Hi Remi,
Thank you. I greatly appreciated your response.
In that paper on your web site, you linked to a paper by Andreas Rathke-
who is a director of Special Projects at the European Space Agency..
The topic was in reference to the EMDrive device. I'm just an observer..,
but I am sorry to say that I did not agree with his "conclusion".
'Microwave spacecraft propulsion by a closed resonant cavity'
http://uk.geocities.com/remicornwall/MicrowaveEMProp.pdf
.. wherein he states :
"Having found, that the principle of the microwave engine proposed by SPR
relies on a
misconception, it comes as a surprise, that a prototype of the engine
nevertheless
generates appreciable thrust. Possible explanations for this are however
easily spotted:
On the one hand air expelled from the microwave cavity could generate the
thrust. On
the other hand the apparatus could acquire a charge during the experiment,
which
would then generate a Coulomb force and invalidate the force measurement.
Also a
direct coupling between the microwave generator and the measurement device
needs
to be excluded.
In conclusion the recently proposed concept of microwave propulsion by a
closed
resonant cavity violates fundamental principles of physics, i.e. momentum
and energy
conservation and is hence obviously not feasible."
= = =
I do not understand the kind of thinking that dismisses experimental
evidence because it violates a theory we were taught.
Yes there may be artefact. Probably is, in fact. And yes the theory may be
flawed. (but **if** it turns out to be real... then find a theory that
fits.) He said that the possible artefacts needed to be excluded but nowhere
mentions doing that. He is the director of Special projects at the ESA. Did
he not assign it to a working group?
He effectively dismissed the whole thing because.. it cannot exist. And yet
he had a working model in front of him, otherwise why did he state (Quote:)
"the prototype generated appreciable thrust". ?
I have heard that the EMDrive folks used a digital scale to measure the
force. That's a no-no-, agreed... but.. has anyone test measured it with
a mechanical scale?
= = =
Cheers,
Colin
From: "Remi Cornwall" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Colin,
Try http://uk.geocities.com/remicornwall/ElectromagneticPropulsion.htm
I've a section on Shawyer and a short paper by Andreas Rathke of ESA.
Remi.
-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Quinney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07 September 2006 15:34
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Vo]: Emdrive Engine
Group,
September 2006 The Engineer Online :
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/Article.aspx?liArticleID=295931
SPR's EMDrive :
<http://www.emdrive.com/>
Antigravity... or very close to it.
BBGB (Blow by Grinding Blow) or,, as close to enough information was
herein
supplied from picture and description for some of us to attempt a
replication. There is also a patent, but I do not yet have that number. I
thought I should just pass this along, all that I have..
The short description is : an unbalanced 2 gm force- derived from : a
2.45
GHz microwave- bouncing back and forth within a resonant chamber- that
is
wider on one it's ends..
The developer is a UK company SPR, director is Roger Shawyer.
<http://www.emdrive.com/>
Nasa is sceptical but there are reports of seven (7) independent reviews
by
: BAE Systems, EADS Astrium, Siemens, and the IEE.
And... DTI ( a UK government agency?) has awarded the company 125,00
pounds
for the prototype, part of a three year 250,000 pounds Program. For Space
Propulsion (said to reduce the Mars mission from 9 to 3 months, etc.)
Additional links:
2004 The Engineer Online
http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/266633/Defying%20gravity.htm
EUREKA DECEMBER 2002 FEATURE STORY (plus a 2004 update)
A force for space with no reaction & a perfect PICTURE
http://www.shelleys.demon.co.uk/fdec02em.htm
A paper giving the theory and a summary of the experimental work is
available free by e mail application to [EMAIL PROTECTED] , giving name
and
affiliation.
Note that they intend to increase the Q factor by orders of magnitude in
the
future.
Cheers,
Colin Quinney
