Oh My God, Free Momentum!?

[ryan]

This might actually be happening!

Can we use this as an energy source?

Make sure you read the whole thing.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...-anomaly-and-the-impossible-emdrive-thruster/

 

[beero1000]

Ehhh, I'd take that claim with a huge amount of salt.

The theoretical "explanation" here is to essentially scrap much of modern physics - he's contradicting the equivalence principle, general relativity, conservation of momentum, location invariance of physical law, the existence of dark matter, etc, etc. While it's technically possible that this is what's happening, Occam would say that the odds are better to conclude that there's some fault with the marginal outcomes of the handful of experiments conducted so far.

 

[barbos]

Yes, pure unadulterated bullshit.

 

[Kharakov]

Well, if the big G is associated with number of particles in a volume of spacetime, instead of mass in a volume of spacetime, we can build megastructures to harvest momentum, and maybe create low mass neutrino black holes with a couple of electrons in them for charge (so we can move them around electromagnetically) to use for space ships.

Basically, we'd need 2 black holes per ship, or a rapidly orbiting black hole in order to maintain acceleration neutrality. Ohh... maybe that's what electrons are.... physics clicks when you have the right premises provided to you in the right order by a sentient mega-intelligence like Space "don't call me God" Time.

 

[repoman]

I would like to see a college physics level presentation of this phenomenom. Complete with math and diagrams. Also, stating where the effect more complicated.

 

[Kharakov]

If you're talking about what I said, the following is a test for the phenomena.

Aluminum and Beryllium of the same mass are comprised of different numbers of fermions, so if G is correlated with number of fermions (or just particles) instead of mass...

If the Al/Be cylinders cause a deflection of the torsion balance (laser moves along the wall), you confirm G's correlation with number of particles in a volume of spacetime:

 

[Bomb#20]

Cool! You mean that I actually have frickin' sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their frickin' heads? You're the best evil son an evil dad could ever ask for.

 

[Kharakov]

I was actually thinking of calling the giant rotating energy generating devices "Bomb#20 electricity generators" because of our conversation. Or something like that....

 

[Derec]

Aluminum and Beryllium of the same mass are comprised of different numbers of fermions,

Did you make a calculation as to how different the numbers would be? The only difference I see would be in binding energy per nucleon, right? So why not use something like iron vs. lithium (or hell, solid hydrogen for that matter) to maximize the difference?

Also, does your idea count nucleons or quarks. I.e. would the number of fermions be N+2Z or 3N+4Z? And are mesons considered to have two fermions each or zero?

 

[Juma]

If you're talking about what I said, the following is a test for the phenomena.

Aluminum and Beryllium of the same mass are comprised of different numbers of fermions, so if G is correlated with number of fermions (or just particles) instead of mass...

If the Al/Be cylinders cause a deflection of the torsion balance (laser moves along the wall), you confirm G's correlation with number of particles in a volume of spacetime:
View attachment 6528

How do you measure that you got 100 kg of each?

 

[Kharakov]

Aluminum and Beryllium of the same mass are comprised of different numbers of fermions,

Did you make a calculation as to how different the numbers would be?The only difference I see would be in binding energy per nucleon, right? So why not use something like iron vs. lithium (or hell, solid hydrogen for that matter) to maximize the difference?

Bad wording on my part. I meant every fundamental particle other than gauge bosons by fermions (although I haven't even considered the Higgs!).

I went with Al and Be because of the Eöt-Wash group's experiments. The metals have a decent nucleon to mass ratio difference.

I assume it is easier to compensate for electrostatic and magnetic influences with these substances because Eöt-Wash group used them for measurements of the equivalence principle (they need to eliminate electromagnetic influences on their experiments). Iron is definitely not something that one would want to use for such sensitive measurements (pretty susceptible to magnetic fields), and I don't think Hydrogen is easily managed.

Also, does your idea count nucleons or quarks. I.e. would the number of fermions be N+2Z or 3N+4Z? And are mesons considered to have two fermions each or zero?

I'm not really worried about what particles are involved at this point- I want to know if different particle counts, but the same mass, create different gravitational accelerations.

If gravity is more correlated (???) with particle count than it is with mass, then it's time to start trying to figure out what particles to count, and what not to count (particle wise).

 

[Kharakov]

If you're talking about what I said, the following is a test for the phenomena.

Aluminum and Beryllium of the same mass are comprised of different numbers of fermions, so if G is correlated with number of fermions (or just particles) instead of mass...

If the Al/Be cylinders cause a deflection of the torsion balance (laser moves along the wall), you confirm G's correlation with number of particles in a volume of spacetime:
View attachment 6528

How do you measure that you got 100 kg of each?

Balance. Universality of free fall still applies, so you can determine that you have pretty much equal masses due to the acceleration in the Earth's field (their contribution is negligible to the total system). The fused (joined) cylinders don't have to be exactly 100kg either. They just have to be equal in mass.