Chapter 10 - Propulsive Implication of Photon Momentum in Media

HOME PAGE Web Site Contents Mars Report Contents Mars Report Abstract CV for Dr. David Roffman Diplomas PhD Thesis PhD Thesis Powerpoint Mars PowerPoint MSL Weather Reports MSL Weather Fall Yr 3 MSL Yr. 3 Summer Weather MSL Yr. 3 Spring Weather Martian plume March 25 2017 MSL Ultraviolet Desai, EDL, Parachutes & ExoMars Mars winter vs. summer temps Sea at Utopia Planitia, Mars Tree Stump at MSL? Spherical life on Mars? Mars Report Abstract, 1-1.2 Mars Report Sec.2-2.1 Report 2.2-2.4 Report 2.5-2.5.2 Report 2.5.3-2.7 Report 3-4.1.2 Report 5 to 6 Report  7-7.2.1 Report 8 Report 9 Report 10-11 Report  12-12.2 Report 12.3-12.5 Report 12.6 Report 13-14 Report 14.1 Report 14.2-14.3 Report 14.4-14.6.2 Report 14.6.3-14.7 Report 15-19 Report References Report Afterword Rebuttal of REMS Report Running water on Mars MSL Year 0 Weather MSL Yr 2 Winter-Spring Weather MSL Yr 2 Summer Weather MSL Yr 2 Fall Weather MSL Yr 2-3 Winter Weather Adiabatics MSL Hi Temps MSL Low Temps Organic Chem found by MSL Oxygen in Mars Air MSL Day length & Temp Warm winter ground temps 155-Mile High Mars Plume Radiation Diurnal Air Temp Variation Mars Temps Fahrenheit Beagle found JPL/NASA Pressure Mistakes Enter MarsCorrect Sol 370, 1160 & 1161 Histories Mars-Radio-Show JPL Fudges Pressure Curves MSL Temp. ∆ Mast to Ground High & Low Pressures Normalized Mars soil 2% water Moving rock Mars MAVEN MSL Relative Humidity Claim Ashima Concedes Original MSL Weather Record Old MSL Weather Record MSL Summer Weather Pressure Estimate REMS Wind MSL Pressures REMS Reports Curiosity Geology CERN-2013-pics Daylight Math MSL Errors P1 MSL Errors P2 MSL-Chute-Flap MSL daylight Ashima Sols 15 to 111 Ashima Sol 112 to 226 Ashima Sol 227 on New Ashima Sols 270+ MSL Summer to Sol 316 Updated Secrets of Mars Weather Forecast Wind Booms MSL Credibility MSL Temp. Swings MSL Temperatures Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) VL2 - MSL Ls Comparson Ashima MIT Mars GCM Dust Storm Nonsense Mars Slideshow Moving Sand & Martian Wind 3 DEC12 Press Conf. MSL Press Conf. 15NOV2012 Sol Numbering MSL Pressure Graph to Ls 218.8 MSL Sky Color Mars Sky Color DATA DEBATE! Zubrin's Letter Phoenix Vaisala Vaisala Pressure Sensors Phoenix &MSL Flawed MSL REMS Viking pressure sensors failed MSL landing site Mars Landings Phobos Grunt Martian Air Supersaturation Mars & CH4 Mars and MSL Time Viking Pressure Audit Links Mars Society 2008 Quant Finance Frontiers Home Front. Preface Frontiers Ch. 1 Frontiers Ch. 2 Antimatter Lightning Frontiers Ch. 3 Frontiers Ch. 4 Frontiers Ch. 5 Frontiers Ch. 6 Frontiers Ch. 7 Frontiers Ch. 8 Frontiers Ch. 9 Frontiers Ch 10 Frontiers Ch 11 Frontiers Ch 12 Frontiers Ch 13 Frontiers Ch 14 Frontiers Ch 15 Frontiers Ch 16 Frontiers Ch 17 Frontiers Ch 18 Frontiers Ch 19 Frontiers Ch 20 Frontiers Ch 21 Frontiers Ch 22 World Tour Spring-Break -13 Other Travels Asteroid Impact? ExoMars data Unit Issues Viking Pressures Tavis CADs Landing Long Scale Heights LS of Max/Min Pressures Tavis Report Tavis Failures Lander Altitude Martian Trees? Code Experiment Gedanken Report Mars Nuke? Martian Flares Mach Numbers MOLA (altitude) Original Mars Report Mariner 9 & Pressure Mars  Temps MSL Time MPF Pressure Blog Debates Spring Pendulum Plasma Model Reporting Errors Orbital Parameters Anderson Localization P. 1 Anderson Localization P. 2 Moving rock old Navigating Mars Mars Report Section Links Mars Report Figure Link Gillespie Lake rock outcrop MSL Sol 200 Anomaly Sol 1300&1301 Anomalies Gilbert Levin & Labeled Release Brine on Mars Ceres Lights Yr 1 Table 1 amfivan Missing data Mitchell Report Old Mars Report All MPF Temps ExoMars fails Did Spirit find past life? MSL ground temps go haywire Seasonal Pressure Altitude Calculations OPACITY AT MSL

Updated 9/30/2016

Chapter 10 - Propulsive Implication of Photon Momentum in Media

Notes by David A Roffman on Chapter 10 of

FRONTIERS IN PROPULSION SCIENCE

Chapter by Michael R. LaPoint,

Project Manager, Science Research and Technologies Project Office,

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama 

    There has been a major debate in science for about 100 years over the issue of momentum density of electromagnetic field propagation through an index of refraction greater than unity.  Now, there have been two theories for how to handle the situation, and they are direct opposites. 

     One alternative is the Minkowski equation and the other is the Abraham equation.  For the first equation, momentum density increases when passing through a greater index of refraction (by a factor of n2).  As for the second equation, the opposite happens; momentum density decreases (by a factor of 1/n).  It is important to know that both are attempted derivatives of the Maxwell Field Equations, which pertained to a vacuum. 

    Attempts to prove either theory have ranged from thought process to experimentation.  In 1935, Halpern showed that symmetric energy (provided prerequisites), will not satisfy Minkowski’s equation.  So, Halpern was an Abraham fan.  Balasz used a thought experiment to buttress Abraham.  He proposed two enclosures in uniform motion without external forces.  Both enclosures have a dielectric rod, and one has a slower electromagnetic wave passing though the enclosure.  The wave moving through the vacuum will be moving faster than the one in the rod.  To keep center of mass and momentum, the Abraham (slowing down) tensor must be used.

    While thought experiments are nice, they are not real physical experiments.  The first physical experiment took place in 1954 with Jones and Richards.  Although it wasn’t well known, it did demonstrate one thing.  For this experiment, many metallic reflectors in air and in dielectric media were used to test radiation pressure.  This experiment backed up Minkowski  But the results were ignored.

    Another experiment was carried out in 1973 by Ashkin and Dziedzic.  This one used laser light to measure the radiation pressure on an air-water interface.  A net outward force was detected, thus giving more credit to Minkowski.   The same year a follow up was done.  Gordon published a report on pseudomomentum.  He summarized that Abraham was correct for nondispersive dielectric media, while Minkowski was correct for determining the radiation pressure of an object in a media.  Using time varying voltage, Walker helped to prove that Abraham was right.

    Later experiments by Brevik and Gibson (used a photon experiment) helped to prove that both view points were correct.  For high frequencies, Minkowski’s tensor should be used.  But for low frequencies, Abraham’s tensor is a good idea. 

Other researchers have proposed taking the average of the two tensors.  The Bose-Einstein condensate experiment utilized rubidium in a gas to check the tensor theories.  Based on the refraction and momentum, Minkowski’s tensor seemed correct.  To summarize this cyclical debate, there is still no answer about who was right (what tensor is right).  The book mentions on page 356 that a narrow band optical pulse of 600-fs duration ans 1-MW/cm2 peak power, incident upon a multilayer photonic bangap structure  with mass of 10-5 grams may produce accelerations up to 108 m/s2.  In optics, an ultrashort pulse whose time duration is on the order of the femtosecond (which is 10 − 15 seconds.  There is an indication that the short interaction time limits displacement and velocity, but these experiments could be used to test electromagnetic phenomena and momentum transfer to large objects (like a spaceship). Using a relativistic acceleration formula it is obvious that the speed of light cannot be reached or surpassed.

    While all of the previous discussion is nice, propulsion is what really matters.  Here the chapter starts with Slepian’s Electromagnetic Space Ship.  He used an oscillating magnetic field for propulsion.  He asks two questions: Is there an unbalanced force acting on the material system of the spacecraft, and can the unbalanced force be used to propel the ship?  (answers - yes to 1, and no to 2).  This was not to be taken seriously, as it was published with a rebuke by him a month later.  It was designed only to provoke thought.  The idea is nonsense, as the thruster would go forward and back an equal distance (no net movement).  However, Corum et al. say that unidirectional motion is possible.  This claim has been shown to be false, but the time derivative of electromagnetic density might alter space, causing some acceleration (this was shown by the US Air Force Academy).

    Brito tried to use the principles that this chapter discusses to create a propulsion device (Electromagnetic Inertia Manipulation Propulsion), but it failed.  However, there was some force observed that may not have been due to error.  Another idea is Feigel’s Hypothesis, that is, Zero Point vacuum fluctuations move dielectric objects in crossed electric and magnetic fields.

     The European Space Agency’s companion, van Tiggelen et al. believe the Feigel hypothesis to be measurable and quite real.  They calculate that a small magneto-electric object inside an isotropic (and monochromatic radiation field) could move if external fields were switched on.  Also, for a field intensity of 10kW/cm2, a velocity of approximately 10-5 cm/s could happen if an object’s composition was FeGaO3.  This can be verified by a 10 micro gram crystal of the same substance as the previous object mounted at the end of a piezo-resistive cantilever (but there is no more data in this area). 

    The real question is how to use the two tensors developed, and how to apply them to space travel.  This is still a mystery, and many more tests are needed.  A breakthrough here will not only finish a hundred year battle in physics, but may open up new worlds for us to explore.  Note p = h/λ, where “p” is the momentum, “h” is Planck’s constant, and “λ” is wavelength.  This applies to photons and particles with mass.