if we’re really getting down to the nitty-gritty here, we need to explain charge and why like charges repel and unlike charges attract. We can model something like that by using more dimensions (imagine a rubber sheet with two balls dimpling it – they will roll together, and if we use a negative mass (Helium balloon under the sheet) then the ball and balloon will separate – here like charges attract and unlike ones repel, but we can’t have everything in this analogy) but I don’t know if those dimensions are real – by definition we can’t measure them in our 3D world.

    The current explanations are not really satisfactory, and of course the mysterious Higgs Boson was introduced to explain inertia. With Mike’s explanation, we don’t need the Higgs, which is pretty lucky since I think it probably doesn’t exist anyway. If you look at the equations of motion involved in those particles you find some pretty complex calculations. My feeling is that the equations ought to be a lot simpler and come from very simple principles, with the appearance of complexity only arriving because of the numbers involved. There’s no way that a particle can do all those calculations in order to work out where it should be – it simply reacts to what it sees at the time. Do virtual particles really exist or is it just that the maths works out nicely? Hard to really say, but I’d prefer to stick to things I can see and measure rather than inventing phantoms.

    Could be that on this subject I’ll never find any theory that is satisfying. As such, I’ll get free energy sorted out first – I have all the logic there and I’m pretty certain that it will work. It’s also pretty useful to have. For hot climates, it will give you air-cooling and power out at the same time, and for cold climates it can take the heat from outside and move it inside the house, and no fuel is needed. It will thus knock a pretty large spike in the AGW guns and I’m cynical enough to use the “zero Carbon” idea to sell it even though it won’t make any difference, except to show that human-generated CO2 was never the problem and that climates have always changed and always will (at least until the Earth gets burnt up by the Sun going Red Giant). That’s a long way in the future, though….

  12. p.g.sharrow April 30, 2017 at 8:06 am

    @Simon; I’ve been following your discussions at Smith’s blog and the links provided. No need to send me additional information. You are following concepts that I also follow, just a different goal in mind.
    Boy! do I know how time flies when you have too many Irons in the fire. I haven’t been able to work on my physics experiment for 3 years because of the demands on my time and funds. Maybe this year will be different. One can hope.
    Be sure to utilize gravity to improve your odds for getting a good outcome. Changes in output due to changes in orientation would be helpful to know in my endevour as well.
    I don’t see any reason that your concept Can’t work. GOD uses the same thing to power the Universe, you are just working at a different scale in size and time. I think that this is so simple, once it is figured out, that there will be a dam burst in physics and innovation. Though not beneficial to the pioneers, of great benefit to the human race…pg

  13. Simon Derricutt April 30, 2017 at 8:27 am

    pg – I’ve been developing the ideas by writing occasional articles on Revolution-Green over the last few years. I’ll sort out a document and email it to you, since it’s always useful to have the technical details in other countries.

    Though the bought-in kit to make what I want is pretty expensive (all-in maybe around $100k) I have the ability to make most of it and get secondhand parts and repair them. I’ve now got the time and enough money to bring the project to completion. There are several possible designs I can test out, and I’ve got some help too so it will happen this year.

    Early on I was loathe to call it perpetual motion, but that’s actually what it is. That energy doesn’t go away, and just needs re-aligning in order to re-use it. Where the limits of 2LoT apply (and they still do in the majority of applications) we make energy by burning something and then use it once to do work and then it’s dissipated as heat. By re-aligning that heat energy we can re-use it. It’s really that simple, and it took me a long time to see that because I’d been taught that we can use energy once. We can also call it Free Energy, but the various Free Energy experimenters so far don’t realise what I’m saying so are still trying to get their magnet motors to work. Oh well….

  14. p.g.sharrow April 30, 2017 at 10:42 pm

    @Simon, I want to commend you for your restraint in dealing with Will Janoschka. While you illuminate with your POV, he just throws up great clouds of smoke and confusion. Reminds me of a physics professor that has a bad attitude towards a student that refuses to accept the old standard model that he was an enthusiast of. At least Oliver Manual sometimes gives us enlightenment while riding his hobby horse. He has also learned a bit from us 😉

    Be glad to examine your stuff, not sure if I can contribute anything of value. From what I have seen so far there appears to be room to drive a truck through but not sure of your drive train as of yet.
    I work in applied science with a broad field of experience and think in 3 dimensional pictures not in higher math formula. An old farmer, not an academic. So don’t feed me a bunch of complex calculations to prove your work, to be practical it must work in the gross. Solar PV is barely practical and I have been in love with it since the mid 1970s. After examining all of the costs involved it can only contribute in special applications. Wind power is even worse. These things must be exposed to the elements to work so have a rather short life because they self destruct.
    We live in an ocean of energies beneath a Niagara Falls and the educated say we can’t measure it so it does not exist. I can see it! Gravity, mass/inertia, EMF, quanta “particles” all right there in front of us. Time to throw off the thermal thinking of FIRE! and grasp the wonder of nuclear energies.

    Everything feeds on something, so there is no free lunch. BUT! there is a great deal that we do not fully understand about how the Universe works. The “Big Bang” of standard theory is not even logical but that is what we get from accepted science because the math in the theories says it must be so. GOD is not a mathematician! Just because man can give an approximation of GODs work in mathematical equation does not make it a law. ..pg

  15. Simon Derricutt May 1, 2017 at 1:04 am

    pg – there’s no point in getting annoyed with Will. When I answer I just need to remember it’s not really him I’m talking to but instead all the others on EM’s blog. Will is only after all stating the entrenched attitudes I need to answer.

    I’ve given some examples that can be purchased, and the Lovell device can be made at home. Though I haven’t personally replicated the Lovell device, RMS did and found that it worked, and one of his followers made a somewhat larger (and less well-made) version and showed it producing a lot more power when warmed. Lovell died, and his kids have been trying to sell the devices (and maybe the company too, I think) but they don’t know why it works. They do know that it just needs a single source of heat (no second colder sink needed) and have measured the output at various temperatures. I see no reason to doubt their measurements, either. Looks like the general response is ignoring it, maybe because people think it’s just another scam. It doesn’t work well at room temperature because they’re using a too-large band gap, but would be OK recovering waste industrial heat.

    My design needs deposition of thin films of the correct materials in the same way as the Lovell device, but since I’ve come from electronics the active materials perform somewhat better than the Lovell device and I’ve calculated the output we ought to get down to -60°C, so though you’ll need 4 times as much in the Arctic it will still actually work. Basically, take the structure that is used for solar panels and change the semiconductor to one with a very low band-gap. It should just work, but in order to make that I need the tools for semiconductor fabrication. Those are gathering on the kitchen table and I should have functional kit in a month or so.

    The core of the idea, though, is simply that all we need to do is put the directionality back into the “waste” energy and we can use it again to do work. That energy isn’t lost, and all that’s lost when we use it is the ordering into all going in the same direction. It took me 40 years to see that simple fact, since I had to get over what I’d been taught.

    There are several methods for restoring that directionality, and I’ve just chosen the simplest one to make that will actually deliver what I want. Once there’s something on the market and the principle can’t be denied any longer, there will be some bright people who design better ones. It needs someone to kick-start the process, and only a crackpot can do that since it’s against current theory. It’s impossible until I can prove absolutely that it’s not only possible but quite easy.

    You’re right that we live in a sea of energy. It doesn’t need maths to understand the principles of how we make that energy usable, simply the realisation that in order to do work we need to have that energy moving in the same direction and it doesn’t take any effort to change the direction of energy. We change the direction of energy all the time. Bounce a ball, shine a torch at a mirror, use a crow-bar…. We do it all the time without even thinking about it.

    The nice thing about this is that someone will only need to buy a panel once. It doesn’t need to be out in the weather, so won’t degrade over time like a PV or windmill does. No need for the grid, and no way that the government can switch off your power once you’ve got it.

    I’ll be doing some editing over the next few days and send you the technical details of what I’ve designed and how to make it. I don’t expect you to get the sputtering kit or to learn the techniques, but you can if you want to. I’m getting some professional help via Mark Dansie which should shorten the time it takes to get to something that works, and there are still some technical questions I can’t answer until we’ve measured the results. As such, the “how to make it” will likely need updating once the data is in.

    Meantime, a friend of mine in Australia (Phil Hardcastle) has an alternative design that is a bit harder to make (and maybe to understand as well) that should also be produced fairly soon. There are a few other people I know of working on alternative methods. It only takes one successful product to initiate the changeover to recycling energy rather than burning things to get energy.

  16. Simon Derricutt May 3, 2017 at 2:24 pm

    pg – maybe an alternate angle may help in seeing the problem. The 2LoT says basically that heat will move from hotter to colder, and that this movement can deliver work.

    Why does heat move from hotter to colder?

    That’s the sort of question that I’d have asked as a kid, and have gotten either the answer of “it’s obvious!” or “that’s a stupid question!” and a clip around the head.

    Actually, heat doesn’t move from hotter to colder. That’s the beginning of the real answer. Heat is kinetic energy, and when you put it into an object it will bounce around on a random walk, splitting into smaller bits and so on until that initial energy input has an equal probability of being anywhere it can physically get to. Sometimes it will travel to a place that’s hotter, and sometimes to a place that is colder, but it doesn’t actually take any notice of the temperature – it’s just spreading out from where it started in that random walk. Over time, we’ll measure that energy heading towards that even distribution. Meantime, all the other bits of energy there are all doing the same thing of tending towards an even probability of being everywhere they can get to. When we therefore measure the temperature somewhat later, we find that the hot side has become colder and the cold side has become hotter, and now all areas are the same temperature. The heat has moved from the hotter to the colder as far as the measurements show us, but that energy doesn’t suddenly stop moving around in its random walk once the temperatures are the same. That energy is still moving around just as fast, but it’s now a dynamic equilibrium. When one bit of energy leaves our measurement spot, another bit (on average) randomly moves into it. There’s a little jiggle around that average, which is the only clue that things aren’t really steady-state.

    What the measurements tell us and what is really happening are two different things. The thermometers tell us that the heat moves from hotter to colder, but what’s actually happening is a random spreading-out of each bit of energy until the probabilities of being anywhere are equal. In the course of that random movement, the source and destination temperatures are actually irrelevant. This is the nature of the random processes we are dealing with. The energy will go towards somewhere hot just as easily as it will go somewhere cold. It’s only when we average everything out, we’ll see a net movement from hot to cold.

    The standard viewpoint is that heat only moves when there is a differential, and then only moves in one direction. This is shown to be a lie by Brownian motion – in thermal equilibrium there is still movement in every direction.

    Another source of environmental energy is atmospheric air pressure. Consider what happens if you throw a dried pea at a piezoelectric sounder. You get a pulse of electricity out that you can rectify to produce power out, and the pea will rebound at a lower velocity than it hit with. Air pressure is caused by all those air molecules hitting the boundaries, and if we have a large area then it’s seen as a constant. As we use a smaller and smaller microphone, though, we get to see more variations around the average pressure, and there is a certain minimum size beyond which the random noise is bigger than the signal. Take it a lot smaller still, of the order of the mean-free-path of those air molecules (about 70nm for NTP), and use a fast-enough (around 7GHz) diode with a small-enough forward voltage, and you can generate power from air pressure. The air will of course cool down in the process. A friend of mine has just invented a diode that will probably do the job and is relatively easy to make…. Sadly, this method (it should produce around 1kW/m² at 10% efficiency) isn’t patentable, since I published it around 4 years ago. Oh well….

    The silly thing is that all these things are obvious once you start to look. It’s built into the equations we use, but then there’s that insistence that heat (or kinetic energy) can only move in one direction, when we can see that’s not correct using just a microscope and some pollen, and we’ve known that a very long time. Instead, the 2LoT brings up paradoxes when you look at things on a microscopic or molecular scale. Kinetic energy doesn’t know its source temperature, and can’t see the temperature of its destination. It just moves. When there are enough transactions we see an emergent pattern of it moving from a higher density to a lower density, but at the individual transaction level that simply doesn’t apply – it’s just a random walk.

    I hope this explains things a little better.

please say something interesting

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: