All posts by gdaigle

About gdaigle

Gregory Daigle is a former professor of design who has accrued national and international awards for interactive media and STEM learning. He has held management and creative leadership positions with advertising, e-learning, industrial design and interactive media firms. He heads an awarded non-profit for place-based learning and has written numerous articles on design and technology.

New study confirms viability of E-Cat as an energy source with high energy density

A long-awaited extended study of the E-Cat low energy nuclear reactor by third party scientists has been published. A copy of the report is now posted at the web site Sifferkol.se.

Here is the explicit URL link: http://www.sifferkoll.se/sifferkoll/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf

Two days after the release of the paper the reaction from the major media outlets has yet to arrive. Several reviews from minor outlets are informative, including an article by Mark Gibbs who used to write for Forbes on the LENR phenomenon, and Extreme Tech. I have written about LENR and Rossi’s E-Cat eleven times in this blog since first mentioning the E-Cat in my book in March 2011. The two most relevant articles are here: E-Cat and Gravity Generators and It is Occasionally Nice to Back a Winner

In the book I singled out E-Cat as one of two potential non-interruptible distributed energy resources with sufficient energy density for powering floating architecture. But it is the shift in thinking about distributed power that will be most important in the coming months. A source with a million times the energy density of gasoline that does not use rare or expensive elements is going to create a major shift in thinking about energy. Because of its high Coefficient of Power (COP) the E-Cat has been shown to be capable of self-sustainability, though that was not tested in this most recent paper.

Gravity-like field generators are theorized to also self-sustain due to a tangential rotational force generated, similar to the homopolar motor effect (as can be demonstrated by anyone with a strong magnet, nail, battery and a wire). Until fabricated it is unknown how much power could be generated by the rotational force. Would it be able to generate sufficient excess energy to cool the required superconducting coils? If not, then a sustainable power source such as LENR would come into play.

Swarming and DigiGrav

Nearly a decade ago when I was teaching Second Life to my students, I would occasionally come to a new “sandbox” where, upon landing, I was immediately hit with a barrage of swarming objects. They visually blocked my vision in every direction and made navigation around that territory impossible.

That swarming behavior was a relatively new feature of Second Life meant to emulate the flocking of birds or fish, but was often used by “griefers” to harrass visitors. My experience was not a good one, but at least this was a virtual world. I couldn’t imagine the same being possible in the real world.

At the time I had no notion that academics elsewhere were working on flying robotic navigation using a sensor net that would portend swarming behavior of robots. The SWARMS project brings together experts in artificial intelligence, control theory, robotics, systems engineering and biology with the goal of understanding swarming behaviors in nature and applications of biologically-inspired models of swarm behaviors to large networked groups of autonomous vehicles. We have now seen flocks of robots fly autonomously to achieve patterns autonomously and semi-autonomously (ie. follow the leader). We have also seen flying quadcoptor robots that build scaled-down complex structures out of blocks so precisely and effortlessly that it defies belief.

As a story in RawStory notes, scaling up to real-world sizes of building materials would mean “construction times could be drastically reduced. Ultimately, a hyper-streamlined system could result in thousands of construction jobs being eliminated and a surge in urban sprawl. Such an invention, properly scaled upward, would be simply revolutionary — and that radical vision, scarcely imagined even in science fiction.”

The digital control of gravity-like field generating platforms (shortened here to DigiGrav) is one of the big ideas of gravity design. Anything that you could image with currently networked flocks or swarms of flying quadcopters may be able to be achieved at a larger scale when flying platforms employing gravity-like fields are employed instead of quadcopters.

Accelerating construction, as mentioned in the book Gravity 2.0, is only one aspect of autonomous or semi-autonomous tasking. Rather than floating entire structures to shield/concentrate sunlight or rain, use of flocking behavior would allow structures composed of autonomous platforms to be both transient and reconfigurable.

These temporary structures might divert rain from already soaked fields to adjacent culverts… or divert rain that would otherwise land on adjacent roadways and parking lots to fields in need of additional rain. The next day such swarms might protect crops from hail damage or reflect additional sunlight towards greenhouses… all while reconfigurable and on-demand.

Already, the notion of reassigning flying billboards to move with the inflow and outflow of commuter traffic has been suggested in Gravity 2.0. Perhaps now the size of the billboard might also be adjusted according to just-in-time statistics on who is watching and their viewing preferences as conveyed through cellular networks.

Of course, there is always the possibility of “griefing” in the real world, to harrass users by blocking views and inundating with undesired messages. No doubt legislation will arise to block such griefing in the real world, just as users of Second Life eventually were given the opportunity to report griefers in that virtual world.

NASA tests Emdrive propellantless propulsion

As stated in NextBigFuture, a US scientist, Guido Fetta, has built his own propellant-less microwave thruster, and managed to persuade NASA to test it out. The test results were presented on July 30 at the 50th Joint Propulsion Conference in Cleveland, Ohio. Astonishingly enough, they are positive.

Numerical and Experimental Results for a Novel Propulsion Technology Requiring no On-Board Propellant
Guido P. Fetta, Cannae, LLC

Read More: http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-3853

The NASA team based at the Johnson Space Centre gave its paper the title “Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF [radio frequency] Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum”. The five researchers spent six days setting up test equipment followed by two days of experiments with various configurations. These tests included using a “null drive” similar to the live version but modified so it would not work, and using a device which would produce the same load on the apparatus to establish whether the effect might be produced by some effect unrelated to the actual drive. They also turned the drive around the other way to check whether that had any effect.

Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum
David A. Brady, Harold G. White, Paul March, James T. Lawrence, and Frank J. Davies

NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas 77058

This paper describes the eight-day August 2013 test campaign designed to investigate and demonstrate viability of using classical magnetoplasmadynamics to obtain a propulsive momentum transfer via the quantum vacuum virtual plasma. This paper will not address the physics of the quantum vacuum plasma thruster, but instead will describe the test integration, test operations, and the results obtained from the test campaign.

Back to 2009

A Nextbigfuture review of emdrive in 2009

A link to the 14 page word document on the 2009 EMDrive research

Wired also has an article on the Emdrive

 

A connection to EHT is not suspected as a theoretical basis for this drive despite the reliance of both upon superconductors.

Three publications by the originators of EHT

page1image384

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have three publications to share with the readers through the generosity of Prof. Dr. rer.nat. Jochem Hauser.

The first is his review of the book “Gravity-Superconductor Interactions: Theory and Experiment”, first published in 2012.  Editors: G. Modanese, G. A. Robertson.  Dr. Hauser also includes a short mention of my and my book.  Please click HERE to launch the Acrobat (PDF) file of the book review.

The second is Chapter 11 of the same edition, entitled Emerging Physics for Gravity-Like Fields written by  Walter Dröscher and Jochem Hauser.  It also contains the Foreword to the edition.  Here is the abstract:

Abstract: Based on theoretical ideas under development since 2002, termed Extended Heim Theory (EHT), as well as experiments performed at AIT Seibersdorf, Austria since 2006, it is argued that there is evidence for the existence of novel gravity-like fields and thus also different types of matter. These gravity-like fields are not described by conventional Newtonian (Einsteinian) gravitation, i.e., by the accumulation of mass. Instead, under certain conditions, they should be producible in the laboratory by small ring or disk shaped masses rotating at cryogenic temperatures. EHT, in describing these novel fields, postulates six fundamental physical interactions, three of them of gravitational nature. The two additional gravity-like fields may be both attractive and repulsive. It is further argued, based on both EHT and experiments, that these gravity-like fields are outside the known four physical fundamental forces, and may result from the conversion of electromagnetic into gravitational fields. The gravitomagnetic effect of these fields is found to be some 18 orders of magnitude larger than classical frame dragging of General Relativity. This fact seems to be in accordance with recent experiments performed at AIT Seibersdorf. A non relativistic semiclassical model will be presented as an attempt to explain the physical nature of the novel gravity-like fields. There seems to be a special phase transition, triggered at cryogenic temperatures, responsible for the conversion of electromagnetic into gravitational fields. The features of the six fundamental physical interactions are utilized to investigate the potential of the novel gravity-like fields for propulsion purposes as well as energy generation.

Please click HERE to launch the Acrobat (PDF) file of Chapter 11.

Finally, in preparation for the publishing of the sixth (special) issue of the Journal of Space Exploration, Dr. Hauser has generously allowed me to post the Foreword for that issue.  Please click HERE to launch the Acrobat (PDF) file of that foreword.

 

Design factors for gravityships and gravitecture+

Until it becomes a discipline in its own right with its own set of best practices, gravity design will likely begin as an intersection of other design disciplines.  Other design disciplines may include:

Industrial/Product Design
Interface Design
Transportation Design
Architecture
Urban Design
Experience Design
…and other non-design disciplines:
Social demography
Cultural studies
Sports kinesiology
Medicine
…and likely several others.

The ebook Gravity 2.0 was primarily a resource for conveying the discovery of a potential route to gravity modification and a scoping document for areas of impact.

The following are design factors for gravityships and floating architecture (gravitecture+) to be considered by practitioners of gravity design.  The intersection with other design and non-design disciplines to address those factors will determine the range of considerations and skills to be developed by gravity designers.

For gravityships:

Control and display interfaces
• While under conditions of acceleration, deceleration
• While under conditions of weightlessness
• While body orientation to acceleration/deceleration is in the coronal, sagittal or transverse (axial) planes.

Regulatory parameters for flight
• FAA and ICAO craft types include hovercraft, fixed wing aircraft, rotorcraft, glider, lighter-than-air, powered parachute and weight-shift control but not gravityships.

Vertical Airspace
• Class G (uncontrolled, less than 1200 feet AGL)
• Class E (controlled, ground, <700 feet AGL, <1200 feet AGL)
• Visual Flight Rules vs Instrument Flight Rules with SATS

Flight Paths
• Use of flight corridors, flyways, roadways, waterways

Safety
• For pilots, passengers, flight controllers, maintenance

Environment
• Refining, processing and disposal of superconducting materials, disposal of reaction mass to be acted upon (e.g. lead), extraneous “gravity-like field” pollution

Parking
• Access to parking facilities
• Specialized parking structures

Power
• Storage via Lithium-air or other storage systems

Vehicle to Grid
• Payment to owner when parked and providing excess power to electrical grid
• Payment to owner when parked and providing gravitational lift to structures

Traffic controls
• Navigational beacons at elevations, GPS guidance

Aerodynamics
• Shaping of windshields/cowlings/airfoils with gravity-like fields

Communications
• Vehicle to vehicle communications for navigation and networking
• Vehicle to ground communications using WiFi and cellular networks

Pilotless/smart vehicles
• Extensions of regulations pertaining to drones
• Use of “smart” vehicle technology for autonomous navigation

For gravitecture+ (floating residences):

Control and display interfaces
• While under conditions of acceleration, deceleration, ascent, decent

Taxation for structures not affixed
• Shadow tax (adumbration) as with floating homes
• Roaming fees
• “Slip” fees

Private rights vs real property rights
• Right to moor for extended periods of time
• Right to sunlight (“hikage kisei”) if gravitecture+ blocks sun
• Right to view if gravitecture+ blocks view
• Air rights  (without use of “transfer of development rights”)

Utilities
• Mooring services
• Storage of water
• Generation/storage of electricity

Waste treatment
• Disposal of waste water and garbage
• Demographics

Citizenship
• Voter registration
• Determination of residency

Regulatory parameters for flight
• Those from FAA and ICAO (mentioned above)
• Right to light (large structures blocking light)
• Right to view (large structures blocking view)

Vertical Airspace
• Class G (uncontrolled, less than 1200 feet AGL)
• Class E (controlled, ground, <700 feet AGL, <1200 feet AGL)
• Visual Flight Rules vs Instrument Flight Rules with SATS

Cabotage
• First Freedom of the Air (freedom to land)
• Second Freedom of the Air (freedom to fly without landing)

Flight Paths
• Use of flight corridors, flyways, roadways, waterways

Safety
• For pilots, passengers, flight controllers, maintenance

Environment
• Refining, processing and disposal of superconducting materials, disposal of reaction mass to be acted upon (e.g. lead), “gravity-like field” pollution

Power
• Storage via Lithium-air or other storage systems
• Generation via LENR
• Generation via azimuthal rotation (similar to homopolar motor but using Heim-Lorentz force rather than Lorentz force)

Land values
• Diminishing value of non-floating residential properties with the advent of gravitecture+ alternatives

EHT as a mechanism for MOND

EHT gives rises to six fundamental forces, three of them of gravitational nature, and thus could lead to a novel type of propulsion without propellant. The following are quotations from a 2012 paper by Droscher and Hauser. It suggests that one of the three gravitational forces acts upon spacetime and underlies the cosmological constant responsible for the expansion of the universe. It is postulated that negative dark energy (attractive field) is attracted to the matter inside of a galaxy and that its antiparticle (repulsive field) is repelled by the interior matter and collects in the galactic halo where dark matter resides. This makes it a candidate for the explanations behind MOND, a leading alternative to dark matter that has been found to accurately predict the speed of stars within dwarf galaxies.

On the Reality of Gravity-Like Fields
AIAA 2012-2491
48th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference & Exhibit
29 July -1 August 2012, Atlanta, Georgia

“It is assumed that the dark energy is composed of both repulsive and attractive fields and only the combined action is perceptible in empty space. Inside galaxies, because of the large density of visible matter, the attractive field is neutralized and an additional gravitational interaction mediated in form of the MOND acceleration a0 has to be taken into account.”

“Since no dark matter seems to reside within galaxies (ESO observations, June 2012), but, on the other hand the deviation from Newton’s law has been experimentally verified by McGaugh (February 2011), only the interaction of dark energy with visible matter inside the galaxy and the interaction with dark matter in the galactic halo remain to account for this modification of the gravitation law. Since the MOND hypothesis seems to give the correct value, any derivation should reproduce this value. As the measurements by Reyes and also galactic gravitational lensing have shown, both visible and dark matter are subject to Newton’s gravitational law.”

“Moreover, since strong gravitational lensing is observed, galaxies must possess dark matter. Therefore, the physical mechanism for galactic halo formation has to be found, while, at the same time, the non-existence of dark matter inside galaxies must follow from the the same physical concept, and, finally, the correct value of the MOND acceleration needs to be produced. So far, no physical theory exists. Therefore, the attempt is undertaken to apply the novel concepts of EHT to try to solve this riddle.”

“According to Loll et al. the computer simulations from Causal Dynamical Triangulation (which is a Monte Carlo simulation of the path integral for the action of GR, or summation over universes) without cosmological constant Λ > 0 do not lead to a four-dimensional spacetime in the classical limit. In other words, a repulsive gravitational force is mandatory, and thus the assumption of the existence of dark energy is justified also by computer simulation.”

“It is known that within a galaxy, cosmic expansion does not take place. Instead, an additional acceleration field, a0, directed toward the center of the galaxy is present. Since dark matter cannot be present inside a galaxy, the existence of attractive dark energy is postulated, which according to EHT, would be represented by the antiparticle of the quintessence particle νq.”

“The question arises, how the large density of ordinary matter inside a galaxy – remember that dark matter cannot be present – does act on the mixture of positive and negative dark energy that is ubiquitous in the Cosmos? The result is known, namely that inside a galaxy an acceleration a0 = 1.2 × 10−10 m/s2 pointing toward the galactic center must be obtained. Obviously, it can only be caused from the presence of negative dark energy (attractive gravitation), residing inside the galaxy, which is attracted by the visible matter inside as well as the dark matter in the halo of the galaxy. Both types of dark energy, positive (repulsive) and negative (attractive) are present throughout the Universe, but in the current era | Λ |>| Λ+ |, and thus a resulting force leading to an expansion is acting on the space field.”

“However, as will be shown next, the effect of Λ+ (contracting spacetime, but being repulsive with regard to the matter inside the galaxy because of its negative energy) is neutralized inside a galaxy, and therefore inside the galaxy only the attractive gravitational effect of Λ on ordinary matter (both visible and dark) remains. The reason why the Λ+ is neutralized inside a galaxy, is due to the fact that a galaxy contains a large amount of ordinary matter, where visible matter is inside the galaxy and dark matter resides in the halo, with about 80% of the matter in the halo. To understand the qualitative physical mechanism of dark matter halo formation, consider a sphere filled with positive electric charges. It will repel particles arriving from outside the sphere that are of like charge, while attracting particles of negative electric charge. In the gravitational case, the νq particles are representing the cosmological Λ+ field and are repelled by the galactic matter, and thus are screened out. The νq particles, representing the Λ field are attracted by the galactic matter, and thus are collected mainly in the halo, where matter density is larger. Thus, a surplus of νq particles is collected in the halo and, to a lesser extent, inside the galaxy, resulting in an acceleration acting toward the center of the galaxy, which is known as the MOND acceleration, being prevalent for visible matter in the vicinity of the halo. In this way, dark energy in combination with the dark matter halo seems to be responsible for the observed MOND acceleration.”

[Formulas in the original document are not represented in this summary]

Locus of Design

This is an interactive exercise for understanding design as an intersection of domains representing social factors, functional capabilities and experiences. It was developed by former design professor Greg Daigle in 2006 and first appeared in Core77. It has also appeared in the ebook “Gravity 2.0.”

There are several design frameworks for describing the relationships between people and the products they use. “User-centered design” (UCD), “activity-centered design” and “experience design’ are leading models. This model was developed in 2006 and employs three overlapping domains, each with concentric rings of influence to establish the “locus of design.” In combination, all three domains address the social-functional-experiential basis for design decisions.

The Social Domain includes the user, the local cohorts (immediate family, co- workers, friends, neighbors with whom they interact) and wider social groups including extended family, long distance collaborators and society in general.

The Functional Domain includes how products “function.” This ranges from simple mechanisms or electronics, to systems of functions working together within the same product or used in conjunction with nearby products, to local and wide area networks of products connected non-physically or through the cloud.

The Experiential Domain is both temporal and perceptual and includes the “in-the-moment” experiences, but also those over time (often shared with others) and experiences which transform long-term behaviors for individuals, groups or society.

LoD_Screenshot1-10inches

 

 

 

 

 

 

On the first screen users have the option to explore the different concentric circles of each domain to see what they represent.

LoD_Screenshot2-10inches

 

 

 

 

 

 

In subsequent screens the user can select settings from each of the domains and see how the concentric domains move into place to represent the overlaps.  Users can also drag the concentric domains until they overlap and view the outcomes… or take an interactive quiz to show if you understand the concept fully.

LoD_Screenshot3-10inches

 

 

 

 

 

 

The interactive version of the app for desktops was build with ZebraZapps.  See it below… (may take a full minute to load).

Be sure to click on the “Z” in the corner to see your viewing options to zoom to full screen.

The app is also available on Google Play for android devices: Locus of Design.

Explore how any design situation can be described as an overlapping set of three domains that determine the “locus” of design.

Terrestrial and space applications of gravity-like fields

This is a preprint of an article accepted for publication in a special issue of the Journal of Space Exploration, ©2014 Mehta Press: Terrestrial and space applications of gravity-like fields. Publication date Aug/Sept 2014.

ABSTRACT: Extended Heim Theory (EHT) suggests two additional gravity-like fundamental forces and proposes the possibility of propellant-less propulsion for space flight. If sufficiently safe and cost effective, technology spinoffs may prove to be disruptive for terrestrial applications. Applications based upon advancements in this field could have far- reaching implications for transportation, architecture, urban planning and industry. Coupled with promising distributed energy technologies of sufficiently high specific energy, the impact upon local economies, social systems and even representational democracies may be a challenge to future generations.

Upcoming article on design and gravity-like fields

There will be an upcoming special edition of the Journal of Space Exploration (JSE) entitled “Journal of Space Exploration on Spaceflight Perspectives from Novel Concepts of Spacetime, Gravitation, and Symmetries”. It is being orchestrated by Dr.rer. nat. Jochem Hauser, Professor(em) HPC, Campus Suderburg, Ostfalia University.

There will be seven papers including one I authored entitled, “Terrestrial and space applications of gravity-like fields: a designer’s perspective”. It highlights topics presented in my book Gravity 2.0 and includes additional information on recent advances in LENR for powering gravity-like field generators.

Update on Steorn, LENR and gMOD

A few weeks ago Steorn’s HephaHeat site threw up a construction sign as they get ready for a new phase. HephaHeat is a line of inline water heaters employing inductive heat and developed by the Irish engineering firm . The HephaHeat technology is purportedly based upon Steorn’s Orbo technology. See 2012 blog entries from Aug 3 and July 20.

CEO Shaun McCarthy recently mentioned in a forum that the coming weeks would be very interesting. Of course, Steorn’s Orbo-tech was mentioned in my book Gravity 2.0 as one of two possible avenues for providing continuous power for gravity-like field generators, the other being LENR (low [lattice] energy nuclear reactions). Steorn has backed off on its claims of a coefficient of power (COP) greater than 1 (more energy out than in) as it began developing HephaHeat.

Physicist Brian Ahern, mentioned in those previously cited blog entries, gave a presentation at the recent 2014 CF/LANR Colloquium at MIT on cold fusion (LENR).
The link to his presentation can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PS2v1kN1U8
Videos of the other conference presenters can be found here: http://coldfusionnow.org/interviews/2014-cflanr-colloquium-at-mit-full-coverage/

Ahern’s presentation, “Nanomagnetism for Energy Production”, proposes that nano-magnetism is perhaps the underlying basis of LENR. He has suggested that asymmetric magnetism within magnetic nanomaterials particles of 5-10nm underlies the effect of LENR due to the manner in which particles contained within a metal lattice oscillate, nanonickel being one of the more recent materials of choice in LENR research.


Asymmetric magnetism has been stated by Steorn as the basis of Orbo, and therefore HephaHeat. Seemingly, the connections between LENR and HephaHeat draw closer. This is important because although the granting of patents for LENR may have been proceeding in Europe and Japan, the US patent office does not grant patents for LENR (ie. cold fusion). However, Steorn has been granted patents in the US for its Orbo magnetic technology.