Derivations Blog

Derivations

A place for deriving stuff. We take requests.

Previous in Blog: SpaceX Booster Going Home   Next in Blog: Unmanned SpaceX Mission to Mars by 2018
Close
Close
Close
13 comments
Rating: Comments: Nested

Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

Posted April 23, 2016 9:48 AM by Bayes

A very interesting theory has been put forth to explain why the EM drive works. Up till now, scientists have been baffled how something that should produce no thrust has been shown in multiple experiments to produce a small amount of thrust.

Here is the article:

The Curious Link Between the Fly-By Anomaly and the "Impossible" EMDrive Thruster

About 10 years ago, a little-known aerospace engineer called Roger Shawyer made an extraordinary claim. Take a truncated cone, he said, bounce microwaves back and forth inside it and the result will be a thrust toward the narrow end of the cone. Voila … a revolutionary thruster capable of sending spacecraft to the planets and beyond. Shawyer called it the EmDrive. Shawyer's announcement was hugely controversial. The system converts one type of energy into kinetic energy, and there are plenty of other systems that do something similar. In that respect it is unremarkable. The conceptual problems arise with momentum. The system's total momentum increases as it begins to move. But where does this momentum come from? Shawyer had no convincing explanation, and critics said this was an obvious violation of the law of conservation of momentum. Shawyer countered with experimental results showing the device worked as he claimed. But his critics were unimpressed. The EmDrive, they said, was equivalent to generating a thrust by standing inside a box and pushing on the sides. In other words, it was snake oil. Since then, something interesting has happened. Various teams around the world have begun to build their own versions of the EmDrive and put them through their paces. And to everyone's surprise, they've begun to reproduce Shawyer's results. The EmDrive, it seems, really does produce thrust.

In 2012, a Chinese team said it had measured a thrust produced by its own version of the EmDrive. In 2014, an American scientist built an EmDrive and persuaded NASA to test it with positive results. And last year, NASA conducted its own tests in a vacuum to rule out movement of air as the origin of the force. NASA, too, confirmed that the EmDrive produces a thrust. In total, six independent experiments have backed Shawyer's original claims. That leaves an important puzzle-how to explain the seeming violation of conservation of momentum. Today we get an answer of sorts thanks to the work of Mike McCulloch at Plymouth University in the U.K. McCulloch's explanation is based on a new theory of inertia that makes startling predictions about the way objects move under very small accelerations..... "This is what the EmDrive may be doing," says McCulloch. The idea is that if photons have an inertial mass, they must experience inertia when they reflect. But the Unruh radiation in this case is tiny. So small in fact that it can interact with its immediate environment. In the case of the EmDrive, this is the truncated cone. The cone allows Unruh radiation of a certain size at the large end but only a smaller wavelength at the other end. So the inertia of photons inside the cavity must change as they bounce back and forth. And to conserve momentum, this must generate a thrust. McCulloch puts this theory to the test by using it to predict the forces it must generate. The precise calculations are complex because of the three-dimensional nature of the problem, but his approximate results match the order of magnitude of thrust in all the experiments done so far.

Article Continues Here

Reply

Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
2
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: About 4000 miles from the center of the earth (+/-100 mi)
Posts: 9912
Good Answers: 1141
#1

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/23/2016 10:39 AM

This is great news if it works out. Without any theory, all researchers can do is cut and try, groping around in the dark. With a theory, they can figure out how to optimize the effect and determine whether it will ever be large enough to be useful.

I'm glad to see that this is still being studied. If the experimental results are to be believed, something very strange is going on.

Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
The Engineer
Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Physics... United States - Member - NY Popular Science - Genetics - Organic Chemistry... Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Ingeniería en Español - Nuevo Miembro - New Member

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, New York
Posts: 5060
Good Answers: 129
#2
In reply to #1

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/23/2016 10:50 AM

"With a theory, they can figure out how to optimize the effect and determine whether it will ever be large enough to be useful."

I completely agree. This goes to show that an interesting invention, even when the inventor misunderstands why it's working, can be critical to advancing science because it spurs the theorists to action. Theorists are incredibly important and useful when focused, but when left to their own devices you sometimes just end up with a bunch of theorists going off the deep end with unprovable theories.

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: by the beach in Florida
Posts: 33392
Good Answers: 1817
#3

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/23/2016 8:53 PM

What is the power to thrust ratio? Does anybody know?

__________________
All living things seek to control their own destiny....this is the purpose of life
Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Good Answers: 12
#4
In reply to #3

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/23/2016 10:52 PM

Not sure the exact number, but I know it scales with the Q of the resonating cavity. Google Shawyer and EMDrive and you can grab the numbers. At this point, the efficiency isn't high, but if you apply some of the tech they use in the physics particle accelerators you could scale the concept up to a practical level.

The real mindblowing thing is this is a reactionless thruster. It isn't creating thrust by shooting onboard mass out the back. It is literally converting electricity into microwaves and then converting that into thrust. This is also why the theorists are all in a bunch. It throws lots of their preconceived notions out the window.

So much of the fuel on a normal rocket is used lifting the weight of its own fuel. This completely bypasses that problem. You just need a way of generating electricity. Solar panels or a small nuke plant could work. The mass of the ship could be a fraction of today's size because you are not hauling fuel for the full trip.

This is extremely exciting to think about, but I am in watch and see mode. Trying to maintain a healthy level of scepticism and an open mind at the same time.

__________________
A robot must risk his neck for his brother man, and may not cop out when there's danger all about. - Isaac Hayes' First Law of Robotics
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: by the beach in Florida
Posts: 33392
Good Answers: 1817
#6
In reply to #4

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 9:37 AM

"FAQ

Theory

1.
Q. Is the thrust produced by the EmDrive a reactionless force?
A. No, the thrust is the result of the reaction between the end plates of the waveguide and the Electromagnetic wave propagated within it.

2.
Q. How can a net force be produced by a closed waveguide?
A. At the propagation velocities (greater than one tenth the speed of light) the effects of special relativity must be considered. Different reference planes have to be used for the EM wave and the waveguide itself. The thruster is therefore an open system and a net force can be produced.

3.
Q. Why does the net force not get balanced out by the axial component of the sidewall force?
A. The net force is not balanced out by the axial component of the sidewall force because there is a highly non linear relationship between waveguide diameter and group velocity. (e.g. at cut off diameter, the group velocity is zero, the guide wavelength is infinity, but the diameter is clearly not zero.) The design of the cavity is such that the ratio of end wall forces is maximised, whilst the axial component of the sidewall force is reduced to a negligible value.

4.
Q. Does the theory of the EmDrive contravene the accepted laws of physics or electromagnetic theory?
A. The EmDrive does not violate any known law of physics. The basic laws that are applied in the theory of the EmDrive operation are as follows:

    Newton's laws are applied in the derivation of the basic static thrust equation (Equation 11 in the theory paper) and have also been demonstrated to apply to the EmDrive experimentally.
    The law of conservation of momentum is the basis of Newtons laws and therefore applies to the EmDrive. It is satisfied both theoretically and experimentally.
    The law of conservation of energy is the basis of the dynamic thrust equation which applies to the EmDrive under acceleration,(see Equation 16 in the theory paper).
    The principles of electromagnetic theory are used to derive the basic design equations.

5.
Q. Why does the EmDrive not contravene the conservation of momentum when it operates in free space?
A. The EmDrive cannot violate the conservation of momentum. The electromagnetic wave momentum is built up in the resonating cavity, and is transferred to the end walls upon reflection. The momentum gained by the EmDrive plus the momentum lost by the electromagnetic wave equals zero. The direction and acceleration that is measured, when the EmDrive is tested on a dynamic test rig, comply with Newtons laws and confirm that the law of conservation of momentum is satisfied.

6.
Q. Is the EmDrive a form of perpetual motion machine?
A. The EmDrive obeys the law of conservation of energy and is therefore not a perpetual motion machine. Energy must be expended to accelerate the EmDrive (see Equation 16 of the theory paper). Once the EmDrive is switched off, Newton's laws ensure that motion is constant unless it is acted upon by another force.

7.
Q. Why does the thrust decrease as the spacecraft velocity along the thrust vector increases?
A. As the spacecraft accelerates along the thrust vector, energy is lost by the engine and gained as additional kinetic energy by the spacecraft. This energy can be defined as the thrust multiplied by the distance through which the thrust acts. For a given acceleration period, the higher the mean velocity, the longer the distance travelled, hence the higher the energy lost by the engine.
This loss of stored energy from the resonant cavity leads to a reduction in Q and hence a reduction of thrust.

Test procedures

8.
Q. Has buoyancy been allowed for?
A. Buoyancy has been allowed for in the initial experiments and then eliminated by hermetically sealing the thruster.

9.
Q. Are there any convection currents which might affect the results?
A. Convection currents did not affect the results, as measurements were taken with the thrust vector up, down and horizontal. Test runs were also carried out using a thermal simulation heater to quantify the effects of change of coolant temperature.

10.
Q. Has stiffness in cables and pipes been allowed for?
A. The only connections to the balance were high flex electrical links

11.
Q. Has friction in any pivots been allowed for?
A. Static thrust measurements were carried out using 3 different techniques - a counterbalance rig with a knife edge pivot, a direct weighing method using a 16kg balance (0.1 gm resolution), and with the thruster suspended from a spring balance with the weight partly offloaded on to an electronic balance.

12.
Q. Have electromagnetic effects been taken into account? These include interactions between current-carrying conductors and between such conductors carrying RF currents and nearby metallic structures in which currents might be induced.
A. Stray electromagnetic effects were eliminated by using different test rigs, by testing two thrusters with very different mounting structures, and by changing the orientation by 90 degrees to eliminate the Earth's magnetic field.

13.
Q. Is there any ionization within the air, which might cause electrostatic charging and resulting forces?
A. Electrostatic charges were eliminated by the comprehensive earthing required for safety reasons, and to provide the return path for the magnetron anode current.

14.
Q. Could RF pick-up measurement circuits have produced erroneous results?
A. EMC tests were carried out on the instrumentation to eliminate the effects of RF pick up.

15.
Q. Could acceleration be caused by spurious torques generated by the air bearing?
A. Dynamic tests are preceded by an acceleration calibration test, using standard weights to determine the air bearing friction.

16.
Q. Could acceleration be caused by anomalous thermal or electromagnetic effects?
A. Acceleration and deceleration tests have been carried out in both clockwise and anti-clockwise directions Acceleration from rest only starts when the magnetron output frequency matches the resonant frequency of the engine, following an initial warm-up period.

Applications

17.
Q. Can the technology be qualified for space applications?
A. Yes, all the basic microwave, power supply, thermal and control technologies are similar to flight equipment currently used on high power communication satellites.

18.
Q. How can the EmDrive produce enough thrust for terrestrial applications?
A. The second generation engines will be capable of producing a specific thrust of 30kN/kW. Thus for 1 kilowatt (typical of the power in a microwave oven) a static thrust of 3 tonnes can be obtained, which is enough to support a large car. This is clearly adequate for terrestrial transport applications.
The static thrust/power ratio is calculated assuming a superconducting EmDrive with a Q of 5 x 109. This Q value is routinely achieved in superconducting cavities.
Note however, because the EmDrive obeys the law of conservation of energy, this thrust/power ratio rapidly decreases if the EmDrive is used to accelerate the vehicle along the thrust vector. (See Equation 16 of the theory paper). Whilst the EmDrive can provide lift to counter gravity, (and is therefore not losing kinetic energy), auxiliary propulsion is required to provide the kinetic energy to accelerate the vehicle."

http://emdrive.com/faq.html

Now that's what I call a fantastic claim!...I'd have to see it to believe it....and even then, it would take a lot of convincing....It seems to me somebody would have noticed this effect before now, I mean we've been working with electromagnetic energy waves for some time now....This sounds like cold fusion all over again...

__________________
All living things seek to control their own destiny....this is the purpose of life
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: About 4000 miles from the center of the earth (+/-100 mi)
Posts: 9912
Good Answers: 1141
#7
In reply to #6

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 10:48 AM

A bit carried away, are they?

I suppose they are open to offering an investment opportunity.

Reply
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: by the beach in Florida
Posts: 33392
Good Answers: 1817
#8
In reply to #7

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 12:26 PM

Well according to this we should be able to build fist size devices to counteract gravity on heavy objects meaning that movers could now employ children to pack and transport your belongings in their autonomously piloted vehicles.....!

__________________
All living things seek to control their own destiny....this is the purpose of life
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: About 4000 miles from the center of the earth (+/-100 mi)
Posts: 9912
Good Answers: 1141
#9
In reply to #8

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 2:56 PM

SPR's claims in #6 are obviously over the top!

So, if the test results are to be believed, either there is some normal physics phenomenon that hasn't been taken into account (electromagnetic interaction, etc.) or there is something new here to discover. We know there are new discoveries to be made such as the nature of dark matter and dark energy.

Either momentum is not conserved under some circumstances (almost zero probability!) or the momentum has to be transferred to something! Neutrinos were discovered when conservation laws were apparently violated. Results that don't make sense lead to discoveries.

Maybe McCulloch's theory will lead to new experiments that will either make or break it. We don't know what to try without a theory.

Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Good Answers: 12
#10
In reply to #9

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 3:04 PM

I agree. The exciting thing about this is how it seems to break the rules. This is how progress gets made and we gain a better understanding of physics. Maybe it is all a hoax, but some pretty smart people have been replicating the effect with consistent results. It may still be a longshot, but it is well worth investing some money to see where it leads.

__________________
A robot must risk his neck for his brother man, and may not cop out when there's danger all about. - Isaac Hayes' First Law of Robotics
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: About 4000 miles from the center of the earth (+/-100 mi)
Posts: 9912
Good Answers: 1141
#5

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 8:14 AM

Another interesting tidbit:

In his paper "Testing quantised inertia on the emdrive", McCulloch claims his modified mass equation (MiHsC) can explain the effects attributed to dark matter and dark energy:

"...MiHsC can explain galaxy rotation without the need for dark matter (McCulloch, 2012) and cosmic acceleration without the need for dark energy (McCulloch, 2007, 2010)."

http://arxiv.org/abs/1604.03449

Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Good Answers: 12
#11
In reply to #5

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/24/2016 3:31 PM

Both of the terms, dark energy and dark matter, were coined because they were the simplest analogy to explain the effects we are seeing out in the universe. Basically, things are accelerating (energy) and objects are clumping (gravity from matter) in ways we can't explain.

These names are fun, but they are also lazy and could be deceptive. These same effects could be caused by a wide variety of other things. Some of the simplest (but unproven) theories posit that the effect of forces such as gravity could change in unexpected ways over large distances. This could mean that dark energy and dark matter aren't needed to explain what is happening out there, but a better understanding of physics is.

The effects being seen in the EMDrive could be the result of an area of physics we just don't completely understand. By focusing attention on these misunderstandings we have a great opportunity to learn more. The greatest words to ever hear out of a scientist's mouth should be "Wow, I didn't expect that!"

I find it amazing how so many prominent scientists have the arrogance to say that the EMDrive is impossible because it breaks the laws of physics. Don't they have any sense of the history of science?

In the early 1800s if you tried to suggest that the flow of time changes for the observer based on the relative speed between the observer and observed you would have gotten laughed out of the Royal Society. That is accepted by everyone today, but it broke our understanding of physics and subsequently rebuilt it in new ways after Einstein proposed it.

Our history of science is a constant stream of breaking the laws we understood and rebuilding them with a better understanding. Every time you see a scientist who declares something is impossible without putting in any effort to truly understand it you have found a person who cares more about their prestige and position than understanding science.

__________________
A robot must risk his neck for his brother man, and may not cop out when there's danger all about. - Isaac Hayes' First Law of Robotics
Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
The Engineer
Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Physics... United States - Member - NY Popular Science - Genetics - Organic Chemistry... Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Ingeniería en Español - Nuevo Miembro - New Member

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, New York
Posts: 5060
Good Answers: 129
#12
In reply to #5

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/25/2016 7:48 AM

Now that would be something great!

Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Hearts of Oak Popular Science - Paleontology - New Member Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2005
Location: In the Garden
Posts: 3389
Good Answers: 75
#13

Re: Possible Explanation for Impossible EM Drive

04/26/2016 8:18 AM

Engage the photon drive, Scotty!

I was reading the article thinking "If it works, then there is a conservation of momentum...the bit that's wrong is the equation they're using" Glad some researchers are prepared to work on it and increase our understanding of the world.

Increase of knowledge by successive approximations...

__________________
Chaos always wins because it's better organised.
Reply
Reply to Blog Entry 13 comments

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Bayes (2); drobertson (3); English Rose (1); Rixter (4); SolarEagle (3)

Previous in Blog: SpaceX Booster Going Home   Next in Blog: Unmanned SpaceX Mission to Mars by 2018

Advertisement