@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, May 15, 2015 7:08 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
I'm not mistaken about the gravitational impact of a fleet of flying
cars suspended in the air by a reactionless propulsion, the earth would
face many millions
: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above
the Theoretical Limit
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob Cook
- Original Message -
From: mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 6:44 PM
: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 9:50 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above
the Theoretical Limit
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob Cook
] responsible for the cavity
provides gamma screening.
Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 2:34 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
Dear Francis X,
I am coming around to your way
Potential seems way above
the Theoretical Limit
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob Cook
- Original Message -
From: mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's
that trip asymmetrical.
Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 2:47 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
There are some more dots to connect.
http://www.livescience.com/29111-speed
Limit
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob Cook
- Original Message -
From: mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical
receive the
realativistic levels of dilation.
Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 2:34 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
Dear Francis X,
I am coming around to your way of thinking
:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way
above the Theoretical Limit
From a previous post except in part as follows:
have referenced papers here to show how the confinement of electrons on
the surface of gold nanoparticles: a nanoplasmonic mechanism can change
[mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Friday, May 15, 2015 12:08 PM
*To:* vortex-l
*Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way
above the Theoretical Limit
From a previous post except in part as follows:
have referenced papers here to show how the confinement of electrons
-interpertation-of-casimir-effect-expanded/
Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 12:08 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above
the Theoretical Limit
:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way
above the Theoretical Limit
Dear Francis X,
I am coming around to your way of thinking.
Regarding...
“when lasers were fired through the EmDrive’s resonance chamber, some of
the beams appeared to travel faster than the speed
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above
the Theoretical Limit
Axil,
You also mentioned [snip] In one experiment, a radioactive isotope with a
half-life of 69 years was reduced to 6 microseconds.
That is 15 orders of magnitude reduction. Most
-expanded/
Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 12:08 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above
the Theoretical Limit
From a previous post except in part as follows:
have referenced papers here to show how
Here is an interesting thought, if this did work to produce thrust that did
not act against the earth, then the earth would be moved in the direction
of the device due to attraction to the device (flying car) equal to the
weight of the object (it is attracted to the whole mass of the earth, and
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
Personally, I think it is a bogus premise to assume that Newton’s laws are
not being violated when this EM device is speculated to be “hovering” a few
feet above the surface of Earth. As Dave
Axil Axil
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Axil+Axil%22
Tue, 12 May 2015 13:40:01 -0700
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20150512
I wonder if the resonant shape of the microwave cavity produces a pattern
of positive and negative
: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 4:40 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
I wonder if the resonant shape of the microwave cavity produces a pattern of
positive and negative vacuum energy
:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way
above the Theoretical Limit
I wonder if the resonant shape of the microwave cavity produces a pattern
of positive and negative vacuum energy that corresponds to the high and low
energy pattern of microwave radiationn produced by interference
From Mixent:
I suspect you are confusing centripetal and centrifugal. (They are
opposites).
I suspect your suspection is correct. I meant centrifugal.
A part-time dyslexic like me is occasionally prone to mangle or substitute
wording.
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
Steven you seems to understand this with gravity. I have to confess I
understand very little. As you say my two pedal brain cannot see what
gravity is.
Perhaps you can help me (I am sure many others can also) but I cannot even
understand that gravity does not impact my body (or any body) different
Tuesday's sermon
Personally, I think it is a bogus premise to assume that Newton’s laws are not
being violated when this EM device is speculated to be “hovering” a few feet
above the surface of Earth. As Dave rightly points out if the “hovering” device
were to be situated outside the
I wonder if the resonant shape of the microwave cavity produces a pattern
of positive and negative vacuum energy that corresponds to the high and low
energy pattern of microwave radiationn produced by interference. The zone
of increased positive vacuum energy may produce longer lived virtual
In reply to John Berry's message of Tue, 12 May 2015 17:50:30 +1200:
Hi,
Yes, the reaction mass is the earth.
Yes it is, and perhaps with the EM drive it still is. Or maybe the Sun, or maybe
the Milky Way, or maybe the entire universe, or maybe the space-time continuum
itself.
Perhaps our laws
skeptics!
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, May 12, 2015 11:50 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the Theoretical
Limit
Dave--
I believe there are 2 forces
Lennart,
I don’t wish to portray myself out as an expert on gravitry. I’m definitely
not. All I can say is that I have been interested in the subject for most of my
life. (I’m 62.) As such, it should not come as a surprise that I have come up
with a few eccentric observations. As a freshly
OK Vincent I beat you with ten years and I try to avoid being retired.
I really think you made a good analogy withe funnel and water. A new one to
me.My objective is not to impact the science world. However, I have a clear
liking of new ventures. LENR to me is a new venture.
I understand that my
than the idiot who answers them.
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks
From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 8:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above
Why concentrate upon a very special case instead of the more general
applications for these drives? Hovering is useful, but it is not going to
enable one to travel among the stars.
Hovering gives us flying cars.
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:50 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes,
And easier access to orbit, or indeed removing the need for orbit all
together.
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why concentrate upon a very special case instead of the more general
applications for these drives? Hovering is useful, but it is not
Message-
From: Bob Cook [mailto:frobertc...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 9:50 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 12 May 2015 16:39:37 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
I wonder if the resonant shape of the microwave cavity produces a pattern
of positive and negative vacuum energy that corresponds to the high and low
energy pattern of microwave radiationn produced by interference. The
- Original Message -
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
I agree that hovering does not violate Newton's laws. That is a special
case. Take away
-Original Message-
From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, May 10, 2015 10:48 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 10 May 2015 18:07:28
-0400:
Hi,
[snip
Drives.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, May 10, 2015 10:48 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the Theoretical
Limit
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 10 May 2015 18:07:28
The video states that m drive obeys Newtow's laws. It has no reaction mass.
It does not obey Newton's laws. That comment was an understatement bordering
on misinformation.
Frank Z
Potential seems way above the Theoretical
Limit
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob Cook
- Original Message -
From:
mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 6:44
PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential
Yes, the reaction mass is the earth.
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:44 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Frank Znidarsic's message of Mon, 11 May 2015 18:58:16 -0400:
Hi Frank,
[snip]
The video states that m drive obeys Newtow's laws. It has no reaction
mass. It does not obey Newton's
Hovering does not violate Newton's laws IMHO. Energy and momentum are
conserved.
Bob Cook
- Original Message -
From: mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nextgen EM Drive's Potential seems way above the
Theoretical Limit
In reply to Frank Znidarsic's message of Mon, 11 May 2015 18:58:16 -0400:
Hi Frank,
[snip]
The video states that m drive obeys Newtow's laws. It has no reaction mass.
It does not obey Newton's laws. That comment was an understatement bordering
on misinformation.
Frank Z
Which of Newton's
EM Drive's Potential seems way above the Theoretical
Limit
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 10 May 2015 18:07:28
-0400:
Hi,
[snip]
It doesn't cost any energy at all to support a car. The
ground does this just
fine with no energy expenditure. E = F . d. If d = 0,
then E = 0.
I'm
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 10 May 2015 23:19:42 -0400:
Hi,
I'm suggesting that in theory no energy is required as long as there is no
movement. IOW he creates a force, but as long as that force doesn't act over a
distance, then it need do no work.
E = F x d; F = m x a. E = m x a
IOW he creates a force, but as long as that force doesn't act over a
distance, then it need do no work.
I'm the one who suggests that the thrust created by the EM Drive could be
used to levitate an object. Shawyer is saying that the EM Drive could
create 1 tonne of thrust for 1 kilowatt of
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 10 May 2015 23:43:04 -0400:
Hi,
IOW he creates a force, but as long as that force doesn't act over a
distance, then it need do no work.
I'm the one who suggests that the thrust created by the EM Drive could be
used to levitate an object. Shawyer is
Ok, well if it is used for static thrust only, it is then a coin toss if it
would work opposing gravity as static on the surface of the earth
experiences 1G of acceleration.
According to the equivalence principle...
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks Robin. You're right. He does say that this force of 1 tonne per
kilowatt is for 'static thrust'.
I found an answer from the website. He is referring specifically to a
'static thrust', not used to do work.
The static thrust/power ratio is calculated assuming a superconducting
EmDrive with
A reactionless drive tends to break the conservation of energy by just
existing.
Since there is no equal and opposite energy does not balance, double the
velocity would be achieved with double the energy but yield 4 times the
stored energy, eventually that leads to excess energy out.
Now in the
His claim is 1 tonne of thrust per kilowatt. One tonne of thrust will
accelerate an object. An object under the acceleration of gravity will be
countered by the thrust, costing 48 kilowatts of power in the process. This
is not the same as suspending an object by a rope or something. Are you
In reply to Craig Haynie's message of Sun, 10 May 2015 18:07:28 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
It doesn't cost any energy at all to support a car. The ground does this just
fine with no energy expenditure. E = F . d. If d = 0, then E = 0.
I'm not sure how this applies to an EM drive (if at all), but perhaps
49 matches
Mail list logo
