My invention that may replace rocket technology

timewerx · Sep 26, 2016

Sorry for the delay. Should have been last week but been busy lately with other work.

Additional parameters will be tested. Next test is mostly for verification of violation of Newton's 3rd Law. To setup a turn table to better demonstrate thrust produced.

Will be compared against a basic ion propulsion drive. To demonstrate major differences between reaction-based and non-reaction based propulsion systems.

Will also be tested for generation of "gravity-well" or quantum forces analogous to gravity - this is a long standing expectation of mine if the Newton's 3rd Law is ever violated. It leads to non-sensible classical extrapolations that only Quantum Mechanics would make sense of.

It is probably be going to be separated into two threads for separate discussion.

lesliedellow · Sep 27, 2016

timewerx said:
Will also be tested for generation of "gravity-well" or quantum forces analogous to gravity - this is a long standing expectation of mine if the Newton's 3rd Law is ever violated. It leads to non-sensible classical extrapolations that only Quantum Mechanics would make sense of.

Perhaps you need reminding that Quantum Mechanics becomes Classical Mechanics at the macroscopic scale.

Do you know what a gravity well is?

doubtingmerle · Sep 27, 2016

timewerx said:
Additional parameters will be tested. Next test is mostly for verification of violation of Newton's 3rd Law. To setup a turn table to better demonstrate thrust produced.

If you can violate Newton's third law of motion it will be a major change in our knowledge of the world, and you will become famous, perhaps more famous than Newton. I await the publication of your results in a refereed journal.

Meanwhile I will remain skeptical.

Good luck!

timewerx · Sep 27, 2016

doubtingmerle said:
If you can violate Newton's third law of motion it will be a major change in our knowledge of the world, and you will become famous, perhaps more famous than Newton. I await the publication of your results in a refereed journal.

Meanwhile I will remain skeptical.

Good luck!

Thanks! However, I'm not actually the first (nor to scientifically prove) to have invented a device that is designed to violate Newton's 3rd Law.

I only did something entirely different in principle but hopefully with a massive improvement potential. If anything, this might be the first for such device to have a "launch engine" potential. That can be developed into a powerful engine enough to break free of the Earth's gravity together with its payload and the entire package.

doubtingmerle · Sep 27, 2016

timewerx said:
Thanks! However, I'm not actually the first (nor to scientifically prove) to have invented a device that is designed to violate Newton's 3rd Law.

Someone has proven an invention that violates Newton's third law of motion? Where has this been documented?

timewerx · Sep 27, 2016

doubtingmerle said:
Someone has proven an invention that violates Newton's third law of motion? Where has this been documented?

This one is still being peer reviewed. It officially went out first. Entirely different principle than the one I'm using.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-theory-explain-EmDrive-man-Mars-10-weeks.htm

There is a major performance issue though and room for further development seem quite limited at the moment.

doubtingmerle · Sep 27, 2016

timewerx said:
This one is still being peer reviewed. It officially went out first. Entirely different principle than the one I'm using.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...-theory-explain-EmDrive-man-Mars-10-weeks.htm

There is a major performance issue though and room for further development seem quite limited at the moment.

Interesting. Actually the claim is not that this violates the 3rd law, but rather that the exhaust is not easily detected.
See http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/adva/6/6/10.1063/1.4953807 .

timewerx · Sep 28, 2016

doubtingmerle said:
Interesting. Actually the claim is not that this violates the 3rd law, but rather that the exhaust is not easily detected.
See http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/adva/6/6/10.1063/1.4953807 .

It is an independent peer review, not solid theory at the moment.

Results tend to be inconclusive due to the very small amount of thrust being produced by the EM Drive (often just dozens of micro newtons).

However, in many published performance figures, the thrust produced per watt is significantly higher than the radiation pressure (0.00667 microNewtons / watt) vs NASA's result in high vacuum (1 microNewton / watt).

It gives me a comfortable advantage at the moment...that is until I get more conclusive proof that my thruster will work in space.

DennisF · Sep 11, 2024

timewerx said:
There's electrical drain from two sources:

- Corona discharges (glowing you saw in the video)
- Possible Quantum tunneling of electrons through the insulator

Quantum tunneling of electrons through an insulator requires that the insulator be very thin- in the 10 nm range. Some companies are working on direct thermal to electric conversion by trying to make an insulator thin enough for tunneling electrons as both the charge and heat carriers of the process.

timewerx · Sep 11, 2024

DennisF said:
Quantum tunneling of electrons through an insulator requires that the insulator be very thin- in the 10 nm range. Some companies are working on direct thermal to electric conversion by trying to make an insulator thin enough for tunneling electrons as both the charge and heat carriers of the process.

True but we're also dealing with electric fields in thousands of kilovolts, not just the 5, 12, 100 volts we find in common household items. Such high voltage will also induce strong electric field /voltage gradients inside the insulator.

You won't just get tunneling if you use 10 nm thin insulator for several thousand kilovolts, the insulator will be vaporized as well!

Anyway, I've pretty much given up on this project and asked the mods to move this thread to

Non-Mainstream and Controversial Science

A subforum for the discussion and debate of non mainstream science topics.

www.christianforums.com

I can't believe it's been 8 years. I used to be older then.

HARK! · Sep 12, 2024

MOD HAT ON

MOD HAT OFF

Jipsah · Sep 14, 2024

timewerx said:
I'm not actually the first (nor to scientifically prove) to have invented a device that is designed to violate Newton's 3rd Law.

"designed to" being the operative phrase. None of them have proven succesful at this point. They have the same success record as perpetual motion machines.

timewerx said:
I only did something entirely different in principle but hopefully with a massive improvement potential.

If your gimmick does anything at all it will be a massive improvement on all its predecessors.

timewerx said:
If anything, this might be the first for such device to have a "launch engine" potential. That can be developed into a powerful engine enough to break free of the Earth's gravity together with its payload and the entire package.

And I might be Elon Musk posing as an old half-redneck half-Asian gaffer from Tennessee, but there isn't any particular reason to bet that way. That pig is still securely situated in a sturdy poke.

timewerx · Sep 14, 2024

Jipsah said:
"designed to" being the operative phrase. None of them have proven succesful at this point. They have the same success record as perpetual motion machines.

If your gimmick does anything at all it will be a massive improvement on all its predecessors.

And I might be Elon Musk posing as an old half-redneck half-Asian gaffer from Tennessee, but there isn't any particular reason to bet that way. That pig is still securely situated in a sturdy poke.

I hope you read my last post before this one. I can't figure out how my device exactly work and given up on it.

Though it seemed to work, I can't figure out the precise nature of how it works as soon as I've accounted for many of the observable effects which doesn't make sense. If I can't figure it out, then my chances of achieving my ultimate goal would be very small and there's a great chance I'd simply waste time and resources on it.

DennisF · Sep 14, 2024

Jipsah said:
"designed to" being the operative phrase. None of them have proven succesful at this point. They have the same success record as perpetual motion machines.

If your gimmick does anything at all it will be a massive improvement on all its predecessors.

And I might be Elon Musk posing as an old half-redneck half-Asian gaffer from Tennessee, but there isn't any particular reason to bet that way. That pig is still securely situated in a sturdy poke.

Hong Kong guy timewerx - don't let this discourage you. Keep thinking creatively, but what you really need to do is to learn what already is known with some certainty about electricity & magnetism (EM). As background you will need calculus, and advanced calculus is a big benefit. (And studying a differential equations textbook cannot hurt either.) Then get an electromagnetic fields textbook and start reading and learning the principles involving Maxwell's four equations plus the two materials relations (relating electric and magnetic field intensity to field density) and also the basic equation that relates E&M fields to force: the Lorentz force equation. Then you will be in a better situation to understand what you are experimenting with.

timewerx · Sep 14, 2024

DennisF said:
Hong Kong guy timewerx - don't let this discourage you. Keep thinking creatively, but what you really need to do is to learn what already is known with some certainty about electricity & magnetism (EM). As background you will need calculus, and advanced calculus is a big benefit. (And studying a differential equations textbook cannot hurt either.) Then get an electromagnetic fields textbook and start reading and learning the principles involving Maxwell's four equations plus the two materials relations (relating electric and magnetic field intensity to field density) and also the basic equation that relates E&M fields to force: the Lorentz force equation. Then you will be in a better situation to understand what you are experimenting with.

Thank you Dennis! I don't actually live in HK but in the much poorer places nearby.

I did took advanced calculus and differential equations in college but never Maxwell. Still I need to brush up on my calculus. I have forgotten it entirely for lack of practice. I never used it in any odd jobs I had.

There's still a factor of fluid or plasma dynamics (is it?) unaccounted for. Potentially structured movements of ionized air occurring between the electrodes because when I eliminated them, the thrust also went away. But when I put it in a sealed containment to restore the flows but otherwise, prevent any thrust from ionized air flows, the thrust is restored. I think this is the part that will get very complicated. Maybe I would need a computerized simulation for that one. There are many CFD (computerized fluid dynamics) software but I don't know if any can also simulate plasma or ionized gas in the presence of EM fields.

DennisF · Sep 14, 2024

timewerx said:
Thank you Dennis! I don't actually live in HK but in the much poorer places nearby.

I did took advanced calculus and differential equations in college but never Maxwell. Still I need to brush up on my calculus. I have forgotten it entirely for lack of practice. I never used it in any odd jobs I had.

There's still a factor of fluid or plasma dynamics (is it?) unaccounted for. Potentially structured movements of ionized air occurring between the electrodes because when I eliminated them, the thrust also went away. But when I put it in a sealed containment to restore the flows but otherwise, prevent any thrust from ionized air flows, the thrust is restored. I think this is the part that will get very complicated. Maybe I would need a computerized simulation for that one. There are many CFD (computerized fluid dynamics) software but I don't know if any can also simulate plasma or ionized gas in the presence of EM fields.

If you start working your way through an EM fields textbook, it will guide you as to what math you need to know. The essential vector calculus (grad, div, and curl) are often summarized in the fields textbooks.

The basic equation for fluid flow is the Navier-Stokes equation. It is worse to work with than Maxwell's four equations and is usually solved numerically by computer. Start with the EM fields book. You will need to know fields theory as fluid mechanics is an add-on to it for what you are interested in.

My invention that may replace rocket technology

the village i--o--t--

Member

I'll think about it.

the village i--o--t--

I'll think about it.

the village i--o--t--

I'll think about it.

the village i--o--t--

Active Member

the village i--o--t--

שמע

Blood Drinker

the village i--o--t--

Active Member

the village i--o--t--

Active Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency