Talk Polywell has a posting from Paul March on James Woodward latest Mach Effect propulsion work.
Woodward is now claiming that he and his associate, a Dr. Heidi Fearn at CSUF, have performed an updated analysis of the M-E derivation for the upcomming JPC conference that has a much better handle on the M-E bulk acceleration issue per his following comments posted to his e-mail distribution over this last weekend.
“There is a clean signal (SNR greater than 10) in the 2 to 3 uN range. And in the data with the frequency sweeps, there’s a power spike at the beginning of the sweep that really heats the device up — but off resonance, so there is no prompt thrust response (as one would expect were the signal a thermal effect). It’s the real deal folks.
Why would I say that it’s the real deal when this signal is orders of magnitude smaller than the predictions suggest it should be? Because we’ve found these past two weeks that those predictions are wrong. Heidi and I have been working now for a while on the JPC paper that will go with the presentation I’ll do at that conference in about a month. While working on the theory section of that paper, I decided to include a section on explicit acceleration dependence of Mach effects. While writing that out, I decided to derive the prediction based on full acceleration dependence — rather than doing the prediction the way it’s been done for years. It turns out that this calculation is not difficult at all. A bit tedious for an old duffer like me; but not difficult.
SI units are really scary. Completely unintuitive for me. So catching some arithmetic errors took longer than it should have. But the end result is a prediction of 10 uN for the present system — whereas observation is ~ 3 uN. And that with the assumption that the electrostrictive constant is the same as the piezoelectric constant. It is surely smaller. But without allowance for mechanical resonance amplification — which is surely present. These two considerations will be largely offsetting I expect. And the resulting prediction will likely be in the uN range.”
To clarify, the electrostrictive coefficient for the PZT ceramic used in Woodward’s shuttler experiments is about three orders of magnitude down from the d33 piezoelectric coefficient of PZT, so his above conclusions hold up in my eyes. So what Jim needs to do next IMO is to prove to the world of physics that the Wheeler/Feynman radiation reaction force IS the mechanism that really conveys gravitational forces around the cosmos and he will have completed his M-E mission.
Mach Effect Propulsion would enable a science fiction like future
If the Mach Effect is real [mass fluctations) and behaves as theorized (with some experimental confirmation) by James Woodward and the effect scales up as expected then we can create propellentless space drive. It appears that the latest research work by James Woodward is validating the existence of the effect.
Previously it was noted what the path to scaling up the current Mach Effect Propulsion to much higher levels would might look like.
Jim’s current speed of sound limited acoustical based PZT stack design can be scaled up to at least the 1-omega 600 kHz power frequency range before their manufacturing has to done with integrated circuit like production approaches due to the small sizes needed work with mechanically resonant systems. That should allow Woodward to increase his thrust levels by at least a factor of 100 or even 1,000 times his current 1.0 uN thrust levels especially if the 2-omega force rectification signal can be boosted from its currently abysmal ~2.0% to 5.0% of the amplitude of the applied 1-omega delta mass drive signal up to 100% or higher due to the bandwidth limitations of his Carvin amplifiers and homegrown matching transformers.
To go much higher in operating frequency than ~1.0-to-10 MHz, a Mach Lorentz Thruster (MLT) like structure that uses much faster propagating electric and magnetic fields in the active dielectric instead of the much slower speed of sound limited acoustical resonance approach used in theses PZT stacks will have to be used IMO. Once we better understand the ceramic bulk acceleration issues surrounding the current dielectrics used in our MLT designs, operating frequencies up into hundreds of MHz will probably be feasibly. The MLT approach should then provide thrust levels that are on the order of (200 MHz/2.0 MHz)^3 = 1,000,000 times higher than my milli-Newton thrust levels reported in my and Andrew Palfreyman’s STAIF-2006 report. That means for the same input power of ~20 Watts we could be producing thrusts on the order of 1,000 Newtons, which opens up the M-E terrestrial transportation applications as well as space based applications.
If you liked this article, please give it a quick review on ycombinator or StumbleUpon. Thanks
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
2 thoughts on “Latest Woodward Mach Effect Propulsion Experiment”
How isolating normal matter from the rest of the universe could create negative energy for a wormhole?
And by the way could you use the wormhole to travel in parallel universe or step into it?
How does the mach effect works? How are mass fluctuations made and how those tiny mass fluctuations exchange gravity to the rest of the universe for a high thrust?
Comments are closed.