Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
The wikipedia page on pair production has an answer to Hotson`s question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production <> Harry On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:27 PM Terry Blanton wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:18 PM Terry Blanton wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:07 PM JonesBeene wrote: >> >>> If one is a follower of Don Hotson >>> >> >> If one wants to be, >> > > And for those who do not, let me see if this sidebar from the first paper > can change your mind. > > The Hotson “family business” is English literature. Mr. Hotson’s > father and uncle had Harvard Ph.D.s in the subject, and his late > uncle was a famous Shakespeare scholar. Mr. Hotson, however, > always intended a career in physics. Unfortunately, he could not > resist asking awkward questions. His professors taught that conservation > of mass-energy is the never-violated, rock-solid foundation of all physics. > In “pair production” a photon of at least 1.022 > MeV “creates” an electron-positron pair, each with 0.511 MeV of > rest energy, with any excess being the momentum of the “created” pair. So > supposedly the conservation books balance. > But the “created” electron and positron both have spin (angular momentum) > energy of h/4π. By any assumption as to the size > of electron or positron, this is far more energy than that supplied > by the photon at “creation.” > “Isn’t angular momentum energy?” he asked a professor. > “Of course it is. This half-integer spin angular momentum is > the energy needed by the electron to set up a stable standing wave > around the proton. Thus it is responsible for the Pauli exclusion > principle, hence for the extension and stability of all matter. You > could say it is the sole cause of the periodic table of elements.” > “Then where does all this energy come from? How can the ‘created’ > electron have something like sixteen times more energy than > the photon that supposedly ‘created’ it? Isn’t this a huge violation of > your never-violated rock-solid foundation of all physics?” > “We regard spin angular momentum as an ‘inherent property’ > of electron and positron, not as a violation of conservation.” > “But if it’s real energy, where does it come from? Does the > Energy Fairy step in and proclaim a miracle every time ‘creation’ > is invoked, billions of times a second? How does this fit your > never-violated conservation?” > “‘Inherent property’ means we don’t talk about it, and you > won’t either if you want to pass this course.” > Well, this answer sounded to him like the Stephen Leacock > aphorism: “‘Shut up,’ he explained.” Later Mr. Hotson was taken > aside and told that his “attitude” was disrupting the class, and > that further, with his “attitude,” there was no chance in hell of his > completing a graduate program in physics, so “save your money.” > He ended up at the Sorbonne studying French literature, and later > became a professional land surveyor. > However, he has retained a lifelong interest in the “awkward > questions” of physics, and with Dirac’s Equation has found > some answers > > > > I hope he had the last laugh. >
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:18 PM Terry Blanton wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:07 PM JonesBeene wrote: > >> If one is a follower of Don Hotson >> > > If one wants to be, > And for those who do not, let me see if this sidebar from the first paper can change your mind. The Hotson “family business” is English literature. Mr. Hotson’s father and uncle had Harvard Ph.D.s in the subject, and his late uncle was a famous Shakespeare scholar. Mr. Hotson, however, always intended a career in physics. Unfortunately, he could not resist asking awkward questions. His professors taught that conservation of mass-energy is the never-violated, rock-solid foundation of all physics. In “pair production” a photon of at least 1.022 MeV “creates” an electron-positron pair, each with 0.511 MeV of rest energy, with any excess being the momentum of the “created” pair. So supposedly the conservation books balance. But the “created” electron and positron both have spin (angular momentum) energy of h/4π. By any assumption as to the size of electron or positron, this is far more energy than that supplied by the photon at “creation.” “Isn’t angular momentum energy?” he asked a professor. “Of course it is. This half-integer spin angular momentum is the energy needed by the electron to set up a stable standing wave around the proton. Thus it is responsible for the Pauli exclusion principle, hence for the extension and stability of all matter. You could say it is the sole cause of the periodic table of elements.” “Then where does all this energy come from? How can the ‘created’ electron have something like sixteen times more energy than the photon that supposedly ‘created’ it? Isn’t this a huge violation of your never-violated rock-solid foundation of all physics?” “We regard spin angular momentum as an ‘inherent property’ of electron and positron, not as a violation of conservation.” “But if it’s real energy, where does it come from? Does the Energy Fairy step in and proclaim a miracle every time ‘creation’ is invoked, billions of times a second? How does this fit your never-violated conservation?” “‘Inherent property’ means we don’t talk about it, and you won’t either if you want to pass this course.” Well, this answer sounded to him like the Stephen Leacock aphorism: “‘Shut up,’ he explained.” Later Mr. Hotson was taken aside and told that his “attitude” was disrupting the class, and that further, with his “attitude,” there was no chance in hell of his completing a graduate program in physics, so “save your money.” He ended up at the Sorbonne studying French literature, and later became a professional land surveyor. However, he has retained a lifelong interest in the “awkward questions” of physics, and with Dirac’s Equation has found some answers I hope he had the last laugh.
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:07 PM JonesBeene wrote: > If one is a follower of Don Hotson > If one wants to be, here is the bulk of his work: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8mt4mJOTGvBNEg4T25LS0FQM3c/view?usp=sharing
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 1:07 PM JonesBeene wrote: > Remember the rotational anomaly of Harold Aspden? > One of my favs: http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/Harold%20Aspden/Essays/ESSAY%20NO_%2013.pdf More: http://www.hyiq.org/Reference/Profile?Name=Harold%20Aspen
RE: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
I reviewed the vid again and the relative entropy issue of encoding seems de minimis for the premise. The bit is defined as a unit of Planck length which apparently assumes that some physical characteristic of space must be altered and the basic assumption is that there is symmetry in a write or erase. What is that characteristic? If one is a follower of Don Hotson – it fits into an epo model (very dense epos) where the polarity would be reversed to encode. None of the conclusions in the chart which he shows half way through are concerned with information encoding as a practical matter - so I don’t see how it matters for the operation of an EM drive.. The most interesting thing to me is that the Spanish team is pushing close to a newton of thrust with a simpler device and apparently they are going for rotation around an axis … which points to a free energy machine instead of simply a thruster. Remember the rotational anomaly of Harold Aspden? That could fit into the picture. He died a decade ago, never getting much credit. From: H LV Terry Blanton wrote: I will check the references; but, my problem with the concept is in the definition of a bit of information. A bit could be constituted by either an endothermic or an exothermic action depending on the method of storage. this looks like a novel idea! At least my google search did not find anything.
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:30 PM Terry Blanton wrote: > I will check the references; but, my problem with the concept is in the > definition of a bit of information. A bit could be constituted by either > an endothermic or an exothermic action depending on the method of storage. > > this looks like a novel idea! At least my google search did not find anything. harry
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:30 PM Terry Blanton wrote: > I will check the references; but, my problem with the concept is in the > definition of a bit of information. A bit could be constituted by either > an endothermic or an exothermic action depending on the method of storage. > > Let us not be information racists. Zero is datum also. :) > cold storage vs hot storage harry
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results --twisted
Off the topic a bit... fanciful... Regarding the "magnetocaloric effect" as bird-walk launch-point. Happy Friday! --- If an EM coupling with the Coulombic near-field were established at some conservant resonance, would the resonant standing-wave-profile afford a thermal-gradient across the resonant structure? Differently, maybe (and Hi Frank!)... Would a standing Znidarsic wave in the near-field of copper atomic lattice have a hot peak and a cool valley? --- Let's say it could be so. In this sci-fi Friday scenario... If heat were removed from the hot-spot of a standing Znidarsic wave in a near-field lattice, would not the colder strata of the thermal gradient cool down more? This sci-fi invention is a heat pump. It is not thermal-difference dependent, but is rather putting a spatial gradient across the black-body energy, per se. Isn't then this fictional artifact capable of continued operation of thermal-separation into cryogenic temperatures? Then the fictional marketing department has their turn, and the device is crafted to self-chill to become a superconducting Znidarsic wave which sculpts a giant spherical void in the Earth when it first worked. Oops. The lake that filled in was called Lake Znidarsic. Cheers, Don On 9/24/2020 8:05 PM, Jonathan Berry wrote: I would note that the magnetocaloric effect seems to embody the same effect. Where the order and disorder of the magnetic domains is changed by magnetization, that is erasing data right?! So it is I guess a pretty robust effect as it is used to cool things already. On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 13:54, Jonathan Berry mailto:jonathanberry3...@gmail.com>> wrote: I'd never heard of that either, but a moment of Googling bought up these as the first 2 results: https://physicsworld.com/a/erasing-data-could-keep-quantum-computers-cool/#:~:text=A%20classical%20computer%20generates%20heat,unknown%20information%20in%20a%20system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 13:35, Terry Blanton mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:21 PM Jones Beene mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote Yes, it is long It's really not long. The presentation is the first half hour and the last is the Q session. It's all based on the Casimir effect. I would be interested on more on the claim he made about increased heat in computer systems when information is deleted. He acted like that was a proven fact. Anyone got a citation on such? TIA -- Stay hydrated!
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
I will check the references; but, my problem with the concept is in the definition of a bit of information. A bit could be constituted by either an endothermic or an exothermic action depending on the method of storage. Let us not be information racists. Zero is datum also. :) >
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
I would note that the magnetocaloric effect seems to embody the same effect. Where the order and disorder of the magnetic domains is changed by magnetization, that is erasing data right?! So it is I guess a pretty robust effect as it is used to cool things already. On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 13:54, Jonathan Berry wrote: > I'd never heard of that either, but a moment of Googling bought up these > as the first 2 results: > > > https://physicsworld.com/a/erasing-data-could-keep-quantum-computers-cool/#:~:text=A%20classical%20computer%20generates%20heat,unknown%20information%20in%20a%20system > . > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle > > On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 13:35, Terry Blanton wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:21 PM Jones Beene wrote >> >>> Yes, it is long >>> >> >> It's really not long. The presentation is the first half hour and the >> last is the Q session. It's all based on the Casimir effect. >> >> I would be interested on more on the claim he made about increased heat >> in computer systems when information is deleted. He acted like that was a >> proven fact. Anyone got a citation on such? >> >> TIA >> >
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
I'd never heard of that either, but a moment of Googling bought up these as the first 2 results: https://physicsworld.com/a/erasing-data-could-keep-quantum-computers-cool/#:~:text=A%20classical%20computer%20generates%20heat,unknown%20information%20in%20a%20system . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 13:35, Terry Blanton wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:21 PM Jones Beene wrote > >> Yes, it is long >> > > It's really not long. The presentation is the first half hour and the > last is the Q session. It's all based on the Casimir effect. > > I would be interested on more on the claim he made about increased heat in > computer systems when information is deleted. He acted like that was a > proven fact. Anyone got a citation on such? > > TIA >
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
Terry Blanton wrote: > I would be interested on more on the claim he made about increased heat in > computer systems when information is deleted. He acted like that was a > proven fact. Anyone got a citation on such? I think this comes from Landauer's principle but I do not have a citation handy. I will look for it tomorrow.
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:21 PM Jones Beene wrote > Yes, it is long > It's really not long. The presentation is the first half hour and the last is the Q session. It's all based on the Casimir effect. I would be interested on more on the claim he made about increased heat in computer systems when information is deleted. He acted like that was a proven fact. Anyone got a citation on such? TIA
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
For anyone who loves science, the new McCulloch lecture on YT is one of the great unappreciated finds of all time ! Yes, it is long and yes he is not a great presenter ... BUT ... the content here is astounding. And it is fairly terse, given the breadth of the subject matter. McCulloch was brought up on Vortex by Mark Iverson over 4 years ago and again by Alain Sepeda and Jack Cole but it is just now sinking in to the collective conscious of vorticians thanks to this new video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=341Yk4k51uY=youtu.be Only a thousand views. Pity. You will thank yourself if you make it through to the end. With a few tweaks, this Quantum Inertia theory is almost guaranteed to get traction. It has so much to offer. Sean Logan wrote: This is great!
Re: [Vo]:Propellantless EM drive results
Thanks for sharing. This is great! On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 6:11 AM JonesBeene wrote: > > > The Shawyer EM drive is not dead but now has serious competition… using > lasers. This is almost a breakthrough but has not attracted much attention > so far.. > > > > > https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2020/09/darpa-laser-version-of-emdrive-has-a-test-result-better-than-commercial-ion-drive.html?utm_source=feedburner_medium=feed_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29 > > > > Despite the negativism from skeptics (all over the Web), the EM drive > concept is now approaching the status of a solid technology despite NASA > dropping it. > > > > What’s with NASA dropping something like this??? Almost unforgiveable. > > > > Fortunately DARPA/ARPA did not give up and the latest results seem to be > fabulous (when and if they are duplicated). > > > > Long video from Mike McCulloch > > > > https://youtu.be/341Yk4k51uY > > > > From the Next Big Future comments: This is related to Mike McCulloch's > “quantized inertia” QI theory which itself is related yet different from > the usual Mach effect and Emdrive drama. > > > > McCulloch has a theory for inertia that predicts galaxies' rotation sans > dark matter, distant binaries and other anomalies presumably without > adjustment, and it has other several interesting implications. It explains > the Emdrive and predicts several kinds of inertia-based drives using EM > waves of different efficiencies…. To call it controversial is an > understatement. > > > > In a way it is refreshing to get rid of the baggage of dark matter. It has > always smelled a bit like a klutz concept… unless of course it is the > “aether” > > > > > > >
