It concerns me that an observer on Earth will notice that the mass and thus
energy of the stationary car held up by the drive is becoming lower with time.
He will not find where that energy is being deposited as the mass drops. The
heat due to cavity loss can be calculated directly, but any
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
Hello!
I was hoping the Vorts could help me with this. Roger Shawyer, at minute
2:56 in this video, claims that the next generation EM Drive could
generation 1 tonne of thrust per kilowatt of power. This means that a 1
tonne car should be able to hover above the ground for the price of one
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
It seems Rossi has learned from the Lugano test and now is running a 1-year
Hot Cat test alongside the commercial 1Mw unit in NC or whereever it is (per
comments today on Rossi Blog Reader.
Rossi indcicates that the SSM is easier to achieve with the Hot Cat as has
been suggested by Parkhomov
See please:
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/05/the-longest-lenr-dispute-unexpected.html
Please tell me your own conclusions.
Peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
12 matches
Mail list logo
