/sci/ - Science & Math

Memetechnology
Memeology
Memenomics

I seriously hope you don't believe this actually works.

>>7268056
i how it works, not so we can have a crazy cool future, but just so /sci/ can be humiliatingly wrong about something

>>7268276

>implying that /sci/ isn't humiliatingly wrong on almost everything

/sci/ can do calculus problems like half the time, and beyond that, it's just a meme

>>7268276
Of course it works, how else would you explain all the UFO sightings?

>It was dirt on the camera lens!
>And the cockpit canopy!
>And the radar screen!

>>7268056
It's called "Memetics" and "Memetic Engineering"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics

microwave popcorn

if they can get 1 newton per 1kw, it basically replaces the wheel
everything flies
its all over industrial settings
all that shit

Hot off the press, some Romanian got it to "work" in his living room.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ

>>7268487
>Potential for high efficiency
>Infinite delta v
>Flying anything purely off of energy
This is too good to be true.

>>7268490
>that blue foam thing
this nigger is adorable

If it is true, why didn't they discover something simple like blasting microwaves into a tube earlier?

>>7268487
Everything can fly
It just replaces the wheel
All that shit

-A haiku by anon

>>7268506
yup
you can go 1g all over the solar system, get to mars in a couple weeks, artificial gravity the entire way there

>>7268490
i was wondering how long until the DIYers got on the train here

its so simple, why not?

I'm going to start posting this in every one of these threads

>>7268625
if this turns out legit i'm going to do _EXCACTLY_ this setup
giant can of liquid nitrogen and all

>>7268047
It doesn't work. If it works the way they say it does would be an overunity device.

If it does work the way they say it does, it would enable just about anyone to make a planet destroying weapon in their garage.

The replicated experiments aren't.

>>7268487
if they can get 1 newton per kilowatt, then it's a perpetual motion machine.

>>7268655
how so?

>>7268655
>Energy is lost due to heat
>Electricity has to come from somewhere
Nigga, don't act like you know what you're talking about.

>>7268655
No...try again...if it takes one kilowatt of power to get one newton of propulsion, it's just a motion machine.

All we need to do for perpetual motion machines is design a system that somehow creates little to no heat and then boom. Done.

>>7268674
>troll detected

>>7268674
I have plenty of rocks in my backyard that generate no heat, can I just define one of those as my system?

Nah, I'm just dumb.

Tfw hopeful of future to all ends.

>>7268674
>all we need to do to break the laws of thermodynamics is break the laws of thermodynamics

Blech I don't even know what I'm talking about

So if this can actually violate the conservation of momentum by pushing on quantum vaccuum fluctuations or whatever, could one of these running for long enough in someone's garage deorbit planet earth?

>>7268707
if its pushing on virtual particles its not violating conservation of momentum

and yes, it could, but you need to input energy for it to do anything. its not magic

>>7268625

>>7268056
Oh yeah human monkeys are so smart. We don't know if it works or not until we test it enough times. You are testing it against your mental model but that model was still made by humans and could be wrong.

>>7268515
>If it is true, why didn't they discover something simple like blasting microwaves into a tube earlier?
Because you and me are "they" you lazy shit. Get to work on my force fields and holograms!

>>7268655
>if they can get 1 newton per kilowatt, then it's a perpetual motion machine.
Or it works and it's not.

>>7268490
So he made an overly complex hot air balloon?

>>7268670
If you get constant thrust per unit of energy at some point the increase of kinetic energy will be larger than the amount of energy you put in. If it worked like they say it does it would break conservation of energy.

>>7269039
Romanian Scientist finally finished his EMdrive tests and got thrust! looks like the 183 pages of forum calculations paid off at NASA space flight forums!

The calculations!

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.3640


Heres the third test that got thrust! on video!
1kw of power for .4 nearly a half a newton of force! Not calibrated fully!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbStna1-XZU


Heres his website:
http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/

>>
Anonymous 05/18/15(Mon)04:48:30 No.7269035

>>7269031
Whoops Wrong video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ
This is the third one!

Shits about to go viral!
Reddit has kicked up a storm!

>>
Anonymous 05/18/15(Mon)04:53:12 No.7269041

https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/

>>7269045
>Romanian Scientist
Right

>>7268724
That's a handwave and it pissed a lot of physicists off. There is no calculation showing how this happens without violating conservation of momentum

>>7269064
>it pissed a lot of physicists off.
Yeah? Who gives a fuck. The guy who built it is an engineer and the guy testing it is also an engineer. It's not their job to explain the physics. Also actual observation trumps theory.

>>7269114
>Also actual observation trumps theory.

The scientific method requires both, pal. Otherwise your just a statistician/economist/journalist reporting events

>>7269114
The fact that he is an engineer already tells me he knows jack shit about what is happening here. It only discredits him further. Besides, engineers are as much scientists as Christians are atheists.

>>7269045
>woo shits gonna get vital whoohoo
>check reddick you gays!!
Kill yourself already holy shit it is obvious you don't come here for serious discussion but just want to spout your confirmation and cognitive biased bullshit in everyone's face.

>>7269128
>Shitting on engineers

U jelly that he's more employable than you?

>>7269124
>The scientific method requires both, pal.
And that problem belongs to the physicist. The engineer is just trying to make a neat device.
>>7269128
It is too much to ask that we simply test the device. If left to physicist they would simply toss it out the window to preserve their theory. How much do we actually know about conservation laws? Do we know everything about them?

>>7269134
His enthusiasm is warranted and I for one enjoy his contribution. Why don't you say something constructive instead of defending your territory like a animal?

>>7269141
A physicist wouldn't even attempt to build an experiment if there is not enough theory to support the idea it could actually work. To just build some thing without having rigorous proof is just plain stupid because nature isn't what you want it to be so you would be wasting a ton of time and money on something that most likely wouldn't work. And the guy in the video has neither theory nor something that actually works. Draw your conclusions from that.

>>7269124
>if something isn't discovered using the scientific method it isn't real

>>7269153
>god is real

>>7268487
at 1 N/ kW its just a huge fucking waste of energy

>>7269155
I don't even know what's going on in your head that made you make a connection like that

>>7269152
Maybe that's why a physicists didn't invent the EMdrive.

>>7269164
Just giving some poor sap scrap metal and an old microwave doesn't mean he can make an em drive. Top. Lel.

>>7269170
citation needed

>>7269177
Source: this Romanian "Scientist"

Meanwhile on physicsforums...

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/thoughts-on-the-emdrive.812279/

>>7269322
Shit, I need to switch websites.

>>7269322
Damn....

What contrast to the constant meme-ing on /sci/

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

Might interest someone

>>7269322

"We don't understand it, so we won't discuss it."

Very scientific.

>>7269676
"It is unscientific, so we won't discuss it."

Very understandable

>>7269146
#rekt
#OGottem

>>7269322
>>7269335
Yea, go to a website ran by kooks like this.

>>7268614
This. Expect Youtube to flood with similar experiments.

>>7269737
What's your point

>>7268047
I'm getting really sick of this meme thread.

>Space hotels
I did love Pan-Am's 1960s moon hotel designs, impossible even today but still lovely

>>7268541
kek
well meme'd

>>7269322
>not even considering the possibility of it working
hell naw

>>7271938
It's disgusting.

>>7269743
The guy is an asshole.

>>7269678
Ridiculous. It's a testable device that has the potential to teach us something.

>>7269678
how many hundreds of youtube videos of people getting exactly the same effect until some labs start taking it seriously

especially once someone scales it up with a real monster magnetron

>>7268047
I'd be surprised if there isn't already a kickstarter campaign for creating these things for some weird use.

>>7269163
A fedora, probably.

>>7269322
>implying that the theoretical basis doesn't exist
>implying that physicists ever do their job correctly
>>7272441

Physicists have managed to spend billions of dollars on theoretical particle physics wankery despite having never actually figured out basic things like how photon momentum transfer actually works.

Why are people so butthurt over reactionless drives? What's the big deal if we can tell conservation of momentum to go fuck itself in some cases?

>>7274050
Some people don't understand science.

They think science means a set of unbreakable laws that are universal and sometimes get nice additions but can never be retracted.

Basically, the fedora-tippers aren't just endlessly circlejerking about atheism, but they are also so clueless about both science and religion itself, that they are being incredibly religious.

>>7274050
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
it's like the tachyon thing a couple years ago. you must eliminate all possible sources of air before throwing out the current model.

>>7273070
>he expect (real) scientists to take something in consideration on the basis of what some retarded youtuber does/says

anyway nasa is doing some research on that front (and not because of some retard playing with magnetrons in his house)

>>7269164
The EMdrive was invented by an idiot that only got thrust from his proposed mechanism because he made a really stupid approximation error. If it actually produces thrust, the guy that invented it can't possibly be correct from Eagleworks' results.

As for why you shouldn't get too excited, this is more than likely to be another instance of FTL neutrinos. Only Eagleworks has poorer results and is claiming to actually have overturned all of physics while the neutrino guys came out and stated they didn't believe their own results and something is probably wrong with their experiment. Instead, Eagleworks concludes their experiment is perfect with little error analysis (no real error analysis in anything I have seen) and have proclaimed that they have shown a reactionless drive works.

>>7268490

He said in the comments that he would try flipping the machine over to see if it would produce thrust towards the ground, to prove that it's directional. It seems to be taking a suspiciously long time for a video about that test to come out.

I really, really want the EmDrive to be real and work, but I won't really be impressed with this DIY drive unless someone can at least prove the thrust is directional.

>>7274087
>stupid approximation error
Probably exists in reality too as it's all a simulation. It's just a matter of time before we start finding glitches.

>>7269157
not if you're a space probe, since sunlight is free unlimited energy, unlike propellant which runs out.

>>7274139

>>7269157
1 N/kW is overunity for anything moving over 1 km/s.

>>7274278
Earth is moving over 29km/s. me lifting my phone is overunity.

>>7274292
It would be if you did it without a reaction force.

>>726849

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rbf7735o3hQ

This is exactly the kind of dumbfuckery that happens when you crowd source scientific research irresponsibly.

NASA Eagleworks had a pretty shitty reputation before this whole EM Drive pop sci hoax blew up and this just cements it. I hope NASA strips them of every penny they get and bans them from using the NASA name.

When you make wild claims with zero serious data to back them up you get peoples hopes up, and you hurt science in the process when they think all science research is like this.

Uninformed citizens then vote for money to be allocated to shit that will go nowhere.

I also hold the owner and mods of the NASA SpaceFlight Forums responsible for this bullshit. Whatever credibility they had before this is all gone.

My jimmies are thoroughly rustled.

>>7268047

>>7274278
>le overunity maymay
fuck off faggot, I saw you in the previous thread, you got blown the fuck out before and you're going to get blown the fuck out here again.

if it works then its not overunity because it works for some unknown reason. if it doesnt then who cares.

>>7274134
Shit doesnt work. He has that copper plate up there for no reason besides "shielding."

>>7268490
One thing I noticed when he tests this device is that when he turns it on there is maybe a 0.8 second delay until thrust shows up on his scale. When he turns it off the scale instantly goes back to near zero.

Also his scale goes negative when he turns the device on which means the device is making itself lighter by trying to move upwards.

>>7268707
There's nothing that actually shows energy in creates a linear increase in thrust. We have a couple of tests that weren't funded enough to be very thorough. Give it time and either the thrust will be shown to actually be an error, or that it doesn't scale linearly.

>>7274832

People on the NASA space flight forums have noticed the delay in "thrust" in different experiments.

I think the explanation was something about it taking a few seconds for some elements to heat up

>>7275031
Have they tested it in a vacuum yet?

>>7275059

Yes, the guy from NASA Eagleworks is posting there about his results and said he tested it in a vacuum.

But people have said that it's not a proper vacuum and it could be affecting the experiment.

I won't take this seriously until paper is submitted for peer review, but the Eagleworks guy refuses to do so.

>>7274765
>fuck off faggot
Nah, memedrives will come and go, basic mechanics is here to stay. You may as well learn it.

>if it works then its not overunity because it works for some unknown reason.
Whatever mechanism it works by isn't going to change the fact that you're getting more energy out than in. If it works, great, you have a new energy source; use it wisely.

>>7269157
It has infinite delta v, given no propellant.
You can go anywhere, given enough time, or shorten the time by throwing more energy at it.
Energy comes dirt cheap. Mass is hard to move around.


>>7274278
>>7275325
>anything moving over 1 km/s.
What is relativity?

>1 N/kW is overunity
1N/kW is 0.001% efficiency.

> you have a new energy source
...

>>7275387
>What is relativity?
Energy is a reference frame dependent quantity. A reactionless drive produces energy in some frames and destroys it in others.

>1N/kW is 0.001% efficiency.
This is just shitty trolling.

>>7275433
Detail me a machine which would violate the second law by creating usable energy, using a reactionless drive, and I'll concede.

>>7275473
Simple: Move the drive around in a circle at a speed v greater than its power/thrust ratio. The drive consumes power P and does work at a rate v*F which is greater than P.

>>7275473
Or if we want to make it dead simple and very concrete, let's make up some numbers for a reactionless craft:
1 Newton thrust
1 kilowatt power usage
1 kilogram mass

Now just turn the drive on for 4000 seconds and ram it into a giant spring. You used 4 MJ of energy to accelerate the thing to 4 km/s, giving it a kinetic energy of 8 MJ, which is absorbed by the spring.

>microwave in a copper tube
>violates current physics
>not properly tested
>current tests show poor results
>romanian youtube video as evidence

>see also youtube videos proving UFOs, free energy, tesla death ray, telekinesis, psychic abilities.

We can use this technology to power a FTL neutrino gun and make a warp drive to colonize mars.

>>7275909
apparantly em drive doesn't violate laws of physics. search google to find out more.

>>7275930
neutrinos are slower than light!!! It was just a mistake that cern has made. they've repeated the experiments and light is still the faster.

http://www.masinaelectrica.com/emdrive-independent-test/

>I flipped the cone in the original setup and i have the thrust downwards (scale goes positive). Unfortunately the thrust downwards is around 7 times smaller. difference on the scale is only 0.20 grams and is consistent with the power on and off . I will post the video on YouTube.

Looks like he did have an effect from heated air, but there seems to be another factor going on.

>>7269322
wow

I've seen some narrow-minded neckbeard assholery in my time but this beats them all. I too laugh at the meme drive but to completely shut down all discussion like this screams of religion.

>>7275991
>apparantly em drive doesn't violate laws of physics.
But then again nothing ever does. Especially when it doesnt do anything at all like the memedrive.

>>7276636
It's a reaction to the excesses of Usenet, where there was no way to keep crazy people from rambling on and on about their crackpot theories, and all discussion devolved into people arguing with the crackpots.