[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 235 KB, 525x746, 1406827851747.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6674013 No.6674013[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Okay, looks like someone's built a different EmDrive (a propellant-less propulsion system) based on the same principle, and presumably it works again.

Conference paper is here: http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-4029

What's the catch?

>> No.6674021

>>6674013
Any videos of it performing successfully?

>> No.6674026

>>6674013
What the hell? This actually looks legit.

There's got to be some source of experimental error. Reactionless drives Don't Happen. But the experimental protocol looks pretty good.

What the fuck? What's next, a working perpetual motion machine? Cold fusion turns out to be a real thing?

>> No.6674032

>>6674013
Also, that "someone" is NASA.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-07/31/nasa-validates-impossible-space-drive

>> No.6674043

>>6674026
>This actually looks legit
Looks legit ≠ is legit, until we have evidence.

>>6674032
That's why I was cautious. It's funded by NASA, yes. Only a conference paper is available. More input is needed. But it looks interesting, yes.

>> No.6674049

>>6674013
>Harold White

There he is again.

>> No.6674054

>>6674049
Well, yeah. He's the dude at NASA whose job it is to look at this stuff.

>> No.6674065

>>6674032
>funded by NASA
doesn't mean shit until there's a working model

>> No.6674071
File: 15 KB, 796x370, emdrive_geometry.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6674071

>>6674013
So, to be clear, are we claiming here that the sum (integral) of all these little arrows add up to zero for a square, but non-zero for a trapezoid? I think basic calculus tells us otherwise? I haven't done the math, but I'm sure someone here has...

>> No.6674080

>>6674065
They have models that "work", we need to put one in a box in space and then see if it is really doing what it's claiming to do rather than something else doing the work.

>> No.6674106

>>6674071
Ok, I did the math and they do both sum to zero. It's not even calculus, just geometry.

So the claim must be that the force is not evenly distributed at every point on the surface.

>> No.6674114

>>6674106
Post the math then.

>> No.6674120

>>6674106
If this is some Casimir effect shit, then the trapezoidal bits could end up with non-cancelling forces as a result of the geometry. Given that it uses the "virtual plasma of the quantum vacuum," I would suspect this is the thing going on. And I am not doing the math to work that shit out.

>> No.6674131
File: 34 KB, 1275x718, normal_vector_add.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6674131

>>6674114
The normal on each side is just 90 degrees rotated... take each side's normal and scale it to the same length as the side (so longer side has longer normal because more force acting on it)... add the normals "tip to tail" and you end up with exactly a 90-degree-rotated version of the trapezoid.

>> No.6674354

>>6674131
but you made closed shape, you need thrust nozzle

after that, do the math again