MF-01 / Signal and uncertainty

A small force.
A complete budget.

Explore graphene momentum estimates, thermal limits and the measurement uncertainty needed for a useful result.

RESEARCH RELEASE 0.2 / 20 OCTOBER 2026

Optical benchmark first. Alpha 1 hardware on hold. No physical coupling, apparatus performance or propulsion result is established. The next milestone is a qualified measurement of known photon momentum.

INTERACTIVE / TWO DIFFERENT QUESTIONS

Can you predict it?
Can you resolve it?

Fixed incoming light−12°+45°Sample + support

The beam diagram is conceptual. The graphene calculation uses the two published states at fixed 45° incidence. Its incident lateral momentum cancels in B − A only when incident power and alignment stay fixed.

1 · Graphene optical estimate

90% absorption is an illustrative input, not a measured value assigned to the device. The 10 W choice is an arithmetic extrapolation, not a safe or demonstrated operating point.

2 · Separate known-force benchmark

Reference amplitude: 13.343 nN from assumed 10 W, 80% efficiency, ±30° states. This is not the graphene device above.

Selected orders / B − A−0.850 pNPartial optical momentum difference
Two-order closure / B − A−0.668 pNConditional estimate using rounded relative efficiencies
One-state thermal photon bound10.117 pNP × assumed absorption / c; not differential noise

Approximate 95% half-width on the separate benchmark amplitude: 17.324 nN

Insufficient: interval half-width exceeds the benchmark amplitude.

u(a) = √(σ²/Neff + usys²); displayed half-width = 1.96 u(a). a is half the full symmetric reversal difference. Gaussian approximation, stationary independent-window noise and an analyst-supplied floor. This comparison is not a power analysis, detection claim or apparatus qualification.

A published optical switch is not a measured thruster

Han and colleagues report 7.8% absolute efficiency at −12° and 8.4% at +45°, with 83.6% and 76.5% relative efficiencies. The fixed incident beam is at 45°, not normal incidence. Their Methods report 3.37 mW at 41.17 THz (7.281 µm), with a 213 µm beam spot. Our 80%-efficient reference is a separate assumed optical benchmark.

Research basis: Sangjun Han, 2025.

Count the light that did not enter the selected order

At 10 W, the selected-order contribution to the full state difference is −2.522 nN; at 3.37 mW it is −0.850 pN. If the rounded relative efficiencies account for all scattered power and only the two propagating orders contribute, reconstructing the other order gives −1.982 nN at 10 W, or −0.668 pN at 3.37 mW. These are derived comparisons, not reported force measurements. Finite-beam scatter, power drift and angular distributions require measurement. Neither estimate certifies operation at 10 W.

The complete momentum equation

F = (Pin ŝin − ∫ ŝ dPout)/c, with thermal radiation handled separately. The outgoing integral includes reflected, transmitted and scattered channels. For fixed incoming power and direction, ΔFx = −Δ∫sin(θ)dPout/c. Mounts, electrical leads and gas add forces outside this optical calculation.

Power scaling must also close the thermal budget

Absorption is not 1 minus the selected-order efficiency. Measure total reflection, transmission and scatter. As an illustration only, 90% absorption at 10 W means 9 W of heat and a one-state thermal photon recoil bound of 30.021 nN. The switch-dependent thermal force depends on how both states emit. Thermal expansion, fixture distortion and gas forces are not bounded by Pabs/c. A matched-heater transfer-function measurement is essential.

Averaging has a stopping point

Commission 100, 10 and 1 nN independent-window noise bands as measured capability gates, not promised dates or specifications. With 128 independent windows and a 0.05 nN amplitude floor, their approximate 95% half-widths are 17.324, 1.735 and 0.199 nN. At the first band, the 13.343 nN benchmark amplitude is not separated from zero by this interval. A 217-window arithmetic illustration passes only under the same ideal assumptions; a proper experiment also needs a prospective power analysis, stable calibration and measured covariance.

Three calculated uncertainty curves flatten at a fixed systematic floor as independent windows increase.
Calculated planning illustration. No instrument data.

A reproducible Monte Carlo budget

The downloadable code propagates 200,000 simulated draws. It keeps power and efficiency uncertainty separate from readout noise, thermal angular asymmetry, mount temperature response, patch drift, gas and electrical residuals. It includes correlated efficiencies and correlated thermal/mount terms. Every numerical distribution is an analyst-selected example; none is an observed MF-01 property. The current model still omits unmeasured optical channels.

Simulated distributions for the partial optical prediction and the prediction plus assumed residual errors.
Calculated planning illustration. No instrument data.

Research basis: Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, 2008 · Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, 2008 · Maxime Monette, 2021.

TermEvidence needed before a real budget
Optical predictionMeasured intercepted power, full angular spectra, calibration covariance, polarization and incidence.
Readout and driftRaw zero/reference records, stability versus averaging time and justified effective sample size.
Thermal radiationState-specific absorbed power, temperature, emissivity and angular emission.
Mount distortionMatched-heater transfer function, temperature lag, geometry and reassembly checks.
Electrostatic / magnetic / gasBeam-off switching, grounded dummy, cable reversal and pressure/field sweeps.
Read the protocol draft↗