Having problems with message search?
In consideration of the aptly put What The Bleep Do We Know!?, we revisit Sir Roger Penrose’s “…..there is at least one glaring omission in present physical theory. This is how small-scale quantum processes can add up, for large and complicated systems, to the almost classical behavior of macroscopic bodies. Indeed, it is not just an omission but an actual fundamental inconsistency, sometimes referred to as the measurement paradox (or Schrodinger’s cat). In my view, until this paradox is resolved we must necessarily remain very far from a physical theory of everything – whether or not such a theory exists.”
The Radius of Curvature of all Natural Law that equates with the matter to energy conversion differential as determined by E=MC2 will fail to have significance as long as the measurement and mathematical construct tools we use, remain in their prehistoric and childlike stages - namely:
- Space and time coordinates that are neither defined accurately, nor equated and standardized to energy differential values
- Ignoring a theory of the continuum (ref Mach) that would overturn the control of knowledge vis-à-vis Planck, Maxwell, Dirac, etc., and allow electromagnetism to be integrated with the knowledge of the structure of the atom
- The blind sight, illusion, will continue………..for as we all know, we cannot see anything faster than by the light (VC) which transmits images of matter.
Those having read StarSteps, and still expressing interest to join this group, can review Quantum Trickery summation below along with the stalled, hindered, and many backward topics from the following STAIF 2006 New Frontiers Symposium and email eaglehawkvision@... with your comments.
--------------------------------------
FYI: an interesting “Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Blog questioning common sense basics:
Evolution, Intelligent Design, Survival Blog:
http://evolution-intelligentdesign-survival.blogspot.com/ - As we currently traverse the threshold past the point of no return (irreversible global warming and 'SMART" nuclear surgical Resource Wars) under the brainwashed belief that growing 'gas' from corn, etc, will save us....... let us take one more look at where we lost both sense and science and "pray, affirm, whatever works for you", that the 100th Monkey Syndrome is still around to perform. ............................our alternative choice is 'Adapt to it' as our corporate masters in freedumb land tell us. (my, my, how do you adapt to Katrina’s and Tsunamis and much greater off-balance things to come?)
A Return to Science (Sense -Pun Intended) - Expanding the stale, petrified, 100 year centennial celebrated definition of E=MC2 – by moving it along the NORMAL channels the equation and definition should have evolved these last 100 years. It is the only arena at this late stage to succeed at reversing the 'irreversible, and surmounting the countless challenges a complex, evolving civilization faces:
- unlimited energy availability
- unlimited and recyclable resource creation
- freedom of movement/transportation, unfettered, uncluttered, at any speed for both goods and people
- meeting the "Ethics" criteria the Foundation for The Future asserts is required for civilizations to survive
- dissolving the argument between Evolution, Creationism and Intelligent Design
- removes the dirty clothes and ancient, misunderstood cultural paraphernalia covering all the great religions of the world, revealing their common core linked to science and the expanded definition of E=MC2, reviving belief and hope to new levels of awe, aspiration, and humble gratitude, surpassing the themes taught by the great religions.
------------------------------------------------------------
December 27, 2005
This fall scientists announced that they had put a half dozen beryllium atoms into a "cat state." No, they were not sprawled along a sunny windowsill. To a physicist, a "cat state" is the condition of being two diametrically opposed conditions at once, like black and white, up and down, or dead and alive. These atoms were each spinning clockwise and counterclockwise at the same time. Moreover, like miniature Rockettes they were all doing whatever it was they were doing together, in perfect synchrony. Should one of them realize, like the cartoon character who runs off a cliff and doesn't fall until he looks down, that it is in a metaphysically untenable situation and decide to spin only one way, the rest would instantly fall in line, whether they were across a test tube or across the galaxy. The idea that measuring the properties of one particle could instantaneously change the properties of another one (or a whole bunch) far away is strange to say the least - almost as strange as the notion of particles spinning in two directions at once. The team that pulled off the beryllium feat, led by Dietrich Leibfried at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, in Boulder, Colo., hailed it as another step toward computers that would use quantum magic to perform calculations. But it also served as another demonstration of how weird the world really is according to the rules, known as quantum mechanics. The joke is on Albert Einstein, who, back in 1935, dreamed up this trick of synchronized atoms - "spooky action at a distance," as he called it - as an example of the absurdity of quantum mechanics. "No reasonable definition of reality could be expected to permit this," he, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen wrote in a paper in 1935. Today that paper, written when Einstein was a relatively ancient 56 years old, is the most cited of Einstein's papers. But far from demolishing quantum theory, that paper wound up as the cornerstone for the new field of quantum information. Nary a week goes by that does not bring news of another feat of quantum trickery once only dreamed of in thought experiments: particles (or at least all their properties) being teleported across the room in a microscopic version of Star Trek beaming; electrical "cat" currents that circle a loop in opposite directions at the same time; more and more particles farther and farther apart bound together in Einstein's spooky embrace now known as "entanglement." At the University of California, Santa Barbara, researchers are planning an experiment in which a small mirror will be in two places at once. Niels Bohr, the Danish philosopher king of quantum theory, dismissed any attempts to lift the quantum veil as meaningless, saying that science was about the results of experiments, not ultimate reality. But now that quantum weirdness is not confined to thought experiments, physicists have begun arguing again about what this weirdness means, whether the theory needs changing, and whether in fact there is any problem. This fall two Nobel laureates, Anthony Leggett of the University of Illinois and Norman Ramsay of Harvard argued in front of several hundred scientists at a conference in Berkeley about whether, in effect, physicists were justified in trying to change quantum theory, the most successful theory in the history of science. Dr. Leggett said yes; Dr. Ramsay said no. It has been, as Max Tegmark, a cosmologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, noted, "a 75-year war." It is typical in reporting on this subject to bounce from one expert to another, each one shaking his or her head about how the other one just doesn't get it. "It's a kind of funny situation," N. David Mermin of Cornell, who has called Einstein's spooky action "the closest thing we have to magic," said, referring to the recent results. "These are extremely difficult experiments that confirm elementary features of quantum mechanics." It would be more spectacular news, he said, if they had come out wrong. Anton Zeilinger of the University of Vienna said that he thought, "The world is not as real as we think. "My personal opinion is that the world is even weirder than what quantum physics tells us," he added. The discussion is bringing renewed attention to Einstein's role as a founder and critic of quantum theory, an "underground history," that has largely been overlooked amid the celebrations of relativity in the past Einstein year, according to David Z. Albert, a professor of philosophy and physics at Columbia. Regarding the 1935 paper, Dr. Albert said, "We know something about Einstein's genius we didn't know before." The Silly Theory From the day 100 years ago that he breathed life into quantum theory by deducing that light behaved like a particle as well as like a wave, Einstein never stopped warning that it was dangerous to the age-old dream of an orderly universe. If light was a particle, how did it know which way to go when it was issued from an atom? "The more success the quantum theory has, the sillier it seems," Einstein once wrote to friend. The full extent of its silliness came in the 1920's when quantum theory became quantum mechanics. In this new view of the world, as encapsulated in a famous equation by the Austrian Erwin Schrödinger, objects are represented by waves that extend throughout space, containing all the possible outcomes of an observation - here, there, up or down, dead or alive. The amplitude of this wave is a measure of the probability that the object will actually be found to be in one state or another, a suggestion that led Einstein to grumble famously that God doesn't throw dice. Worst of all from Einstein's point of view was the uncertainty principle, enunciated by Werner Heisenberg in 1927. Certain types of knowledge, of a particle's position and velocity, for example, are incompatible: the more precisely you measure one property, the blurrier and more uncertain the other becomes. In the 1935 paper, Einstein and his colleagues, usually referred to as E.P.R., argued that the uncertainty principle could not be the final word about nature. There must be a deeper theory that looked behind the quantum veil. Imagine that a pair of electrons are shot out from the disintegration of some other particle, like fragments from an explosion. By law certain properties of these two fragments should be correlated. If one goes left, the other goes right; if one spins clockwise, the other spins counterclockwise. That means, Einstein said, that by measuring the velocity of, say, the left hand electron, we would know the velocity of the right hand electron without ever touching it. Conversely, by measuring the position of the left electron, we would know the position of the right hand one. Since neither of these operations would have involved touching or disturbing the right hand electron in any way, Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen argued that the right hand electron must have had those properties of both velocity and position all along. That left only two possibilities, they concluded. Either quantum mechanics was "incomplete," or measuring the left hand particle somehow disturbed the right hand one. But the latter alternative violated common sense. Such an influence, or disturbance, would have to travel faster than the speed of light. "My physical instincts bristle at that suggestion," Einstein later wrote. Bohr responded with a six-page essay in Physical Review that contained but one simple equation, Heisenberg's uncertainty relation. In essence, he said, it all depends on what you mean by "reality." Enjoy the Magic Most physicists agreed with Bohr, and they went off to use quantum mechanics to build atomic bombs and reinvent the world. The consensus was that Einstein was a stubborn old man who "didn't get" quantum physics. All this began to change in 1964 when John S. Bell, a particle physicist at the European Center for Nuclear Research near Geneva, who had his own doubts about quantum theory, took up the 1935 E.P.R. argument. Somewhat to his dismay, Bell, who died in 1990, wound up proving that no deeper theory could reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics. Bell went on to outline a simple set of experiments that could settle the argument and decide who was right, Einstein or Bohr. When the experiments were finally performed in 1982, by Alain Aspect and his colleagues at the University of Orsay in France, they agreed with quantum mechanics and not reality as Einstein had always presumed it should be. Apparently a particle in one place could be affected by what you do somewhere else. "That's really weird," Dr. Albert said, calling it "a profoundly deep violation of an intuition that we've been walking with since caveman days." Physicists and philosophers are still fighting about what this means. Many of those who care to think about these issues (and many prefer not to), concluded that Einstein's presumption of locality - the idea that physically separated objects are really separate - is wrong. Dr. Albert said, "The experiments show locality is false, end of story." But for others, it is the notion of realism, that things exist independent of being perceived, that must be scuttled. In fact, physicists don't even seem to agree on the definitions of things like "locality" and "realism." "I would say we have to be careful saying what's real," Dr. Mermin said. "Properties cannot be said to be there until they are revealed by an actual experiment." What everybody does seem to agree on is that the use of this effect is limited. You can't use it to send a message, for example. Leonard Susskind, a Stanford theoretical physicist, who called these entanglement experiments "beautiful and surprising," said the term "spooky action at a distance," was misleading because it implied the instantaneous sending of signals. "No competent physicist thinks that entanglement allows this kind of nonlocality." Indeed the effects of spooky action, or "entanglement," as Schrödinger called it, only show up in retrospect when the two participants in a Bell-type experiment compare notes. Beforehand, neither has seen any violation of business as usual; each sees the results of his measurements of, say, whether a spinning particle is pointing up or down, as random. In short, as Brian Greene, the Columbia theorist wrote in "The Fabric of the Cosmos," Einstein's special relativity, which sets the speed of light as the cosmic speed limit, "survives by the skin of its teeth." In an essay in 1985, Dr. Mermin said that "if there is spooky action at a distance, then, like other spooks, it is absolutely useless except for its effect, benign or otherwise, on our state of mind." He added, "The E.P.R. experiment is as close to magic as any physical phenomenon I know of, and magic should be enjoyed." In a recent interview, he said he still stood by the latter part of that statement. But while spooky action remained useless for sending a direct message, it had turned out to have potential uses, he admitted, in cryptography and quantum computing. Nine Ways of Killing a Cat Another debate, closely related to the issues of entanglement and reality, concerns what happens at the magic moment when a particle is measured or observed. Before a measurement is made, so the traditional story goes, the electron exists in a superposition of all possible answers, which can combine, adding and interfering with one another. Then, upon measurement, the wave function "collapses" to one particular value. Schrödinger himself thought this was so absurd that he dreamed up a counterexample. What is true for electrons, he said, should be true as well for cats. In his famous thought experiment, a cat is locked in a box where the decay of a radioactive particle will cause the release of poison that will kill it. If the particle has a 50-50 chance of decaying, then according to quantum mechanics the cat is both alive and dead before we look in the box, something the cat itself, not to mention cat lovers, might take issue with. But cats are always dead or alive, as Dr. Leggett of Illinois said in his Berkeley talk. "The problem with quantum mechanics," he said in an interview, "is how it explains definite outcomes to experiments." If quantum mechanics is only about information and a way of predicting the results of measurements, these questions don't matter, most quantum physicists say. "But," Dr. Leggett said, "if you take the view that the formalism is reflecting something out there in real world, it matters immensely." As a result, theorists have come up with a menu of alternative interpretations and explanations. According to one popular notion, known as decoherence, quantum waves are very fragile and collapse from bumping into the environment. Another theory, by the late David Bohm, restores determinism by postulating a "pilot wave" that acts behind the scenes to guide particles. In yet another theory, called "many worlds," the universe continually branches so that every possibility is realized: the Red Sox win and lose and it rains; Schrödinger's cat lives, dies, has kittens and scratches her master when he tries to put her into the box. Recently, as Dr. Leggett pointed out, some physicists have tinkered with Schrödinger's equation, the source of much of the misery, itself. A modification proposed by the Italian physicists Giancarlo Ghirardi and Tullio Weber, both of the University of Trieste, and Alberto Rimini of the University of Pavia, makes the wave function unstable so that it will collapse in a time depending on how big a system it represents. In his standoff with Dr. Ramsay of Harvard last fall, Dr. Leggett suggested that his colleagues should consider the merits of the latter theory. "Why should we think of an electron as being in two states at once but not a cat, when the theory is ostensibly the same in both cases?" Dr. Leggett asked. Dr. Ramsay said that Dr. Leggett had missed the point. How the wave function mutates is not what you calculate. "What you calculate is the prediction of a measurement," he said. "If it's a cat, I can guarantee you will get that it's alive or dead," Dr. Ramsay said. David Gross, a recent Nobel winner and director of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara, leapt into the free-for-all, saying that 80 years had not been enough time for the new concepts to sink in. "We're just too young. We should wait until 2200 when quantum mechanics is taught in kindergarten." The Joy of Randomness One of the most extreme points of view belongs to Dr. Zeilinger of Vienna, a bearded, avuncular physicist whose laboratory regularly hosts every sort of quantum weirdness. In an essay recently in Nature, Dr. Zeilinger sought to find meaning in the very randomness that plagued Einstein. "The discovery that individual events are irreducibly random is probably one of the most significant findings of the 20th century," Dr. Zeilinger wrote. Dr. Zeilinger suggested that reality and information are, in a deep sense, indistinguishable, a concept that Dr. Wheeler, the Princeton physicist, called "it from bit." In information, the basic unit is the bit, but one bit, he says, is not enough to specify both the spin and the trajectory of a particle. So one quality remains unknown, irreducibly random. As a result of the finiteness of information, he explained, the universe is fundamentally unpredictable. "I suggest that this randomness of the individual event is the strongest indication we have of a reality 'out there' existing independently of us," Dr. Zeilinger wrote in Nature. He added, "Maybe Einstein would have liked this idea after all." STAIF 2006 Meeting Minutes - New Frontiers Symposium
OVERVIEW
The Space Technology Applications International Forum (STAIF) 2006 Conference was held at the Albuquerque Hilton from 13 Feb through 16 Feb 2006.
The official program, including the exact authors and titles of each paper please refer to the STAIF web site.
13 FEB - SESSION F.01 - POTENTIAL FRONTIERS - I
1:45pm - Paul Murad - Panel Discussion
Paul presented a paper that provided an overview of what was to be included in the New Frontiers sessions this year. He highlighted the need for real R&D funding of these projects in order to mature them to a useable Technology Readiness Level.
2:15pm - Nicholar Broechler - Evolutionary Model for Space Solar Power
A case was made for collecting solar power in space and beaming it to Earth. A worldwide array of 20 to 36 solar collection satellites are envisioned, each at 200MW, with GEO collectors beaming lasers to LEO relays, which beam microwaves to the ground. Light to laser conversion efficiencies of 38% have been reported by JAXA 2005, and the conversion to microwaves could be as high as 50%. Frequency options include the 10GHz band or the 95 to 140 GHz band.
2:45pm - Jamie Childress - High Efficiency PPMT Power Generators and Motors
Jamie Childress of Boeing Phantom Works presented a summary of Flynn Research's Parallel Path Magnetic Technology, and showed how it could be applied to improve the efficiency of generators and motors. Using a new combination of coils and permanent magnets on the stator, it provides flux switching in a way that there is always a torque connection to the rotor. This is an improvement over the standard switched reluctance design.
3:15pm - John Brandenburg - GEM Theory of Field Unification
John presented his unique brand of unified field theory, which combines features of Sakharov's ZPF with the Kaluza-Klein merger of EM and GR. He presented the Vacuum Bernoulli Equation and showed that if it is true then a circulating pointing vector should provide gravitational lift. His claim was that a 3 phase version of this rotating EM field constructively interferes with the ZPF, and he also stated that the Japanese had published observations of this to 1 part in 1000. Experimental results are still pending.
13 FEB - SESSION F.02 - EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS & NEW CONCEPTS - I
4:00pm - Eric Davis - Review of Concepts for Quantum Vacuum Field Study
Dr Eric Davis presented an overview of various ways the ZPF could be studied and utilized. Highlights of this extensive paper included the fact that QCD will not contribute to the ZPF, and that a closed engine cycle may be defined that extracts energy from the ZPF without violation of the laws of thermodynamics.
4:30pm - Raymond Jensen - Is Faster Than Light Communication Possible?
A scheme for FTL communication was presented that utilized the presence or absence of interference fringes in entangled photon pairs to propagate a signal faster than light. The method required a pre-existing train of entangled photons be generated and sent out in advance of the signal at the speed of light, and once this was done, one entangled photon should instantaneously affect the other. Modulation would be a "0" for no interference pattern, and a "1" for the presence of an interference pattern. This FTL approach was understandably controversial.
5:00pm - Martin Tajmar - Gravitomagnetic Solution to Cooper Pair Mass Anomaly
A gravitomagnetic London moment and graviton mass is predicted inside of rotating superconductors that may account for a Cooper Pair mass anomaly (.008% heavier than 2 electrons) observed by Tate (1989) in Nb at 6K. The extra mass of gravitons would account for the anomaly. This is a small but measurable effect that occurs only in rotating SC, and is not observed in static SC.
5:30pm - Giorgio Fontana - Traveling in a Computational Universe
Dr Bob Baker presented this paper for Fontana, who could not travel out for the conference. Fontana's thesis is that our universe bears the mark of being computationally optimized, via the dimensionality of quantum mechanics. The predictive power of this theory was not clear, and it was therefore difficult to judge in the absence of the author.
6:00pm Adjourned
14 FEB - SESSION F.03 - THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS - FTL TRAVEL
10:30am - Bob Baker - Lasers for GW Generation and Detection
Dr Bob Baker reviewed predicted GW power and GW amplitude predictions for the laser experiment being planned by the Chinese. High instantaneous powers do not necessarily translate into higher amplitudes, and it is the amplitude that triggers detection thresholds. In the case of the Chinese experiment, they are planning on using a synchro-resonance, or inverse Gertsenshtein detection process, with the GW waves focused via a fractal membrane. This should provide the necessary amplitude sensitivity.
11:00am - Eric Davis - Generating Negative Energies in the Lab
Dr Eric Davis covered various options for the possible creation of "negative energy" i.e. a depression in space time without the use of mass. Such negative energy distributions are required by the Alcubierre solution and other warp drives. Eric noted that the Casimir effect breaks down below 15um, well before the resultant suppressed ZPF modes would ever produce a useful quantity of negative energy. However, there are more robust methods envisioned, such as squeezed light or quantum coherence, where one quantum state is squeezed preferentially at the expense of another. Several production methods were outlined, including squeezing cavities and laser pulse superposition.
11:30am - Franklin Felber - Exact Relativistic Antigravity Propulsion
A new solution set for Einstein's GR field equations was presented that considered for the first time a fast moving dynamic source field solution. It was established that when a gravitational source moves faster than c/((3)^.5) the source can be repulsive. The half angle of repulsion reaches a maxima at B = .8
12:00pm - Sonny White - Alcubierre Warp Drive in Higher Dimensions
White presented an investigation of the Alcubierre warp drive solution that included mapping it into a higher manifold, in this case the Chung-Freese metric. The Alcubierre solution requires a ring of negative energy in order to maintain its shape, and has previously been considered in static cases only. The question remained "how does one navigate?" White considered also the case of an initial state that included velocity, and in this case the ring field could be considered as a "boost" field in that the velocity is simply magnified along the same vector. This is useful from an engineering point of view.
14 FEB - SESSION F.04 - ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES FOR PROPULSION I
1:45pm - Keran O'Brien - Random Walk Solution to Heliotropic Transport Equation
Dr O'Brien presented an astrospherics paper describing the cosmic ray environment within the heliosphere, in particular modeling how cosmic rays are transported from the Inter Stellar Medium through the heliopause. Higher energy cosmic rays tend to enter through the bow shock.
2:15pm - Fontana & Baker - Generation of GW with Nuclear Reactions
Dr Bob Baker presented for Fontana a paper on how to generate gravitational waves using nuclear reactions. In this approach a fission source would feed a traveling wave reactor. The quadrupole moments of nuclei inside this reactor would all shift when impacted by a fission product. If all these shifts are in phase a coherent GW output would be produced. This could serve as a source of very strong, very concentrated (but small beam cross section) GW.
2:45pm - Paul Murad - Closed Form Solution to Navier Stokes Equation
Paul reviewed the history of Navier Stokes (N-S) solutions for hydrodynamics and some of the simplifying assumptions that have been made in the past. Cases where fluids are compressible or there is turbulence requires more general solutions outlined in Paul's paper. Simplifications that may still be used include conservation equations and in some cases symmetry, as in axisymmetric flows. Paul also raised the case where N-S solutions and MHD solutions to the same problem do not converge, and in this case one must use an iterative approach, and one can separate the E & B field terms. Mesh distortion terms can also be used to simplify geometry somewhat, but care must be taken when on the boundary of a (subsonic / supersonic) flight regime.
3:15pm - Danielle Graham - Experimental Data on Gravitational Augmentation
Data was presented on the possible effects of human presence on gravitational and geomagnetic measurements. The focus of interest at this presentation was on the gravitational effects, which were taken while a subject was seated motionless on a load cell, and was then asked to meditate. Drops of 6 to 8 N were observed during the exercises, whereas baselines were flat. Questions regarding thermal stability of the load cell were raised, but while no thermal data was gathered, thermal isolation of the load cell during the exercise was reportedly quite good. A demonstration was scheduled for after the conference.
14 FEB - SESSION F.05 - EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS & NEW CONCEPTS - II
4:00pm - Clive Woods - HFGW Optics
Based on the work of Li & Torr superconductors (SCs) were predicted to reduce to speed of propagation of GW. This means SCs could be used as lenses for GW. Because the index would be quite high (n = 300) reflectors would be more practical then refractors due to high transmission losses. At the diffraction limit this technology would be able to concentrate GW by a factor on n^2, or 90,000. Therefore this technology would be a possible enabling factor when attempting to detect otherwise very weak GW signals.
4:30pm - Bob Baker - PZ Crystal Resonator HFGW Generation
Dr Baker presented a paper written with co-authors Woods and Li that outlined a piezo-electric approach to the generation of HFGWs. In this embodiment 2.45um magnetrons would be used to excite FBAR resonators. Two collected sets of resonators are planned for the experiment, each at the end of a moment arm to the focus point, where the GW detector will be placed. The strength of the effect increases as the moment arm radius of rotation increases. The "two set" configuration of radiators had changed from a previous presentation, where there was a radial array of radiators. The two collected clumps of radiators are more efficient than the radial array because the effect goes as the third derivative of the radial change, which is maximized via axial asymmetry.
5:00pm - Clive Woods - A Novel Variable Focus Lens for HFGW
Dr Woods presented a design for a variable focal length lens for HFGW. Equations were solved for 6cm wavelengths but there is no reason why other wavelengths could not be used. Clive observed that Type II SCs allow magnetic vortices to penetrate through the SC bulk, and this affects the GW index of the material. The greater the static magnetic field, the less the index - this is the mechanism that could provide a variable focus. The radial spatial distribution of the B field could provide the lens shape, allowing the SC to be a flat piece. The lens would always be divergent but could be used in conjunction with a convergent reflector for any optical power.
5:30pm - Reiss & Hathaway - Experimental Lab Standards for Gravity Effects Search
George Hathaway presented a nice summary list of many of the experimental spurious noise sources that can enter gravitational experiments, including mechanical, thermal, and electrical effects that can interfere with good measurements. As an example of the configuration trades faced for a typical experiment, if an expensive Rubotherm magnetic suspension system is used to avoid entering a cryogen dewer, then how can thermal measurements be made within the dewer? A starting list of all possible measurement problems will be posted to www.earthtech.org in about a week's time.
6:00pm - Adjourned
A brief levitation demonstration followed, sponsored by the Rathma School of Enlightenment and the NW Frontier Research Institute. Several Newtons of weight loss were observed in real time while monitoring a meditating subject seated on a scale.
7:30pm - 2006 STAIF Awards Banquet
15 FEB - SESSION F.06 - EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS & NEW CONCEPTS - III
10:30am - James Woodward - Mach's Principle, Flux Capacitors, and Propulsion
Dr Woodward presented an overview of the current state of his experimental investigations into the flux capacitor. The flux capacitor, also known as the Mach Lorentz Thruster (MRT), operates magnetic flux storage out of phase with electric capacitive charge storage to provide momentum exchange with the Machian background. For details of the method of operation see the Foundation of Physics, 10/04. No new physics is required to understand the modus operandi. The latest enhancement to the test article was to add a crown of wiring to dissipate the Lorentz wind effect as first discovered by Cox. This should help air testing look more like vacuum testing. In the past 700 uN thrusts were observed in air, with only 75 uN being observed in a vacuum.
11:00am - Paul March - Woodward Effect: Modeling and Experimental Verification
Paul presented his latest data on MLTs, which use a toroidal configuration with a BaTiO3 nonlinear dielectric core. The toroidal configuration means that a wind effect dissipation crown is not required. In spite of this, very high thrusts have been observed: about 2000 - 4000uN on the 2004 test article, and about 1000uN on the 2005 test article. Paul runs his tests over periods of at least 8 seconds because thrust seems to peak and flatten out only after at least 6 seconds.
11:30am - Nembo Buldrini - Experimental Study of Machian Mass Fluctuation Effect
Test results from the ARC Seibersdorf Research facility in Austria were presented for several of Woodward's test articles. Woodward sent the test articles there, along with the required power supplies and signal generators. Testing was performed on a high precision balance, inside a faraday cage, inside a fully evacuated vacuum chamber. Results were negative in all cases. Researchers there also produced their own version of a MLT test article, and testing on that device was also negative - no thrust was observed in any of the cases. There is no explanation yet as to why results are negative in their vacuum chamber, but positive in many other tests. Testing is ongoing and there are plans to send additional test articles.
12:00pm - Tony Robertson - EM Nonlinearity in the Dielectric Medium
Using some of the same references as Feigel (2004), Tony investigated predicted E x H effects for non-linear dielectric media which seem to account for much of the data taken on MLTs. After looking at the vacuum mode components of the volume momentum, Tony suggested that a non-linear material that provides magneto-electric birefringence properties would be a better material choice than piezo-electrics for use in MLTs. Other suggestions included using fewer turns in the induction coils, using an increased frequency, and if possible increasing the voltage still further. A combination of these changes should result in dramatically larger thrusts.
15 FEB - SESSION F.07 - ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES FOR PROPULSION II
4:00pm - George Miley - Space Propulsion based on Dipole Assisted IEC System
Dr Miley put a new twist onto his approach to IEC fusion by incorporating a dipole choke first implemented by MIT. In the context of IEC fusion this would require a "split grid," that is the usual spherical confinement grid would be split into a north and south set of hemispheres, each acting as a plasma mirror. In the center a coil would be added, with a hollow core, or bore section, which would act to further confine the plasma by a factor of 16 using the magnetic dipole generated by the coil. This new configuration has become known as a "Dipole assisted Inertia Electrostatic Confinement" fusion approach, or DaIEC. To further improve performance, George suggested the use of RF Ion Beam injection, perhaps from two opposite directions for efficiency improvements via beam to beam interactions, for a "gun injected DaIEC."
It is hard to overstate the importance of IEC technology as compared to regular fusion approaches such as ITER etc. Even with the dipole coil, the compact and lightweight nature of the IEC approach lend it much broader utility to a plethora of applications, including decentralized terrestrial power plants, SSTOs when supplemented with air breathing methods at lower speeds, and when ganged together, useful for deep space missions. In the manned mission to Mars concept that George presented 10 IECs were combined to provide enough power for the vehicle. DaIEC development costs would likely be an order of magnitude less than other nuclear options for space, and the presentation provided the following cost & schedule estimates: lab development 20M + 4 years, proof of principle version 80M + 4 years, continuous operation plasma burning ground version 600M + 6 years, wrapping up with a manned space demonstration flight at 2800M + 6 years. Hence the entire program could get to an interplanetary operational capability with only 3.5B and 20 years, with the side benefits for military SSTO applicability, and terrestrial supplements to the US power grid in remote areas to reduce foreign dependence on oil. Benefits abound, for a very low cost to entry.
4:30pm - Young Bae - Precision Formation Flying for Satellites with nm Accuracy
Dr Bae has received funding from the NAIC for a conceptual development of the formation flight of satellites. Possible applications include LISA, SPECS, and Maxim, among others. The goal is ultra high precision (nm) formations, presumably for interferometric remote sensing. Propellant free concepts studied included tethers and EM dynamics. Young settled on a tethered approach, with a piezo actuator and stepper motor to provide the pulling force, and a photon (laser) thruster to provide the pushing force (up to 700 uN). Satellite to satellite ranging is conceptually provided by a separate laser interferometric system. The photon thrusters seems unnecessary - why he did not propose simply tethering them together and dual-axis spin stabilizing with ion thrusters is beyond me. We ran out of time for questions.
5:00pm - Froning & Czysz - Technology for 2025 to 2050 Military Aerospace Vehicles
Dr Paul Czysz presented as Dave Froning was not able to make the trip from Australia. He presented further details from their fascinating study from last year on possible propulsion concepts for manned military space vehicles of the future. The stretch goals are a manned SSTO to GEO by 2025, and manned CIS-Lunar by 2050. The proposed solution for 2025 was a RAM/SCRAM jet with MHD and IEC fusion in a single SSTO vehicle. Takeoff weight would be 174 Tons, roughly the same as a B2. From Mach 0 to 14 the RAM / SCRAM jet would operate. At M = 14, the MHD would be activated for ½ second to produce ½ GW of power to light the IEC fusion rocket, which would take it the rest of the way to GEO. A key vehicle requirement is to place 18 Tons of payload into GEO orbit. It is suggested that the IEC fusion would be aneutronically fuelled to reduce the shielding weight.
5:30pm - Knecht, Mead, et.al. - DPF Fusion for Future Military Aerospace Vehicles
Another look at an option for the propulsion system of the 2025 SSTO baseline was detailed by Sean Knecht in this talk. A DPF fusion option was developed with an Isp of 1500 - 2000 s, Q = 3.0, a rep rate of 10 Hz, and n(prop) = .90. The capacitive bank was assumed to be half the mass of the propulsion payload weight, and although 3MJ/m^3 is the current maximum energy density, it was assumed that in 20 years it will be 5MJ/m^3. With these parameters, it is possible to develop thrusts of 500 to 1000 kN, with the propulsion system payload weighing in at 16 to 22 MT. The resultant cap specific energy is about 15 KJ/Kg. Cooling was not considered for either the fusion vessel or the capacitors, nor was the capacitor bank design detailed - these details were left to future studies.
6:00pm - Adjourned
16 FEB - SESSION F.08 - POTENTIAL FRONTIERS - II
10:30am - John Brandenburg - Mars X: Mars Mission using Solar Electric Propulsion
Microwave Electro Thermal (MET) thrusters are under development that may be suitable for use in a manned mission to Mars. The device is fed with RF energy at 915 MHz and produces an 8000deg F thrust at 900 sec of Isp. H2O is used as the propellant. It is expected that a 500 KW input would produce 100 N of thrust. At this output it need only be run for 1 month to entry a Mars transfer trajectory. Solar power would be provided by inflatable solar arrays that are capable of 1KW/Kg for Earth to Mars solar distance ranges. Dr Brandenburg also had recommendations regarding the Mars return ascent rocket. Due to the gravitational differences between the moon and Mars, the Mars ascent rocket will necessarily be in the class of an ATLAS rocket (rather than a LEM) to return 3 persons from the surface to escape velocity. This will require that a significant quantity of rocket fuel be manufacture in situ prior to the fueling of the rocket. John recommended that kerosene be manufactured rather than methane, since kerosene requires half as much Hydrogen for the same about of rocket fuel, and kerosene has nearly the same Isp as methane (360 vs. 370sec).
11:00am - Tom Valone - Progress in Electrogravitics for Aviation and Space Travel
Tom suggested that jet engines may by used to develop charge separation in conjunction with leading edge ionizers on aircraft to develop an ion envelope for aircraft in flight. Tom suggested that an ion sleeve about the airframe of an aircraft in flight may beneficially affect drag and stealth properties. It may be worthwhile to investigate the drag claims - if true they could have a useful impact on the fuel efficiency of new commercial aircraft designs still under development. There was also a review of some of the claims of TT Brown, including thrust of a positive pole of a charge capacitor in the atmosphere, and effect that allegedly produces 5N/KW at sea level, and that may be due to ion mobility.
11:30am - Jeremiah Hansen - Experiment to Simulate Gravity Using Diamagnetism
Jeremiah presented a novel concept for the generation of an artificial gravity environment while on orbit or during interplanetary transit. Noting that frogs have previously been levitated in a strong (4T) magnetic field, and further noting that humans are also weakly diamagnetic, Hansen suggested that strong magnetic fields (up to 40T?) may be used to provide an artificial gravity environment for humans in space. This concept could be tested on the ground by creating micro-gravity on Earth for human test subjects, to ensure there are no ill effects. The presentation concluded with a nice demonstration of a diamagnetic chip being levitated above a magnet array. Tom Valone of the audience suggested that the author review the reference "The Body Electric" to further investigate the possible health effects of this concept prior to its full scale development.
12:00pm - John Brandenburg - GEM Unification: Theory of FTL Travel
Dr Brandenburg wrapped up the conference by presenting a summary of his GEM concept, which is a combination of Sakharov's ZPF and Kaluza-Klein theory. Kaluza-Klein supposes that if 4D can account for space, time, and gravity, that 5D can account for space, time, gravity, and EM. This is consistent with the difficulty that has been experienced with measuring G - there may be unknown G-EM interactions that are interfering with measurements. On of the predictions of GEM is that FTL travel is possible. John made the point that, as we have seen with nuclear reactions when man first conceived of those, if we can theoretically predict something, and our theory is correct, then chances are good that nature is already doing it. Therefore there may already be large scale primordial wormholes in space time, that are providing a "multiply connected" universe. This prediction is supported by the observation that the microwave background is very uniform across the entire universe, suggesting some large scale energy leveling that has been hither to for unknown. This paper closed the session and conference.
12:30pm - Conference Adjourned
Offline 
Send Email