arXiv blog

A Blueprint for a Quantum Propulsion Machine

Push on the electromagnetic fields in the quantum vacuum and you should get an equal and opposite force.

kfc 12/09/2009

  • 14 Comments

The quantum vacuum has fascinated physicists ever since Hendrik Casimir and Dirk Polder suggested in 1948 that it would exert a force on a pair of narrowly separated conducting plates. Their idea was eventually confirmed when the force was measured in 1997. Just how to exploit this force is still not clear, however.

In recent years, a new way of thinking about the quantum vacuum has emerged which has vastly more potential. And today, one physicist describes how it could be used to create propulsion.

Before we discuss that, let's track back a little. According to quantum mechanics, any vacuum will be filled with electromagnetic waves leaping in and out of existence. It turns out that these waves can have various measurable effects, such as the Casimir-Polder force.

The new approach focuses on the momentum associated with these electromagnetic fields rather than the force they exert. The question is whether it is possible to modify this momentum because, if you can, you should receive an equal and opposite kick. That's what rocket scientists call propulsion.

Today, Alex Feigel at the Soreq Nuclear Research Center, a government lab in Yavne Israel, suggests an entirely new way to modify the momentum of the quantum vacuum and how this can be exploited to generate propulsion.

Feigel's approach combines two well-established ideas. The first is the Lorentz force experienced by a charged particle in electric and magnetic fields that are crossed. The second is the magnetoelectric effect--the phenomenon in which an external magnetic field induces a polarised internal electric field in certain materials and vice versa.

The question that Feigel asks is in what circumstances the electromagnetic fields in a quantum vacuum can exert a Lorentz force. The answer is that the quantum vacuum constantly interacts with magnetoelectric materials generating Lorentz forces. Most of the time, however, these forces sum to zero.

Hwever, Feigel says there are four cases in which the forces do not sum to zero. Two of these are already known, for example confining the quantum field between two plates, which excludes longer wavelength waves.

But Feigel says the two others offer entirely new ways to exploit the quantum vacuum using magnetoelectric nanoparticles to interact with the electromagnetic fields it contains.

The first method is to rapidly aggregate a number of magnetoelectric nanoparticles, a process which influences the boundary conditions for higher frequency electromagnetic waves, generating a force.

The second is simply to rotate a group of magnetoelectric nanoparticles, which also generates a Lorentz force.

Either way, the result is a change in velocity. As Feigel puts it: "mechanical action of quantum vacuum on magneto-electric objects may be observable and have a significant value."

The beauty of Feigel's idea is that it can be easily tested. He suggests building an addressable array of magnetoelectric nanoparticles, perhaps made of a material such as FeGaO3 which has a magnetoelectric constant of 10^-4 in a weak magnetic field.

These nanoparticles simply have to be rotated in the required way to generate a force. Feigel calls it a magnetoelectric quantum wheel.

Of course, nobody is getting a free lunch here. "Although the proposed engine will consume energy for manipulation of the particles, the propulsion will occur without any loss of mass," says Feigel. He even suggests, with masterful understatement, that this might have practical implications.

So here is a high-risk idea with a huge potential payoff. The question is: who has the balls to try it?

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0912.1031: A Magneto-Electric Quantum Wheel

TRSF: Read the Best New Science Fiction inspired by today’s emerging technologies.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

Liam

1 Comment

  • 787 Days Ago
  • 12/09/2009

Delta-v or orientation change?

The body of the article claims the possibility of effecting a delta v without a reaction mass, which is interesting.  The abstract however mentions only orientation change, but that doesn't seem particularly special as we have the means now for attitude control without ejecting matter, namely reaction or momentum wheels.  Attitude control isn't mentioned in the body of the article.

Reply

afeder

1 Comment

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

Re: Delta-v or orientation change?

Could someone in the know kindly respond to the important point raised by the parent poster?

Reply

ArdRhi

1 Comment

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

Hmmm...I recognize this..

The device being proposed to test this principle bears a striking resemblance to something that has already been proposed, utilizing the Blackett Effect to achieve the same goal.  The creator dubbed the device the "Dillon-Wagoner Graviton Polarity Generator", though it acquired a more colloquial name:  the "spindizzy".

I'm delighted.  Just as scores of other authors have predicted science, once again, we see it happening again.  Bravo.

I'm looking forward to see if this experiment bears fruit.  We desperately need some sort of quantum propulsion device.

Reply

ta2025

1 Comment

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

Impulse Engines

adding to the previous comment, this drive concept sounds very similar to the drives envisioned by Gene Roddenberry for Star Trek and slower than light travel - "Impulse Engines". Now, combine that with fusion from Plasma focused Fusion devices, http://www.lawrencevilleplasmaphysics.com/ and you REALLY have something!

Reply

sunil.thakur

23 Comments

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

Absurdities must have limits

In another reply to an article here, I had given an elaborate response under the same subject. I am giving this brief response under the same subject. God, if you do exist then please save physics from absurdities.

Sunil Thakur
http://www.norlabs.org

Reply

happyjack27

2 Comments

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

BAMM!  Every action still has an opposite and equal reaction == you still need to eject a mass.

Reply

rshelton3000

12 Comments

  • 783 Days Ago
  • 12/13/2009

Re: so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

It doesn't take reaction mass to move an object.  Look at electromagnetic propulsion, no mass is ejected from the transport at all (unless you consider the odd passenger or so).

Reply

Advertisement

happyjack27

2 Comments

  • 782 Days Ago
  • 12/14/2009

Re: so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

Electromagnetic propulsion ejects ionized gasses.  Very very small amounts, but amounts nonetheless.   Usually hydrogen nuclei, I believe.  It just gets a lot of force out of each atom.  It still pushes the atoms as much as it pushes the space ship.

And btw, in addition to being wrong, your argument was incomplete:  you didn't even bother to propose how electromagnetics can violate the law of conservation.  (Which would be ironic, seeing as though it's considered one of the forces through which it acts.)

Reply

cripdyke

52 Comments

  • 780 Days Ago
  • 12/16/2009

Re: so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

You are the one who is missing the point -

Think of a maglev train, not a spaceship. Through the application of electroweak force in a specific manifestation (the magnetic component, to the extent this is severable), a force lifts and propels the train without reaction mass leaving the train.

Likewise, if you wish to only speak about spaceships (which seems to be the source of your logical error above) a mag-field generator used when near a magnetized body would produce acceleration through the interaction of magnetic fields without ejecting any reaction mass from the spacecraft.

Your mistake was in  confusing electromagnetic propulsion with what is called "ionic propulsion" by the aerospace industry.

Your proper reply to this should be, well, yes, I misunderstood, but even the examples here which correct that misunderstanding do not violate the principle in question: the track (and the planet to which it is connected) is pressed back as the train is pressed forward in the first case and in the second case, the generic "magnetized body" - Jupiter might be a good example, the earth is another - is pushed back.

But you are missing the point if you reply in such a way. The proponents of this concept are excited about not carrying the reaction mass on board the space-craft. They are not excited about violating known physics.

Hope this clears up the confusion...

your friendly, neighborhood cripdyke

Reply

YetAnotherBob

5 Comments

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

Relatively speaking, yes.

The two have no meaningful difference.

Reply

Spacer

3 Comments

  • 785 Days Ago
  • 12/11/2009

Re: so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

I would just use the simple system used by a Flying Saucer which I patented.
You only have to learn one formula: Q = CV .
Mit had a good laugh when I told someone there how it worked and they were not interested to publicize it.
It is based on the impossible-to-do-in practice-
problem  by Faraday (The two metal concentric spheres that do not touch and form a capacitor etc etc.).
Just like Nasa, where they found that the Propulsion Engineers would become obsolete.
Who would need them if we could fly to the Moon in an hour or top Mars inside one day?

US patent 4,095,162

Reply

smithsomian

182 Comments

  • 782 Days Ago
  • 12/14/2009

Re: so does it push the spaceship forward, or space back?

You FILED a patent, which was rejected.

Reply

MACchine

8 Comments

  • 777 Days Ago
  • 12/19/2009

Does this need work ???

I think this concept needs just a little bit of work !!!

Are not the two metalic plates metalic planets ?

The vacuum is outterspace between the planets ??

And the nanoparticles are there in space being spun up by robotic lasers on energy producing satilites which would create a magnetic worm whole ???

The magnetic fields of the planets would be joined together adding to the power of the worm hole, thus it MIGHT create a quantum singularity for any metal object like a space ship tossed into it, meaning the ship could quickly accelerate to lightspeed, mass gains would be irrellevent !!!!!!

If THAT does NOT happen a ship could still ride the massive magnetic wave between the two planets !      

Reply

MACchine

8 Comments

  • 774 Days Ago
  • 12/22/2009

This is a REALLY GOOD idea ???

Here THIS might be the BEST way to do this ...

Set up your nano particles and robotic laser system to spin the particles between the Sun and Jupiter to get a super powerful worm whole, if you used the Earth with Jupiter the Earth might move a little bit more then normal -- BAD SCIENTIST !

Anything metallic entering the worm whole would immediately accelerate in whatever direction it was traveling in to light speed.

Maybe this is how the SUN REALLY WORKS no fusion just quantum accelerated particles slamming into each other living in a zero time quantum flux.

Reply

Bio

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Follow The Physics arXiv Blog on Twitter

Subscribe to the arXiv blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement