On a Path to Unification of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, Mach Effect Propulsion and a Large Collection of Videos Explaining Physics

Paul March believes that the Quantum Vacuum Fluctuation / Magnetohydrodynamics of Harold White is the QM (Quantum mechanical) based version of Dr. Woodward’s M-E (Mach Effect) work

Paul March comment: the GRT and QM worlds will ultimately be combined into a coherent “Quantum Gravity” theory that will better explain our current M-E experimental results and will lead the way to FTL interstellar flight.

The first nextbigfuture article on mach’s effect propulsion which has an interview with Paul March

A second article with answers to various questions in comments on mach effect propulsion.

[below are links to 12 videos – about 20 hours – on General Relativity from Stanford, and other shorter videos on mach effect propulsion and six lecture videos on quantum mechanics – also from Stanford]

If the core team of ~5 people including Dr. Woodward could work full time on developing the M-E, we think we could have an R-C controlled M-E technology demonstrator that could move itself over an air hockey table, up and running within 2-to-3 years (for about $4 million in funding).

Inertial Mass Dependency on Local Vacuum Fluctuation Mean Free Path

A proposed relationship between the vacuum energy density, light-radius of the universe, and the plank force. The equation is proposed to infer a connection between inertial mass and an observer’s light horizon. This horizon is conjectured to be the mean free path for vacuum fluctuations as seen by an observer in deep space. This fundamental relationship will then be derived from a gravitational wave equation. Once this has been derived, the results will be extended to derive an equation to calculate the effect local matter has on the mean free path of a vacuum fluctuation, and hence the local vacuum energy density (vacuum fluctuation pileup). The paper will conclude by applying the theoretical framework to calculate expected thrust signals in an externally applied ExB application meant to induce plasma drift in the vacuum fluctuations

More on the Dielectric Needed for Really Good Mach Effect Propulsion

Now, in any M-E device, per Andrew Palfreyman’s STAIF-2006 M-E math model and a later unpublished “constrained input power” math model we created together in 2008, which are both based on Jim Woodward’s M-E derivation, the magnitude of the generated M-E derived mass/energy fluctuation signal in the energy storing dielectric is proportional to the available active dielectric mass, but inversely proportional to the density and volume of this active dielectric mass. What these three requirements translates out to is that the magnitude of the M-E delta mass/energy signal is proportional to the peak electrical and mechanical stresses applied to a given volume of the dielectric until it breaks at least. This high dielectric stress requirement limits the maximum lifetime of the dielectric so in any M-E device, a tradeoff between performance verses lifetime will have to be made. Also of note is that since the M-E signal is expressed in a cyclic manner that is in counter-(180 deg)-phase to the cap’s self-generated electrostrictive signal, using a dielectric material with a small electrostrictive constant is a big plus. Otherwise the M-E signal is cancelled out by the electrostrictive signal (E-S) until the M-E signal is driven large enough to overwhelm the E-S signal. This can happen because the M-E signal’s expression is much more nonlinear with input power than the E-S signal.

Operationally, the controlling M-E parameters of interest are the following. The dielectric’s M-E signal is proportional to the summation of the applied ac & dc bulk (relative to the distant stars) accelerations and the square of the da/dt “Jerk” accelerations. Desired peak bulk accelerations should be measured in thousands of gees or higher. Next, the M-E signal is proportional to the capacitance of the accelerated M-E cap dielectric, the cube of the applied operating voltage, the cube of the operating frequency, the square of the active dielectric constant, but varies inversely with the dielectric’s loss factor (i.e., lower ac Equivalent Resistance (E-R) is better) which controls the dissipated power and temp rise of the caps for a given input power. If making a solid state Mach Lorentz thruster (MLT), the magnitude of the rectified unidirectional force is proportional to the volumetric crossed B-field in the dielectric, and the thickness of the dielectric in the direction of the applied E-field which increases the leverage arm of the applied crossed B-field. MLTs also require the use of a single cap dielectric layer to preclude Lorentz force cancellation issues that arise by using standard multilayer capacitors were the applied E-field reverses direction in each layer at a given point in time.

Given the above M-E output signal’s optimization parameter space, the desired characteristics of operational M-E energy storage devices, AKA capacitors, is as follows:

1. Relative dielectric constant (e-r)= 1,000 or greater but depends on operating voltage.
2. Dielectric density should be less than 5.6 grams/cc (BaTiO3) and preferably much less.
3. Operating frequency should be optimized for the 10-to-50 MHz range.
4. Dielectric Loss Tangent should be less than 0.5% at the operating frequency.
5. Operating voltage should be up to 100.0 kV-p (See EEStor process), but depends on obtained e-r. Higher e-r allows lower peak voltage for a given energy storage value.
6. Operating times should be measured in thousands to tens of thousands of hours. This will require using low-k plastic film caps or higher-k single crystal or nano-crystal caps.
7. For MLTs the dielectric magnetic permeability should be 10 or greater in a single layer arrangement.

STAIF 2006: Andrew Palfreyman on Reactionless Drives

25:57 – 3 years ago
Inventor & Engineer Andrew Palfreyman talks about the Mach-Lorentz Thruster, which he participated in presenting at the STAIF 2006 Conference as the world’s first true reactionless drive. His research could lead to future star-trek style propulsion based on a novel application of conventional physics, and he discusses with us a set of replication results published in the prestigious American Institute of Physics to support this groundbreaking scientific discovery. Palfreyman is part of a joint research-team including Paul March, Dr. James Woodward, and Dr. Martin Tajmar from the ESA, who are collaborating on several replications to ensure top-quality laboratory research to confirm this amazing effect.

Some other STAIF presentation videos online

Dr. Martin Tajmar Interview: Warp-Drives, Antigravity, and FTL

18:03 – 3 years ago
In our exclusive STAIF 2006 interview, Dr. Martin Tajmar joins us to speak about his theoretical research into FTL, Warp-Drive, and Antigravity technology. Tajmar works at ARC Seibersdorf in Austria, which subcontracts to the European Space Agency (ESA) for a number of innovative new technology projects.

Greg Meholic on FTL Propulsion and the STAIF 2007 Conference

14:48 – 2 years ago
This STAIF 2007 presentation by aerospace engineer Greg Meholic provides an overview of this year’s conference experience, with updates on Meholic’s own theoretical work in a fluid-dynamics model of physics and his research in Breakthrough Propulsion Physics. Meholic is a communications session co-chair for Section-F of the STAIF Conference, focusing on emerging space propulsion physics technologies.

General Theory of Relativity

Lecture 1 of Leonard Susskind’s Modern Physics concentrating on General Relativity. Recorded September 22, 2008 at Stanford University. 1 hour 38 minutes

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 2

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 3

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 4

Stanford’s Felix Bloch Professor of Physics, Leonard Susskind, discusses covariant and contra variant indices, tensor arithmetic, algebra and calculus, and the geometry of expanding space time.

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 5

Leonard Susskind’s Modern Physics concentrating on General Relativity.

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 6

Geodesics and geodesics motion through spacetime.

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 7

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 8

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 9

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 10

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 11

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 12

Lecture 1 | Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Stanford)

Lecture 1 of Leonard Susskind’s Modern Physics course concentrating on Quantum Mechanics. Recorded January 14, 2008 at Stanford University.

This Stanford Continuing Studies course is the second of a six-quarter sequence of classes exploring the essential theoretical foundations of modern physics. The topics covered in this course focus on quantum mechanics

Lecture 2 | Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Stanford)

Lecture 4 | Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Stanford)

Lecture 7 | Modern Physics: Quantum Mechanics (Stanford)

The rest of the 10 course quantum mechanics lectures are through this link

Relativity Lorentz Transformation Equations Part 1of 2

List of other online courses from Stanford.

9 lectures on Quantum entanglement (course 1)

8 videos from course 3 on Quantum Entanglement

Stanford university on Youtube