Keith,
Drop Roger Shawyer for a second. Have you seen Steve Burn's recent paper?
He suggests that to increase gravitational mass we reduce the phase
velocity.
I thought I was confused before. (Phase velocity. Group velocity. FTL / No
FTL.)
http://www.geocities.com/sburns808/SWMass.pdf
GRAVITATIONAL MASS EMULATION WITH A REDUCED
PHASE VELOCITY STANDING WAVE
Steve Burns
9/13/2006
INTRODUCTION:
A possible link between gravitational mass and an
electromagnetic standing wave is explored. A rotating standing
wave emulates matter as a self-captured EM wave (1). Reducing
wave phase velocity increases mass in the classical sense of
m=E/v2. Here we will explore a way to electrically generate a
rotating standing wave with reduced phase velocity in order to
verify mass increase.
Colin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Nagel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 1:27 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: stationary emdrive- inertial anchor
Hi Robin,
you write:
Possible, but not exactly in evidence.
Quoting Andre, "In the following we review the the theoretical
model for the engine put forth by SPR..." The next paragraph
is then supposed to represent Rogers view, despite being phrased
in the ( typically academic ) first person plural form. It's
not clear though, and on first reading I thought the same.
Perhaps someone who knows Andre can write him and request
some clarification. Wouldn't it be surprising if he asserts
the phase velocity is the speed of energy transfer?
He has however missed one point. Looking at figure 2.4, it's
obvious that upon reflecting from the sloping side, the wave will
not only impart a vertical force to the wall, but also a
horizontal component, since the angle of exit will be equal to the
angle of entry, and hence the overall force on the wall will be
perpendicular to it. Because the wall slopes, this perpendicular
force can be broken up into a vertical component and a horizontal
component. Without doing the math, my intuition says that the sum
of all the horizontal components on the walls will exactly equal
the difference between the forces on the ends.
I completely agree, the thought struck me as well. Roger sort
of hand waves around this point by saying that due to
impedence matching we can discount this effect. By that, I
take it to mean that he uses a proper exponential horn rather than the
crude linear illustration. But still, I am deeply troubled. It's
a show stopper.
Another way to descibe the device is to say that he is
transforming from a TEM wave to a TE or TM wave, if you
are familar with the microwave terms.
That then begs the question, whence the actual force measured in
the real devices? :)
Yup.
K.
BTW, love your new sig. Here's one for you.
"Is it just me, or is the 21st century basically the Middle Ages
with indoor plumbing?" -K-
