Thats actually a brilliant idea. I rarely say that about ideas but thats brilliant!
Tell me more about it.
Thats actually a brilliant idea. I rarely say that about ideas but thats brilliant!
Tell me more about it.
Assuming that are not the infamous Tom2, I will give you a polite response.
Since your posts lack at least one profane vulgarity per sentence, I feel safe in assuming you to be a different Tom.
An important force present in the device is the force coincident with emission of a photon from a charge particle, photon recoil. As the charge intensity changes on either plate, the time-varying electric field instantly induces a magnetic field. This mutual production of electric and magnetic fields is what is called an electromagnetic wave. As each photon of electromagnetic wave energy is exuded from either plate the plate enjoys an equal and opposite recoil reaction: the photon of energy goes one way and so the plate kicks back the opposite way.
The charge intensity cannot be changed without inducing the wave.
Your device strongly resembles one explained by Prosoothus in these forums. You can review any individual member's posts. I unfortunately I do not remember in which thread he wrote of it. It was probably about 6 to 18 months ago but it is not possible for me to recall exactly.
Prosoothus
Registered Senior Member
TimeTraveler,
Thanks for the compliment.
I came up with this idea a few years ago, and over the years I've come to the conclusion that it would probably be better to use electromagnets instead of charged plates (magnetic fields instead of electric fields). The only technical problem in testing this device would be creating the high frequencies needed to make it function, and to have the electromagnets (or plates) that can react to those frequencies. For example, if the distance between the electromagnets, or plates, is 1 meter, the length of the generated electric or magnetic fields would have to be .5 meters, which would mean that the electromagnets would have to switch off then on within 1.6 * 10^-9 of a second.
Tom, aka Joeblow93132
Thanks for the compliment.
I came up with this idea a few years ago, and over the years I've come to the conclusion that it would probably be better to use electromagnets instead of charged plates (magnetic fields instead of electric fields). The only technical problem in testing this device would be creating the high frequencies needed to make it function, and to have the electromagnets (or plates) that can react to those frequencies. For example, if the distance between the electromagnets, or plates, is 1 meter, the length of the generated electric or magnetic fields would have to be .5 meters, which would mean that the electromagnets would have to switch off then on within 1.6 * 10^-9 of a second.
Tom, aka Joeblow93132
Prosoothus
Registered Senior Member
CANGAS,
No, I'm not that Tom.
When I first came to sciforums, my nick was Joeblow93132, and I put my name, Tom, at the end of each post. Then a new person signed up at sciforums using the nick joeblow. In order to prevent confusion, I changed my nick to Prosoothus. I continued putting my name at the end of each post until Tom2 showed up, and people started getting the two of us confused. So I dropped Tom at the end of each of my posts, and now I just use the nick Prosoothus.
You have to take into consideration that the electric, and magnetic, pulses created by the plates are omni-directional, so the recoils of the photons would have a zero net force on the plates that are creating them. Since the recoil forces of the photons would be superfluous in this device, only the forces resulting from the interaction between the photons, and between the photons and the charged plates, would be relevant.
No, I'm not that Tom.
When I first came to sciforums, my nick was Joeblow93132, and I put my name, Tom, at the end of each post. Then a new person signed up at sciforums using the nick joeblow. In order to prevent confusion, I changed my nick to Prosoothus. I continued putting my name at the end of each post until Tom2 showed up, and people started getting the two of us confused. So I dropped Tom at the end of each of my posts, and now I just use the nick Prosoothus.
You have to take into consideration that the electric, and magnetic, pulses created by the plates are omni-directional, so the recoils of the photons would have a zero net force on the plates that are creating them. Since the recoil forces of the photons would be superfluous in this device, only the forces resulting from the interaction between the photons, and between the photons and the charged plates, would be relevant.
Thank you, Prosoothus for your kind response.
When I was reading this thread start post I was in too much of a hurry to precisely digest the timing of the pulses. I remember months ago when reading of the device, thinking that the timing permitted/created a net thrust.
In my recent haste, I zeroed in on the point of accounting for the forces and so responded on that topic only.
Months ago, I vaguely recall reading some poster's flame of your idea, and my retorting to them that your device was no more exotic ( I think they tried to taint you with a more harsh phrase ) than a photon rocket.
That is certainly still my opinion.
When I was reading this thread start post I was in too much of a hurry to precisely digest the timing of the pulses. I remember months ago when reading of the device, thinking that the timing permitted/created a net thrust.
In my recent haste, I zeroed in on the point of accounting for the forces and so responded on that topic only.
Months ago, I vaguely recall reading some poster's flame of your idea, and my retorting to them that your device was no more exotic ( I think they tried to taint you with a more harsh phrase ) than a photon rocket.
That is certainly still my opinion.
Townsend Brown built and tested his device in a vacuum and published reports of success.
A photon striking an object will transmit an amount of momentum and kinetic energy as a function of its frequency AND an important function of whether it is absorbed or reflected. Absorption provides one amount of momentum/energy. Surprisingly, reflection provides TWICE as much.
Overdoze,
Actually, you were not only making sense, you were also proving my point.
No, that's not true. It takes energy to charge and discharge the plates. This is the energy that would be converted to kinetic energy.
Tom
So you are running the device at low superconducting temperature.
Overdoze,
I see your point. I'd then have to say that, in my device, momentum would be transferred from the "virtual" photons of the electric field to the rest of the "engine".
Since I'm unaware of the actual composition and the source of the forces of electric fields, I can't get any more specific on how the momentum would be conserved.
I broke the process of the device into small steps in order to find out if I went wrong anywhere. I couldn't find anything wrong.
The only thing that does bother me is not knowing what the exact "momentum" of the virtual photons of the electric field will be in this type of device. The momentum might be large, like the force generated in electrostatic interactions, or they might be small, like a photon hitting a solar sail. If it is large, the device will work. However, if the momentum of the virtual photons is small, it will likely balance out to give a electrostatic vibrator.
Tom
The operation of the device will involve both virtual photons and real photons.
While the charge is growing or dying down, it acts as a time-varying electric field inducing a magnetic field, creating an electromagnetic wave whether a wave is invited or not. The wave is associated with a real photon. The real photon provides a recoil as the wave leaves the plate and provides a transfer of momentum and kinetic energy when it is absorbed and/or reflected at the second plate. The momentum and kinetic energy of the wave's photon can be relativitely easily calculated.
Once the charge strength is stable, then the electric field force is acting by continual transfer of virtual photons between the individual charges on the two plates, according to Quantum Physics. Again, the electric field force exerted by one plate upon the other can easily be calculated using relatively simple electrostatic force equations.
Actually, at any moment that there is a charge of any strength, there will be an initiation of virtual photon transfer between the plates, in addition to real photon transfer by the wave.
It is helpful to me personally to visualize the processes in terms of Quantum Physics, but the simple classical equations should work adequately.
It is possible to mechanically construct a monopole magnet. It was patented very roughly 15 years ago. Sorry, don't have the patent number or even the classification.
Quantum Physics describes the repulsive electric force in a fairly straightforward way. The two charge particles are continually exchanging virtual photons. The virtual photons carry momentum and transfer it when they reach the other charge particle and are absorbed. Like Arnold Schwarzeneggar and Sylvester Stallone throwing 16 pound bowling balls to each other. Each toss tends to knock them apart.
The tricky thing is how QP describes the attractive electric force. It is based on the exchange of virtual photons and they carry positive momentum, like all good virtual photons always do. However, for attraction the virtual photons know to go around the block and hit the other charge particle from behind, knocking the two particles closer together. It is such a complicated and convoluted description that I can only understand it at the time I am reading it and can remember it even a shorter time. At this moment I cannot find a good reference in either a book in hand or remember a net link but I am going to Google it and try to get you one. You might get lucky by Googling "**virtual photon *attraction" or something like that.
*Edited typo to change "repulsion" to "attraction".
**Edited "quantum physics attraction" to change to "virtual photon attraction".
Last edited:
Belatedly it has ocurred to me that the pivotal question of this thread topic would be a valuable science experiment, regardless of the outcome. I have no idea at this moment whether such an experiment has been conducted and published. I urge Prosoothus to consider it as an experiment in addition to possibly being a useful invention
I have repetedly analyzed the net results of the wave energy aspect and am convinced that it produces a net thrust at best, and at worst simply no net thrust.
Still working on the electrostatic aspect with only positive results but I want to beat it to death before making any claim.
I have repetedly analyzed the net results of the wave energy aspect and am convinced that it produces a net thrust at best, and at worst simply no net thrust.
Still working on the electrostatic aspect with only positive results but I want to beat it to death before making any claim.
Prosoothus
Registered Senior Member
CANGAS,
I agree. Although there are models, like the example you gave, that attempt to explain electric and magnetic fields, I don't think that anyone knows for sure what they really are. The device I proposed will actually show what happens when a static electric or magnetic field that is detached from its source impacts a charged particle or magnet. Whether this device creates a net thrust or not, its results will help us understand electric and magnetic fields a little better.
One more thing, it's possible, although unlikely, that the electrostatic version of the device could give dramatically different results than the electromagnetic version. If this is the case, not only would this device give us a better understanding of electric and magnetic fields, but it would also emphasize the differences between those fields.
I agree. Although there are models, like the example you gave, that attempt to explain electric and magnetic fields, I don't think that anyone knows for sure what they really are. The device I proposed will actually show what happens when a static electric or magnetic field that is detached from its source impacts a charged particle or magnet. Whether this device creates a net thrust or not, its results will help us understand electric and magnetic fields a little better.
One more thing, it's possible, although unlikely, that the electrostatic version of the device could give dramatically different results than the electromagnetic version. If this is the case, not only would this device give us a better understanding of electric and magnetic fields, but it would also emphasize the differences between those fields.
For a long time it has bothered me that it has been assumed that the Faraday ( who I greatly admire ) experiments unified electric fields and magnetic fields, yet they really do behave differently. I would be much happier if the apparent difference between the action of electric fields and magnetic fields were more thoroughly defined.
I am not living in a vacuum; I know that the Lorentz theory(s) claim a solution. And I know that I am uneasy with the Lorentz solution(s) as it stands.
The quantum physics description of electromagnetic fields in terms of virtual photons exchanged between participating particles leave us with some unproven ( as far as I know ) questions; do we really know that the virtual photon exchange progresses at c?
Your description of your device seems to provide a vehicle for testing this point regardless of the outcome of the device as a prime mover.
I am preparing and will soon post my line item analysis of the action of this device, in terms of first the wave action and also the electrostatic action so that any interested party may have the chance to compare their analytic method and qualitative result, in the interest of scientific persuit, with my own, and hopefully get a little further along toward the goal of scientific truth.
joeblow
I wonder what the reaction would be like in a zero gravity situation. Its a very interesting concept, but does not the electric field shut off as soon as the powersource is shut off? Then there would be no 'electric bullet' or wave to impact the 2nd field. Unless a substace can be used as a buffer, or a 'carrier'. Such as if the device was inclosed in a gas chamber,and because of the gas, or fluid, the electric wave would continue on with out the power source, like a type of plasma. Just a thought. Or what if the electric bullet was used to propell an actual charged object into thr #2 plate and electric field?
I wonder what the reaction would be like in a zero gravity situation. Its a very interesting concept, but does not the electric field shut off as soon as the powersource is shut off? Then there would be no 'electric bullet' or wave to impact the 2nd field. Unless a substace can be used as a buffer, or a 'carrier'. Such as if the device was inclosed in a gas chamber,and because of the gas, or fluid, the electric wave would continue on with out the power source, like a type of plasma. Just a thought. Or what if the electric bullet was used to propell an actual charged object into thr #2 plate and electric field?
WOW. I wonder too, and will think about all your points a long, long, long time and then get back to you. You have asked so many questions and made no statements so that it is practically impossible to respond. To you.
CANGAS will post his analysis soon as promised.
Prosoothus
Registered Senior Member
Ragnarok,
I don't see why it would work any differently in zero gravity.
As far as the electric field is concerned, I believe that it, like all other fields, travels at the speed of c in a vacuum. This would mean that there would be a delay between the time the electric field is shut off and the time it is no longer detected at plate 2.
Electric fields don't need a medium to travel. When I first imagined this device, I thought it would be best to have a vacuum in between the two plates so that the electric fields aren't disrupted by matter. However, now that you mentioned it, maybe a substance can be used to slow down the electric field so that the device wouldn't have to work at such a high frequency.
As plate 1 pushes the charged particle, the particle would push back. The force resulting from the deceleration of the charged particle at plate 2 would balance out the force to accelerate the charge at plate 1, so there would be zero net force. Why push a charged particle to plate 2 when you can just push the charged particles in plate 2?
Tom, aka Joeblow93132
I don't see why it would work any differently in zero gravity.
As far as the electric field is concerned, I believe that it, like all other fields, travels at the speed of c in a vacuum. This would mean that there would be a delay between the time the electric field is shut off and the time it is no longer detected at plate 2.
Electric fields don't need a medium to travel. When I first imagined this device, I thought it would be best to have a vacuum in between the two plates so that the electric fields aren't disrupted by matter. However, now that you mentioned it, maybe a substance can be used to slow down the electric field so that the device wouldn't have to work at such a high frequency.
As plate 1 pushes the charged particle, the particle would push back. The force resulting from the deceleration of the charged particle at plate 2 would balance out the force to accelerate the charge at plate 1, so there would be zero net force. Why push a charged particle to plate 2 when you can just push the charged particles in plate 2?
Tom, aka Joeblow93132
A while back, CANGAS promised to post a step by step analysis of his take on the Prosoothus device, believed to be a workable thruster. CANGAS forthwith found himself up to his axel in alligators and was momentarily(!) diverted. Now that old promise is renewed and, barring a resurgence of reptilean amphibians, my two cents worth of opinion will soon be posted.