EM Drive Patent

Discussion in 'Physics' started by wes, Oct 20, 2011.

  1. wes

    Thread Starter Active Member

    Aug 24, 2007
    242
    2
    So I was looking at what types of Reaction-less engines people might have come up with and I found this Patent on

    5197279_Electromagnetic_energy_propulsion

    I attached it as a PDF


    It seems to me that the engine generates a Magnetic Field with enough energy to be equal to quiet a bit of mass. It then seems that by some how Ejecting the magnetic field from one side of it at huge speeds, it generates a substantial amount of thrust. It looks as if it is kinda of based off a solar flare? It looks like it does something with Magnetic Tension and forcing a part of the Magnetic field to become disconneted? Is that even possible for a magnetic field to become disconnected from it's source? I found a video that kinda shows what I talking about and it looks like it is possible.

    Here it is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDZj1CmsJ64&feature=related

    Also I know Reaction-less engine threads and such aren't usually allowed but this one actually has a patent!!!!!!
     
  2. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Your PDF didn't make it. I'm inclined to dismiss such claims. I remember a propulsion system describing using rods to direct electromagnetic radiation in one direction for thrust. When you read closely the description they were describing an antenna. You can use lasers for thrust if they are powerful enough, but it isn't likely to happen any time soon. Niven described the concept in his Tales of the Known Universe series.

    The thing is, the power levels are huge, way pasts the terawatt level, to be of any practical use. God help anything that gets in the way of the thrust, can you say slice and dice?

    Stanly Mere, the guy selling HHO, had several patents, they were all worthless. The patent system is badly broken, to say the least.
     
  3. wes

    Thread Starter Active Member

    Aug 24, 2007
    242
    2
  4. wes

    Thread Starter Active Member

    Aug 24, 2007
    242
    2
    According to it, it looks as if he is talking about a coil with an inductance of 1.01 x 10^10 Henry's (10,100,000,000 Billion Henry) and current of 6.25 x 10^7 Amps (62,500,00 Million Amps). I don't really know if he is calculating the Magnetic Field energy to mass right but Just off the top of my head though, I would say with that inductance and Current, the field has to be Insane, like rip metal out of your blood insane (Magneto, lol.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2011
  5. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    Again, patents are worthless. They do not have to be true, they don't have to work, and magnetic fields, as opposed to EM fields, do not have mass. Nowdays I'm not sure EM fields have mass as was formerly thought.

    There is no such thing as a reactionless drive, though I do have hopes. Fact is, Newton's Laws of Motion preclude reactionless drives, and other than being modified by the theory of relativity they still reign supreme.

    It is a lot like HHO (which have many worthless patents), wishing something is so will not make it so.
     
  6. wes

    Thread Starter Active Member

    Aug 24, 2007
    242
    2
    Well I didn't know if it works or not, I just figured since it is patented, it must have worked, lol.

    Also, what do you mean by magnetic fields have no mass, they have energy such as in an inductor where the energy is stored within the field and then released back into the circuit so shouldn't it have a equivalent amount of mass because it has energy, just spread throughout the field.

    This sounds like it is going to go in the direction a thread I started a year ago or so about the nature of magnetic fields and how they related to inductors and the speed of light, lol.
     
  7. AlexR

    Well-Known Member

    Jan 16, 2008
    735
    54
    A patent is granted when an invention is new and novel in other words it's not known technology and no-one has thought of it before.

    An invention does not have to work or even have to be theoretically feasible for a patent to be granted so the fact that an invention is patented is no guarantee that is will work or even that it has the remotest possibility of working.

    The whole patent system is set up to protect the inventor from having his invention copied and sold without permission. It does not protect the inventor from wasting his time and money by patenting unworkable inventions.
     
  8. Wendy

    Moderator

    Mar 24, 2008
    20,766
    2,536
    This one is far enough of the technology curve it will probably expire before it is even tried. Patents can be denied if prior technology is shown for the same idea. For example, parascopes were invented by Jules Vern, as the later inventor found out when he tried to patent them. Ditto for water beds, Heinlein got that one. You can't take an idea that is already spelled out in literature and claim it as your own.

    Like I said earlier, the idea doesn't have to work to get a patent.

    The US patent system is not only broken, it is badly broken.

    Larry Niven proposed the laser propulsion system in the 1950's, so there is a good chance the patents issued in 1993 is worthless.
     
Loading...