/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.7230815]

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/nasa-says-emdrive-does-work-it-may-have-also-created-star-trek-warp-drive-1499098

>Nasa has proven that the controversial space propulsion technology EmDrive works and also accidentally might have made a warp drive, as used by the Star Trek Enterprise to travel, possible

>It was thought up and developed by a British scientist called Roger Shawyer, who spent years having his technology ridiculed by the international space community even though Boeing licensed it and the UK government was satisfied it worked.

>Nasa has been testing the technology for a while and it confirmed on 29 April that researchers at the Johnson Space Center have successfully tested an electromagnetic propulsion drive in a vacuum, and although it did not seem possible, the technology actually works.

>"Thrust measurements of the EmDrive defy classical physics' expectations that such a closed [microwave] cavity should be unusable for space propulsion because of the law of conservation of momentum," Nasa's José Rodal, Jeremiah Mullikin and Noel Munson wrote in a Nasa Spaceflight blog.
What is EmDrive?

>EmDrive is based on the theory of special relativity that it is possible to convert electrical energy into thrust without the need to expel any form of repellent.

>Shawyer's critics say according to the law of conservation of momentum, his theory cannot work as in order for a thruster to be propelled forwards, something must be pushed out of the back of it in the opposite direction.

>Nasa researchers posted on the Nasa Spaceflight forum that when lasers were fired into the EmDrive's resonance chamber, some of the laser beams had travelled faster than the speed of light, which would mean the EmDrive could have produced a warp bubble.

>A post by another user analysing the EmDrive experiment said "the math behind the warp bubble apparently matches the interference pattern found in the EmDrive".

So, what do you make out of this?

[Anonymous No.7230818]

>>7230815
that you don't know how to use the catalog

[Anonymous No.7230839]

>>7230818
don't be a dick, this is a significantly better emdrive post than any of the previous ones imo

[Anonymous No.7230845]

>>7230815
Pretty great, actually.

Peer reviewed by three different and independent (even competing) laboratories, and probably humanity's greatest hope for future space colonization.

This makes my heart beat faster, imagining how humanity could really have space empries one day.

[Anonymous No.7230854]

This shit is too big of a find for just one thread.

Damn, this shit should actually be all over the world's media.

Instead, we get niggers and sandnigger killing each other.

I dont want to live on this earth anymore.

[Anonymous No.7230862]

>>7230854
Why can't they just send one up?

9 kgs? That's a cube sat.
Stick an old RTG and you got decent enough rig that could piggy back on a mission for free.

[Anonymous No.7230868]

>>7230862
Rumour has it that the Chinese will send one satellite with a 'certain experimental drive' up to space in 2016, along with their first experimental quantum communications sat.

Whether it will be the EmDrive or an Ion-Drive, is unknown, though. I got my fingers crossed, in any case.

[Anonymous No.7230870]

>>7230845
Its not just for space travel

>Q. How can the EmDrive produce enough thrust for terrestrial applications?

>A. The second generation engines will be capable of producing a specific thrust of 30kN/kW. Thus for 1 kilowatt (typical of the power in a microwave oven) a static thrust of 3 tonnes can be obtained, which is enough to support a large car. This is clearly adequate for terrestrial transport applications.

The EM drive could revolutionize EVERYTHING. It has no moving parts, its super efficient, and runs on nothing but electricity. If this thing could be made as efficient as some of the scientists working on it say it could be, than we are looking at the engine to end all engines. Cars, Planes, Spacecraft, Subs, Boats, Trains... all could run on the same damn system.

Or these upgrades could all go the way of cold fusion and be perpetually 30 years away. Still, even right now it obsoletes Ion drive by being more than 7 times more efficient (2500w creates 750mN) without having to carry propellent.

[Anonymous No.7230873]

>>7230868
Interesting.

>>7230870
> its super efficient
What is its efficiency? Is there a theoretical calculation to estimate this?

[Anonymous No.7230875]

>tfw Alpha Centauri is reality

Chairman Yang, I will serve thy.

[Anonymous No.7230876]

Remember that time we found neutrinos travelling faster than the speed of light?

Same thing. Let's wait one month and see how stupid we end up looking.

[Anonymous No.7230878]

>>7230868

The Chinese will be like the real life aliens of the earth if this happens. They already look like the evolutionary step of greys with their slanted eyes. This isn't a coincidence.

*Puts on tinfoil hat*

[Anonymous No.7230884]

>>7230815
stop filling the board with this crap

[Anonymous No.7230888]

>>7230839
>plugging away that warp drive bullshit that has no basis except some UFO fag's clickbait article
>significantly better
I kekked.

[Anonymous No.7230898]

>>7230854
>magnitude of 10 increase in operational life
>magnitude of 10 decrease in weight
god damn this is incredible.

[Anonymous No.7230900]

>>7230873
3N of thrust per 1W supplied is amazingly efficient (for a theoretical, 2nd generation engine). Think how much energy is wasted by a common car engine. For gasoline engines over 70% of energy supplied is lost to heat; of the total energy supplied to the car from the engine something on the order of only 1% or 2% actually go straight to propelling the vehicle forward due to moving parts, friction, etc.

The EmDrive has no moving parts. The thrust comes straight out of the damn thing. There is, potentially, almost zero losses to the energy required to move it forward, other than atmospheric friction on the moving vehicle.

[Anonymous No.7230904]

>>7230873
I think it has to do with the tapering ratio of the drive, the Q value of the materials that they are using, the efficiency of the microwave. idk man.

[Anonymous No.7230905]

>>7230876
This EMDrive made the news months ago and it resurfaced because its apparently working. I agree we need to just wait and test it more but what other choice do we have anyways than to sit here and discuss it.

[Anonymous No.7230909]

Okay so the initial reason this was discredited because of violating momentum conservation.

Is that not the case now? How do we not know definitively if it does or not?

[Anonymous No.7230910]

>>7230900

Will it accelerate akin to how the tesla cars go from 0 to 60 in like 3 seconds?

[Anonymous No.7230912]

>>7230873
This article on it is quite comprehensive.
>http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

>At 100 kiloWatts the prediction is ~1300 Newton thrust.

A superconducting varient could be MUCH more powerful, possibly by an order of magnitude. If it works it will be completely revolutionary for almost every form of transport. I'm VERY cautiously optimistic, since the implications are on the level of flying cars and aircraft carriers for a superconducting varient.

[Anonymous No.7230915]

>>7230884
>Horse salesman
>Doesn't like technological advances
>"Why people not buying me horses anymore, arrr?"

It's okay.

[Anonymous No.7230918]

>>7230900
>>7230904

Seems like the current efficiency is 1 N/kW from the Chinese team. Dr. White states a mission to Mars would use an EMDrive with an efficiency of 0.5 - 1 N/W.

I'll wait till they fly one in space or get a 1 N/W drive on a train engine.

>>7230912

Thanks.

[Anonymous No.7230923]

>>7230915
> arrr
i dont think pirates sell horses

[Anonymous No.7230929]

>>7230909
The whole idea of this thing is to violate momentum conservation. Like similar machines purported to violate energy conservation, it will be the find of the millenium if it turns out to really work rather than being a measurement error, but the chances of that are quite slim.

[Anonymous No.7230933]

>>7230929
Also, it's worth pointing out that you can't break momentum conservation without breaking energy conservation.

[Anonymous No.7230941]

>>7230923
They sel horrrrses.

[Anonymous No.7230944]

>>7230854
wait this has the same thrust as an ion drive? for a 10th the weight and the same power consumption? daaaaayum

[Anonymous No.7230945]

>>7230910
Yes. Acceleration could be mad crazy, if they can get a second generation EmDrive scaled down. Thats really the hard part about making it work terrestrially, the second generation drives need superconductors to work.

[Anonymous No.7230947]

>yfw aliens contact us tomorrow and say we're ready to join the space council

[Anonymous No.7230950]

>>7230854
Could it not simply be causing spallation to produce the effect, which should be perfectly fine with the laws of physics? I suppose they ruled that out?

[Anonymous No.7230959]

>>7230950
Well in a way this is what one of the NASA scientist suggests...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.2220
> Reply #2238
>Have you considered the effects of breakdown, and in particular multipaction and corona generation? Multipaction breakdown events are known phenomenon on the RF radar and communication systems community. Essentially, at high RF powers you see an effect similar to arcing within your components. This arcing can occur between conductors and dielectrics or even between conductors in vacuum. Sharp edges such as welds and fasteners - particularly in a cavity resonator such as this - can cause these events. This result is damage to the interior conductor and particle generation (even in metal-only situations) as material is "burned." In this case, the metal walls and / or contaminants of your cavity would serve as the propellant. Corona / plasma can then develop from this particle release and exacerbate the situation.

[Anonymous No.7230964]

>>7230854
That diagram is bullshit. Shawyer made a mistake in the calculations and wrongly put the force on the sides of the cavity as normal to the axis not the surface. That explanation cannot work.

[Anonymous No.7230968]

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

Damn, this shit is so fantastic.


The recent hard-vacuum test really has confirmed quiet a few things and eliminated similiarily quite a few concerns with the earlier experiments.

[Anonymous No.7230972]

>>7230968
>This means that an EM drive ship mission could be designed without consideration of the every-two-year interplanetary conjunction launch windows that currently govern Earth-Mars transit missions and could help stabilize and provide more routine Mars crew rotation timetables.

>This same elimination of inter-planetary conjunction-enabled launch windows would be applied to crewed missions to the outer planets as well.

>For such a mission, such as a crewed flight to the outer planets – specifically, a Titan/Enceladus mission at Saturn – an EM Drive would allow for a 9-month transit period from Earth to Saturn, a 6-month in-situ mission at Titan, another 6-month in-situ mission at Enceladus, and a 9-month return trip to Earth. This would result in a total mission duration of just 32 months.

>However, EM drive applications are not limited to Mars or outer solar system targets.

>Applications of this technology in deep space missions have already received conceptual outlines.

>In particular, the Alpha Centauri system, the closest star system to our solar system at just 4.3 lights year’s distance, received specific mention as a potential mission destination.

>Mr. Joosten and Dr. White stated that “a one-way, non-decelerating trip to Alpha Centauri under a constant one milli-g acceleration” from an EM drive would result in an arrival speed of 9.4 percent the speed of light and result in a total transit time from Earth to Alpha Centauri of just 92 years.

>However, if the intentions of such a mission were to perform in-situ observations and experiments in the Alpha Centauri system, then deceleration would be needed.

>This added component would result in a 130-year transit time from Earth to Alpha Centauri – which is still a significant improvement over the multi-thousand year timetable such a mission would take using current chemical propulsion technology.

[Anonymous No.7230980]

>>7230945

How are people meant to survive such bursts of acceleration? They'll have to come up with artificial gravity for space ships..

[Anonymous No.7230984]

>>7230972
Sounds like a good idea for a generation-ark with its own gravity field.

Asteroids could be used and hollowed out for this.

130 years are basically nothing, especially if combined with a prospective cryo-sleep.

[Anonymous No.7230987]

BASED EMDRIVE

EMDRIVE IS SAVIOR OF MANKIND

EMDRIVE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE WORLD

[Anonymous No.7230992]

>>7230972
>Get a result you don't understand.
>immediately draw up plans for a spaceship.

This is shitty science. People criticised BICEP2 for holding a press conference before the paper was reviewed, these people are writing star trek fanfiction when they should actually be working to convince the world of science there results aren't crap long before that.

[Anonymous No.7230996]

There are those that said this day would never come. what have THEY to say now.

fucking "hurr durr intersteller travel is never going to happen".

faggots eating their skeptical ass words.

[Anonymous No.7230997]

>>7230992
Yeah, the article itself is terrible. It blew past the recent findings to fellate itself over a bunch of best case scenarios.

[Anonymous No.7231001]

>>7230996
Humanity is destined for greatness. There's nothing to stop us now, even if we have to sail the stars on a glitch of physics.

[Anonymous No.7231002]

>>7230984
>Asteroids could be used and hollowed out for this.

so key

[Anonymous No.7231006]

>>7230984

What about if the space ship gets hit by comets or debris travelling at such high speeds? I'm delighted to hear though that my future offspring might get the chance of witnessing interstellar travel.

[Anonymous No.7231010]

>>7231006

what percentage of c could a emdrive space ship reach if it was being powered by a gigantic fusion reactor?

[Anonymous No.7231011]

>>7230959
This seems like the most compelling case to me as there doesn't seem to be sufficient refutation. It doesn't necessarily kill the drive though, seemingly, just shows that it is using the copper case as fuel (and thus presumably isn't going on any 130 year interstellar trips any time soon)

[Anonymous No.7231013]

This entire thread.

[Citation Needed]

[Anonymous No.7231014]

>>7231011
I just realized I really overused the word seem.

[Anonymous No.7231017]

>>7230997
It's not just the article, they should not be saying things like this to the press. Everyone knows very few journalists are scientifically literate and will sensationalise a story like this, everyone remembers FTL neutrinos (which had an thread like this on /sci/). Instead of taking caution they are actively exploiting this.

[Anonymous No.7231021]

>>7231011
Can't they simply find the change in mass of their rig?

After reading through the NASA thread, it seems like they did not actually account for it.

[Anonymous No.7231027]

>>7230815
So it's showing signs of a low energy Alcubierre Drive?

[Anonymous No.7231048]

>>7231014
very unseemly of you, old boy

[Anonymous No.7231071]

Is the thrust in millinewtons or micronewtons? I've heard both.

[Anonymous No.7231085]

>>7231027
no

[Anonymous No.7231086]

>>7231071
no citation but they're suggesting it might be usable for VTOL on planes after improved iterations so I would guess milli if that isn't bullshit

[Anonymous No.7231087]

>>7231071
micronewtons and descending
https://plus.google.com/117663015413546257905/posts/WfFtJ8bYVya

[Anonymous No.7231088]

>>7231006
>What about if the space ship gets hit by comets or debris travelling at such high speeds
you're overestimating the density of such objects, especially in interstellar space. The chances of hitting one are astronomically small

[Anonymous No.7231090]

>>7230815
>meme inventions

[Anonymous No.7231105]

Source on the purported vacuum test?

[Anonymous No.7231119]

>>7231105
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

doesn't seem to link the actual paper

[Anonymous No.7231122]

>>7231119
Yeah, that's worthless.

[Anonymous No.7231125]

>>7231122
maybe they're afraid to publish it

[Anonymous No.7231130]

>>7231088

>astronomically

i c what u did thar

[Anonymous No.7231133]

>>7231125
As far as I can tell, idiots are reporting on a forum thread. I guess it drives clicks, but at some point what you are doing is no longer journalism.

[Anonymous No.7231139]

Crackpot theory incoming:

It seems to me that, if these results are legitimate and have a non-trivial explanation, the effects we see from the experiment, both the thrust and the interference patterns, could be explained by dark energy. The most popular model for dark energy is that of a fluid with negative pressure and constant density throughout the vacuum of space. If the EmDrive somehow creates a gradient in the dark energy across the device, this would cause the dark energy "fluid" to "flow" through it.

Since dark energy only interacts through gravity, it can easily exit through the material while exerting a gravitational force on the EmDrive, giving it thrust. This "fluid" exiting the boundaries of the drive allows for conservation laws to be satisfied, and the fact that this is a gravitational interaction would explain the interferometer readings, as gravity acts by causing a curvature in spacetime, or in other words, "warps" it.

This is also possibly compatible with the idea of the EmDrive interacting with the quantum vacuum energy, since there are some reasonable hypothetical connections between dark energy and the QVE. Specifically, dark energy could be a result or a component of the QVE (see: http://www.space.com/25238-dark-energy-quantum-vacuum-theory.html & http://www.calphysics.org/zpe.html).). I just dug these links up, so they might not be very reliable.

[Anonymous No.7231141]

>>7231133
It's NASA.

Attention = Money, and they're lacking in money.

[Anonymous No.7231186]

Apparently the chinese team who did this work hasn't been seen in public after their paper was published. I wonder if their research went top secret and is being tested on the 2016 launch.

[Anonymous No.7231187]

>>7230909
If one had no way of perceiving water, then a propeller would be violating conservation of momentum

I think Dr. White at NASA Aimes is on to something with his "quantum vacuum plasma" virtual particle interaction theory

[Anonymous No.7231193]

>>7231186
Paul March here, they were probably captured by the same aliens who've been chasing us for months.

[Anonymous No.7231199]

>>7230909
I heard someone over at /r/physics talk about some field carrying the momentum to conserve it. But I have no idea on this

[Anonymous No.7231205]

>>7231186
source?

[Anonymous No.7231216]

So I'm reading through the actual source thread right now, here's what I have gathered so far

>It works in a vacuum
>We don't know how or why it works
>Confirmed by multiple experiments in different countries
>It seemingly violates Newton's 3rd law
>NASA has gone completely silent about it and refuses to talk about that project

[Anonymous No.7231220]

>>7231216
what would they even have to hide?

they didn't invent it

[Anonymous No.7231223]

>>7231139
And now that I think of it, this would just be incompressible flow of a fluid through a nozzle, except the fluid is dark energy. The flow would be toward the smaller end of the nozzle, as in a conventional nozzle. Except in this case, the flow is in the same direction as the resulting thrust, which is reasonable since dark energy is modeled with a negative pressure. The fact that it pushes in the direction of flow is consistent with the behavior of dark energy in cosmology (dark energy causes the universe to expand outward while maintaining a constant density, which can be seen as an incompressible flow of sorts, pushing distant galaxies along with it).

/crackpottedness

[Anonymous No.7231224]

>>7231220
Paul March here, we need to keep this technology out of the hands of rogue states. It's already bad enough the Chinese are ahead.

[Anonymous No.7231225]

>>7231220

I just got the weirdest boner

[Anonymous No.7231227]

There have been no further reports from NASA on the experiments that were supposed to be replicated at their other centers (JPL and Glenn) or at John Hopkins University. Actually @wembley, who is an aerospace technology reporter, reports that it is his opinion that NASA has a "news blackout" on this matter, and China's Juan Yang is not saying much either. The Chinese seem to be much further along than NASA, as they reported much greater thrust and they have conducted more thorough experiments (including being the first to numerically report the effects of temperature and temperature gradients with thermocouples embedded in the metal).

[Anonymous No.7231234]

>>7231227
When the actual result is zero, the smaller your result is, the further along you are.

[Anonymous No.7231236]

holy shit, this will litereally be a bigger step for humanity than the wheel.

This will finally open the door to space travel.

Hurry up USA, if China gets this they will overtake and become the biggest power in the world.

[Anonymous No.7231237]

>>7231234
But it's not a zero result

You have 3 independent laboratories, each one of them confirming the thrust in multiple experiments


It's not a discussion "IF" it works, it's a discussion about "HOW" it works

[Anonymous No.7231247]

>>7231237
To expand on that, there are at least two different NASA laboratories involved and they have confirmed beyond doubt that it is generating thrust, they just don't understand how or why yet

[Anonymous No.7231257]

>>7231237
But they didn't confirm each other, they got wildly different results.

[Anonymous No.7231259]

>>7231247
Paul March here, there are in fact 29 labs involved now.

[Anonymous No.7231264]

Paul March here, from this >>7231259 Paul March's future

STOP NOW
STOP TALKING ABOUT IT
JUST FORGET ABOUT IT AND DONT PURSUE
DO NOT PURSUE THIS LINE OF DISCUSSION
IT NEVER HAPPENED
THIS IS IN YOUR BEST INTEREST

[Anonymous No.7231265]

>>7231257
They didn't each other because they were using different setups, with different inputs and different cone shapes. The theoretical model lines up with the results of those experiments using different cone shapes

They all confirmed that EM Drives work

Not sure how the mainstream media somehow read "warp drives" into that though

What we have now is a drive that generates thrust without needing a propellant and without expelling anything. So you could have spacetravel powered by a nuclear reactor (that lasts a long fucking time) instead of having to burn fuel

[Anonymous No.7231270]

>>7231265
Paul March here, the aliens have explained the correct theoretical model now. You should ignore the old explanations.

[Anonymous No.7231277]

This is paul march, i did not make those previous comments in this thread, please disregard what i said.

[Anonymous No.7231283]

>>7231087
This is awesome.

[Anonymous No.7231284]

>>7231234
>they can control the thrust at will
>sustained for almost a minute
>physically actually moved using said thrust

>>actual result is zero

[Anonymous No.7231288]

But what if it's just the metal the thing is made of being ejected from the back plate? That's what I'm guessing is actually going on.

[Anonymous No.7231289]

>>7231284
Actual result means when they have eliminated the forces between the test object and the environment, which they obviously haven't.

[Anonymous No.7231293]

BASED ZEPHRAM COCHRANE

[Anonymous No.7231296]

>>7231289
If that was the actual cause you wouldn't be able to reverse the thrust simply by changing the resonant mode and/or the placement of the dielectric puck

[Anonymous No.7231298]

>>7231296
Why not? EM forces or stuff being ejected from the test object or air currents could all be changed by that.

[Anonymous No.7231350]

>>7230878

>he doesnt know that those "slanted eyes" are just adaption to snow blindness
>humans lived during the ice age, humans crossed ice bridge between asia to NA thats why native indians also have slant eyes

[Anonymous No.7231707]

For all of those who are asking why they didn't read the paper, consider that science in progess is often very messy, and the mainstream media doesn't like messy, they like sensationalism and star trek.

However on the bright side, this 'messy science' is actually generating extraordinary results, and the mainstream media attantion is generating more funding, it's a win-win.

A guy on reddit compiled close to everything we know on the em drive and seperated the facts and theories on it. By the way, from what I can gather, the 'cannae drive' is just a rip off of the em drive by Guido Fetta, but we can't be sure that it's not the other way around. Nevertheless, they both seem to work.

>http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/

Source list (this is the top comment on the post, he will add more to it as he finds more info.):

http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/cqua3ti

For some reason 4chan thought that the millions of links was spam, so i had to post this instead.

[Anonymous No.7231712]

>>7230854
>doesn't change its mass
>thrust

Why do these scientifically illiterate people think they have the authority to write about a topic as complex as the EM drive?

[Anonymous No.7231718]

>>7231712
The scientifically illiterate always use things that we don't quite understand yet to insert their own theories, and believe them. See 'God of the gaps' and all this quantum soul new-age bullshit for examples.

[Anonymous No.7231720]

>mfw first man on mars in 2020
>first man on a planet in another star system in 2060

[Anonymous No.7231721]

>>7231712
>We had to dream up Dark Matter and Dark Energy to explain why General Relativity does not accurately describe the motion of the universe beyond our Solar System and we still haven't found proof that it actually exists
>The Standard Model is completely incapable of describing gravitation
>We have no explanation for the origin of Inertia
>Implying that established theory is the final word for all science, regardless of valid data that offers contradiction to theory

[Anonymous No.7231723]

Is there actually a proper explanation of how this is supposed to work? I have a masters in physics.

[Anonymous No.7231724]

>>7231723
Fast thing goes in, fast thing goes out.

[Anonymous No.7231726]

>>7231723
as stated by NASA Eagleworks scientist Harold White:
[T]he EM Drive’s thrust was due to the Quantum Vacuum (the quantum state with the lowest possible energy) behaving like propellant ions behave in a MagnetoHydroDynamics drive (a method electrifying propellant and then directing it with magnetic fields to push a spacecraft in the opposite direction) for spacecraft propulsion. The NASASpaceflight.com group has given consideration to whether the experimental measurements of thrust force were the result of an artifact. Despite considerable effort within the NASASpaceflight.com forum to dismiss the reported thrust as an artifact, the EM Drive results have yet to be falsified. After consistent reports of thrust measurements from EM Drive experiments in the US, UK, and China – at thrust levels several thousand times in excess of a photon rocket, and now under hard vacuum conditions – the question of where the thrust is coming from deserves serious inquiry.

[Anonymous No.7231729]

>>7231721
>General Relativity does not accurately describe the motion of the universe beyond our Solar System
Which you cannot know. Two models went into describing the dynamics of galaxies, GR and light/mass ratios. It doesn't tell you which is wrong.

>still haven't found proof that it actually exists
Proof doesn't exist in science. Dark matter however has passed 4 major tests which didn't exist in its day.

[Anonymous No.7231730]

>>7231721
There is no doubt that dark matter or dark energy exist.
The standard model is not a complete picture, hence "standard".
If you mean inertial mass, it's identical to gravitational mass.

Not sure what any of that has to do with my post though, because the definition of thrust is <span class="math">\mathbf{T}=\mathbf{v}\frac{dm}{dt} [/spoiler] and no propellant means <span class="math">\mathbf{T}=\mathbf{0}\[/spoiler].

[Anonymous No.7231731]

>>7231236


EMDRIVE IS LOVE
EMDRIVE IS LIFE

[Anonymous No.7231733]

>duct-tape a microwave to a tube
>start up the machine
>fire a laser pointer through the tube
>FASTER THAN LIGHT, GUYS

[Anonymous No.7231734]

>>7231730
>Not sure what any of that has to do with my post though, because the definition of thrust is T=vdtdm and no propellant means T=0 .

The point I was trying to make was that our knowledge of the universe is sufficiently incomplete that a more complete understanding could render propulsion based on the expulsion of reaction mass obsolete. Based on everything we know, that's not possible, but we don't know everything there is to know.

[Anonymous No.7231735]

>>7230854
>That fucking diagram

[Anonymous No.7231738]

>>7231726
Thanks, very odd though.

[Anonymous No.7231756]

Answer should be actually pretty simple: Radiation pressure.

[Anonymous No.7231758]

>>7231735
This actually works, but only if you switch out the engine for an American on a bike, while the magnet suspended before him is a burger.

[Anonymous No.7231763]

>>7231756
Orders of magnitude too strong for that.
I'm wagering half my money on "experimental error" and the other half on "charlatanry"

[Anonymous No.7231773]

they think they can increase efficiency by a million orders of magnitude if they use a superconducting cavity - battery powered jetpack, here i come!

this looks literally like all those anti gravity drives from scifi shows.

[Anonymous No.7231774]

>>7231763
Not even New Scientist is reporting this. It's bogus.

[Anonymous No.7231793]

A century ago, this was real (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_ray))

Now we have another case of bullshit.

[Anonymous No.7231797]

>>7231793
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_drive
More fitting example

[Anonymous No.7231839]

>>7231139
>>7231223
Maybe, plus you pretty much resurrected another form of aether which causes massive butthurt to spergs who think the science is settled.

[Anonymous No.7231840]

>>7231793
>>7231797
>No fun allow!

[Anonymous No.7231841]

>>7231793
>>7231797
Congrats, you have firmly taken an opinion from a position of ignorance.

[Anonymous No.7231842]

>>7231730
>If you mean inertial mass, it's identical to gravitational mass.
proof ?

[Anonymous No.7231847]

>>7231842
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle#Tests_of_the_weak_equivalence_principle

[Anonymous No.7231856]

Mark my words, the thing is consuming the metal it's made of and ejecting the particles.

[Anonymous No.7231861]

>>7230968
.com

Fake

[Anonymous No.7231870]

>>7231841
>position of ignorance
Sure thing buddy, why don't you go and get yourself some FTL neutrinos too?

[Anonymous No.7232142]

>>7231861

lurk more

[Anonymous No.7232153]

forming a space pirate team looking for more
pm with spacescore

[Anonymous No.7232177]

I'm trying to not be excited by this, but it's getting hard.

I bet that the second I actually think this may be true it will all be proven false and it was just some rounding error or something

[Anonymous No.7232186]

I just don't understand how you can generate thrust from nothing, it defies physics, something is fishy here

[Anonymous No.7232187]

>>7232186

As someone above suggested, perhaps it is indeed ejecting something to create thrust, but that something is (as yet) imperceptible and also interacts weakly or not at all with normal matter. i.e. dark matter.

[Anonymous No.7232192]

Couldn't the electrons on the metal be absorbing the photons and scattering lower frequency one's? Do this thing even reflect radiation back?

[Anonymous No.7232198]

>>7230815
NASA has removed the article from their Glenn Research Center Database, its bullshit.

[Anonymous No.7232220]

So if nothing is ejected, and provided it can scale in strength, do we have repulsar lifts? By that I mean there is no need for external 'vents' and that the thrust producer can be inside a vehicle.

[Anonymous No.7232240]

>Shawyer's critics say according to the law of conservation of momentum, his theory cannot work as in order for a thruster to be propelled forwards, something must be pushed out of the back of it in the opposite direction.
>However, EmDrive does preserve the conservation of momentum and energy – to put it simply, electricity converts into microwaves within the cavity that push against the inside of the device, causing the thruster to accelerate in the opposite direction.
This "Technology Reporter" is so stupid it drives me mad. I bet she's a hambeast and a feminits.

[Anonymous No.7232249]

>>7232240
That doesn't even make sense. kek

Also fuck these stupid steak captchas so hard

[Anonymous No.7232308]

>>7232198

Or it has gone top secret, we don't know.

[Anonymous No.7232310]

Why don't they just stick this thing inside a gold-plated cylindrical box and run it off battery power?

[Anonymous No.7232316]

>>7231733
>>7231735
i know it seems like bullshit but its working and no one knows why

personally im scared and also excited.

[Anonymous No.7232327]

>>7232316
>its working
Where're some respectable sources? In case of the fucking faster-than-light neutrinos there was at least an article.

[Anonymous No.7232334]

>>7232327
Not her, but the only real publications I'm aware of are
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2014-4029
http://iopscience.iop.org/1674-1056/22/5/050301

There are claims of a recent positive test in vacuum, but so far only substantiated by forum posts.

[Anonymous No.7232361]

>>7232220
It depends what kind of thrust to weight ratio we can end up with. As it is now it seems to make ion drives obsolete.

[Anonymous No.7232376]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmfPNuhy0mc

The creator seems to think generation two emdrives will be able to replace in atmosphere jet engines etc.

[Anonymous No.7232379]

>>7232220
The obvious application is unlimited free energy.

[Anonymous No.7232388]

>>7232379
Doesn't it require electricity, though?

[Anonymous No.7232391]

>>7232379
Nice buzzwords. Free energy is an oxymoron.

[Anonymous No.7232392]

>>7232388
Yes, but if it's moving fast enough, the thrust it's purported to have adds more kinetic energy than electricity put in.

[Anonymous No.7232396]

>>7232392
I don't think it would work.

[Anonymous No.7232398]

>>7231011
Mate, the engine is effectively a microwave oven, just take like 1500 spares and set the engine on some sticks way out in front of and behind the actual ship.

[Anonymous No.7232408]

muh conservation laws

[Anonymous No.7232410]

>>7232396
I don't think it works either.

[Anonymous No.7232412]

>>7232408
You're not alone.

[Anonymous No.7232424]

>>7232410
*don't think EmDrive works
In case that wasn't clear.

[Anonymous No.7232427]

Are links legit?
It's not some elaborate trolling or anything?

If this is real then we're on the verge of a new steam engine - if not the wheel v2.0. The implications are phenomenal.

[Anonymous No.7232430]

>>7232427
>If this is real

[Anonymous No.7232435]

>>7232427
It's suspicious as fuck. I don't believe it at all.

[Anonymous No.7232438]

>>7232430
There's calculations that suggest you can make a perpeetum mobile with the EM drive if it works

[Anonymous No.7232443]

so wait
could this spacetime warping be scaled up and inverted? so as to encapsulate a spacecraft..?

it sounds like no, since the phenomenon only occurs inside the cone...right?

>i fucking love new physics

[Anonymous No.7232446]

>>7231773
wait
three million times more thrust for the same power?

so like, several tens of newtons off only 700 watts?

[Anonymous No.7232447]

>>7232443
yeah bro that's what the chinese are doing
they're scaling it up to send a team of astronauts on a round trip to jupiter

[Anonymous No.7232460]

So far, what's the most accepted theory that explains the confirmed thrust of the drive?

[Anonymous No.7232463]

>>7232443
>>7232427
>>7232446
If they continue to show that it works and not some lame kick in the balls mundane effect, then we're on the cusp of an entirely new reality.

If this shit works, everything is going to change. For one thing "hard science fiction" is going to look as quaint as aerial battleships.

[Anonymous No.7232469]

>>7232460

scam

[Anonymous No.7232474]

>>7232469

You can reproduce the experiment yourself, it's not a scam. Not sure if it'll be scalable though.

[Anonymous No.7232475]

>>7232469
So 3 different laboratories, one in the USA, one in Europe, one in China, teamed up to for a hoax? How are they earning money with this?

What about the guys who built this thing at home?

[Anonymous No.7232486]

>>7232474
>Not sure if it'll be scalable though

The chinese drive already generated enough thrust to keep the ISS in orbit

[Anonymous No.7232488]

oh look it's
>cold fusion in a sink
again

[Anonymous No.7232492]

>>7232486

They CLAIM that. I'd like NASA to confirm it.

[Anonymous No.7232509]

>>7232460
Anybody?

How and why is it moving? Are there valid theories that don't violate established fundamentals?

[Anonymous No.7232510]

>>7232475
My guess is the thing is leaking air very slowly when turned on, so it looks like it has thrust, because it does. Probably a design flaw that is inherent to the device itself, so it happens in every experiment.

And we have yet to see the paper about the vacuum test.

[Anonymous No.7232514]

>>7232510
>My guess is the thing is leaking air very slowly when turned on


Wouldn't that inevitably lead to a slow decrease in thrust produced?

The measured thrust was pretty much constant over long periods with no variations, proportional to the input power

[Anonymous No.7232515]

>>7232509
No.

[Anonymous No.7232521]

>>7230815
They do NOT claim, that they have invented warp drive. The EMDRIVE was tested in the same testing rooms, as the warp drive was tested, but the warp drive never worked.

[Anonymous No.7232523]

>>7232509
There were some that I saw but I forgot to save the explanations. Sorry bud.

[Anonymous No.7232527]

>>7232521
I think people get confused because NASA actually measured spacetime being warped inside the EM Drive, but they didn't want to make any comment on that because they dunno

[Anonymous No.7232529]

>>7232509

They were extremely technical, something about the quantum vacuum.

[Anonymous No.7232534]

>>7230854
#blacklivesmatter
#fuckscience

[Anonymous No.7232548]

Does anyone know if the experiment considered the possibility that a reaction force is being exerted on the RF generator itself, or at least controlled for it, thus balancing the forces and conserving momentum (and resulting in no net thrust on the entire device)?

[Anonymous No.7232552]

>>7231773
>88milinewtons
>a million orders of magnitude

that's more thrust than a lot of things in the universe
for 700 watts

are you sure you got the numbers right?

[Anonymous No.7232558]

>>7232509
the quick explanation by the guy who headed the project, harold white

>in this very specific instance, the microwaves are forcing the quantum vacuum (the lowest energy state of the quantum field) to act like ions propelled out of an ion engine

[Anonymous No.7232560]

>>7232527
but they did that in air and air gets hot, they didn't warp space, they just heated up air.

[Anonymous No.7232562]

>>7232560
One possible explanation for the optical path length change is that it is due to refraction of the air. The NASA team examined this possibility and concluded that it is not likely that the measured change is due to transient air heating because the experiment’s visibility threshold is forty times larger than the calculated effect from air considering atmospheric heating.

[Anonymous No.7232565]

>>7232558
So it actually is moving via expulsion?

like

any other thruster in the world?

[Anonymous No.7232566]

>>7232562
did they do the interferometer test in a vacuum yet?

if they see the time of flight discrepancy within a vacuum...we're in the weird part of physics

[Anonymous No.7232568]

>>7232566
Not yet, they plan on doing that though

[Anonymous No.7232569]

>>7232565
yes, but somehow harnessing and "directing" the quantum vacuum doesn't make sense, specially at these extremely low energies

[Anonymous No.7232571]

>>7232509
I think my hypothesis that it is due to dark energy, that there IS something leaving the system in order to conserve momentum, but it only interacts with matter through gravity, does not violate any established fundamentals and could also explain the detected interference pattern from the interferometer.

[Anonymous No.7232573]

>>7232509
Other than commonplace theories like evaporating metal, no. Conservation of momentum isn't something you can get around with theoretical cleverness.

[Anonymous No.7232581]

I'd be more worried about momentum conservation than any other thing. What if this thing is real and does not obey the conservation laws? What if, /sci/? I-Is it the end?

[Anonymous No.7232584]

>>7232581
it probably doesnt, the real question becomes "what the hell is generating the force"?

once they scale it up it'll be easier to detect.

[Anonymous No.7232585]

>>7231856
If you've thought of that, I think it's fair to assume NASA have as well

With any luck they've already discounted that possibility, or it'll be an hero time when people find out

[Anonymous No.7232587]

>>7232565
The explanation is bullshit. The quantum vacuum isn't a thing. The thing is various quantum fields such as the electromagnetic field, and the vacuum is the ground state of those fields. It's certainly possible to transfer momentum to the electromagnetic field, but that just means emitting EM radiation. To clarify the terminology, emitting EM radiation changes the electromagnetic field from the state called "vacuum" to another state containing EM radiation. But emitting EM radiation would produce far less thrust than they're claiming, so that's not what's going on.

[Anonymous No.7232588]

>>7232571
But what if you invert the polarity of the flux condensator

[Anonymous No.7232590]

>>7232585
We're talking about a team that publishes physics-defying results in internet forums. You can't imbue them with the credibility of NASA at large.

[Anonymous No.7232594]

>>7232590
That's not what happened you gigantic mongoloid

The discussion about EM Drives was had been happening for years, the NASA guy just chimed in since he was contacted by members of said forums because they were curious to see their results

[Anonymous No.7232602]

>>7232588
>implying dark energy is sci-fi technobabble

[Anonymous No.7232613]

>>7232571
You still have to explain how muh dark energy is being propelled with fucking microwaves. This would mean the microwaves inside the cavity are somehow causing the dark energy to move.

[Anonymous No.7232626]

>>7232475
What's the European one? One run by the inventor? That's likely to be a hoax. The Chinese and US results aren't even close to agreement.

[Anonymous No.7232629]

>>7232594
>that's not what happened
>repeats exactly what I just said

[Anonymous No.7232632]

>>7232626
>china tests the drive and it still works
>china increases the thrust numbers to make it look like their version is better
It really wouldn't surprise me if the thing worked and china was just increasing the thrust numbers to fuck with us. I would trust our numbers much more than chinas right now to be perfectly honest with you.

[Anonymous No.7232641]

>>7232613
Yeah, that's the idea. It would require more testing and theory development; that's how the scientific process works.

[Anonymous No.7232649]

>>7230854
According to that explanation any conical pressure chamber will propel too...

[Anonymous No.7232650]

>>7232632
That would be dumb, it's an earth-shattering result no matter what the numbers are. And we can rule that scenario out because if the device produced thrust similar to the NASA results, the Chinese shouldn't even have been able to measure it given the sort of precision they're claiming. If they were lying about their precision, they wouldn't be inflating their numbers, they would be making themselves look worse.

[Anonymous No.7232658]

http://www.libertariannews.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/AnomalousThrustProductionFromanRFTestDevice-BradyEtAl.pdf

here's the original paper from last year by the way, lots of details

>reading how thorough the testing was and how consistent the results were
>what the FUCK is happening?

[Anonymous No.7232662]

>>7232641
So this is the point where we just start making shit up almost in an attempt to figure out whats going on.

Try and find a hydrodynamics equivalent to forcing water to move using a perpendicularly mounted microwave(or some other device) and a cone shaped object. I've always found it interesting that hydrodynamics and EM have so many similarities. The models for a body of water are similar to the models of free space for some reason.

[Anonymous No.7232669]

>>7232650
Your logic on why china wouldn't lie about this is horrendous.

>it's an earth-shattering result no matter what the numbers are.
trust = 0N, sure is earth shattering in here.

>And we can rule that scenario out because if the device produced thrust similar to the NASA results, the Chinese shouldn't even have been able to measure it given the sort of precision they're claiming.
lol? are you saying they don't have the lab equipment capable of measuring millinewton thrust? you're fucking retarded

>If they were lying about their precision, they wouldn't be inflating their numbers, they would be making themselves look worse.
>if they're lying about one thing that means they CANT lie about something else
retardation the post

[Anonymous No.7232670]

>>7232658
>thorough
There are no errors. It's not fit for a journal.

[Anonymous No.7232678]

>>7232669
>trust = 0N, sure is earth shattering in here.
Any non-zero result is earth-shattering, you know what I meant.

>lol? are you saying they don't have the lab equipment capable of measuring millinewton thrust?
NASA reportes *micronewtons* of thrust. Not millinewtons.

[Anonymous No.7232683]

>>7232650
Those x-axis and y-axis on those charts are pretty troll.

[Anonymous No.7232687]

>>7232678
>NASA reportes *micronewtons* of thrust. Not millinewtons.
>china lying about numbers to make theirs seem better
could still go either way bud. china should have the lab equipment to measure micronewtons of thrust as well there is no issue here.

[Anonymous No.7232695]

>publish "amazing" results that defy physics
>get funded to carry out further experiments
>meanwhile keep funding to use for proper experiments
>oh no it was just a measurement anomaly, woops sorry guys

[Anonymous No.7232696]

>>7232662
The fluid analogy might work in this case because when dark energy is used to explain the cosmological constant, Einstein's field equation can be represented with a modified energy-momentum tensor with an extra term arising from dark energy modeled as an ideal fluid with negative pressure (meaning it tends to drive things apart from each other). So, one popular model for dark energy suggests that it behaves like a fluid.

[Anonymous No.7232700]

>>7232687
If they had a nonzero result, publishing a made-up result instead of the actual one would just cost them their priority in the history books. Basically the "exaggeration" theory amounts to
>Chinese did an experiment
>got an amazing result
>suppressed the result
>published a bogus paper about an experiment that never happened

[Anonymous No.7232704]

>>7232700
You don't understand china very well. They don't care about your version of history when they make up their own lel.

[Anonymous No.7232757]

>>7232704
Screw it shout it from the highest mountains on to the lowest pits of the internet we have discovered the EmDrive!!!!!!!@!!@@@@@

Even if this is a hoax we should probably take this as an excuse to celebrate and remember that if the "hoax" breaks down it's not our fault its the scientists fault
More publicity faster results!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.7232760]

>>7232757
>doesnt understand my argument
>gets butt flustered and spews gibberish

[Anonymous No.7232763]

>>7232696
Your confused. The cosmological constant is used to explain dark energy not the other way. The cosmological constant does not appear in the energy momentum tensor.

[Anonymous No.7232775]

>>7232760
Who are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.7232780]

>>7232763
The cosmological constant is a mathematical construct that can be physically explained by dark energy, or vice versa; it really doesn't matter. I worded it that way because the idea for a cosmological constant came first.

I never said it appeared in the energy-momentum tensor; it appears in Einstein's field equation as a constant that multiplies the metric in an extra term. The equation can be rearranged so that this extra term appears on the energy-momentum tensor side of the equation, and it can be regarded as a new part of the energy-momentum tensor (a T-bar, as it's represented in the book I'm using as a reference). Then, this new tensor term can take the form of an ideal fluid to solve the equation, as I described.

I'm using Section 4.3.4 The Cosmological Constant from "Relativity, Gravitation, and Cosmology" by Lambourne as a reference.

[Anonymous No.7232830]

IIRC something about negative mass came up in a discussion about emdrives? What happened with that?

[Anonymous No.7232839]

>>7230909
The theory is that the reaction mass is extrauniversial via quantum interactions.
>>7230815
>>7230912
>>7231086
Caution is needed. Well, Caution and funding.

We don't want to have to wiggle our ethernet cables again.

[Anonymous No.7232847]

>>7232775
Me.

[Anonymous No.7232854]

>>7230815
>accidentally invented

FWAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.7232856]

>>7230933
If the drive works: Yes you can. That's the idea of the drive. You put energy into the system and it speeds up, but it didn't have to throw stuff behind it.

[Anonymous No.7232857]

>>7232562
If I'm reading right that they've done a vacuum chamber test, 1,000 to 1 odds that they ran the interferometer in the chamber too, and the absence of confirmation on warped space time is an confirmation of absence.

But while this is blowing up places like I09, I'm not sure I trust the sources they call out. they don't feel very "official"

But on that note, the Airforce has made an announcement about their little space drone, claiming it's testing an experimental xenon station keeping thruster, and I'd bet a dollar that this highly unusual mission announcement is a cover for something else.

And even if this shit is bullpucky, we've still got the Lockheed fusion reactor and VASIMR.

Let's just put a electromagnetic payload gun on the side of the Big Island of Hawaii, and we can go to the stars even if this doesn't turn out.

[Anonymous No.7232868]

>>7230947
mfw Neil deGrasse Tyson is named the human ambassador in the council

[Anonymous No.7232869]

Let's just imagine that the emdrive works without releasing anything to accelerate, why does this matter?
Sure you accelerate more quickly with reduced mass, but is that all there is to it?
Could anybody explain the consequences of this to me?

[Anonymous No.7232874]

>>7232830
Claims were made by dubious sources that this EM drive thing was warping spacetime in the first NASA experiment (the one not in a vacuum chamber). While this could possibly be explained by the optical properties of convected air, the idea is that they run the thing in a vacuum with an interferometer, to eliminate the possibility.

If this thing actually is warping spacetime, this is a big deal, because all of the theories about doing such have equations that require negative real number solutions for the energy variables.

Something we don't know how to accomplish.

[Anonymous No.7232875]

>>7231010
Depends how long you have it running. If you left it running forever (making the assumption that you didn't ever need more fuel) you could come infinitesimaly close to c.

[Anonymous No.7232880]

>>7232856

No you can't. Because in another frame of reference, you're putting energy into the system and it slows down. Uh oh!

[Anonymous No.7232887]

>>7232869
>Could anybody explain the consequences of this to me?

Well the immediate practical consequence is that you would make space travel much, much easier. But that's rather dwarfed by the broader implications of violating conservation of momentum, which would be such a huge thing that nobody really knows what it would mean.

[Anonymous No.7232919]

>yfw the activation of the warp drive was detected by the galaxy's resident superspecies and they're going to come fuck us up before we can develop into a threat

[Anonymous No.7232925]

>>7232875
If that was possible then maybe another Voyager program could be developed with much faster probes

[Anonymous No.7232932]

>>7232887
put a copper cone in your microwave and turn it on high for 2 minutes and you'll find out. i did it; it starts to spin and go nuts, try it's cool.

[Anonymous No.7232936]

>>7232919
They aren't here yet and if they really were so advanced and predator-like, we would already be dead.

[Anonymous No.7232945]

>>7232932

[Anonymous No.7232952]

>>7231758
>American exercising for burger.
>Not bursting into tears.
There's a flaw in your schematic.

[Anonymous No.7232984]

>this
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a15323/temdrive-controversy/

[Anonymous No.7232997]

>>7232932
I did that once and it created a terrifying will-o-the-wisp. It wouldn't leave and had to move house.

[Anonymous No.7233146]

>>7232868
mfw you should go back to 9gag

[norsefat !!FzJtFo0j4ph No.7233179]

>have read pretty much all the public articles
>have read every thread on /sci/
>have read the forums
>have read the reddit page top to bottom and all the links


don't mind me, just sitting here patiently waiting for me information or speculation from anons

[Anonymous No.7233183]

>have read all the public articles (even the shit ones)
>have read all the forums
>have read all of the reddit page
>have read all of the links

just waiting for more information or speculations from anons intently

[Anonymous No.7233188]

>>7233183
>>7233179
realized you left your name and tripcode on?

[Anonymous No.7233191]

>>7233188
yeeaaahhhhh...

dun goofed....

[Anonymous No.7233204]

>>7232780
>The cosmological constant is a mathematical construct that can be physically explained by dark energy
No. I study cosmology that's not how it works. Dark energy is the name given to the source of the acceleration of the universe, that could be a cosmological constant but it could also be modified gravity. It's nonsensical to say dark energy explains the cosmological constant.

[Anonymous No.7233229]

>>7233204
Maybe I'm just wording it poorly, since I agree with what you said. Would it make more sense if I said that dark energy, according to one theory, is what determines the value of the cosmological constant, is the reason a cosmological constant exists? Anyway, you're missing the point if you're getting hung up on that part. The point is that using the cosmological constant model for dark energy implies that dark energy behaves like an ideal fluid with a negative pressure because treating it as such solves Einstein's field equation with the cosmological constant term and is consistent with observations.

[Anonymous No.7233355]

>>7231718
Eh, everyone is scientifically illiterate to begin with, the only difference is education.

[Anonymous No.7233401]

>>7231010
According to some felating, it could reach ~9.4% on a journey to alpha centauri. This is assuming they dont decelerate tho.

[Anonymous No.7233406]

>>7231735
I miss Troll Physics threads

[Anonymous No.7233414]

>>7233406

[Anonymous No.7233422]

>>7232869
>Let's just imagine that the emdrive works without releasing anything to accelerate, why does this matter?
Every method of propulsion that we have involves having something that ejects matter from behind it in order to propel itself forward. This would be the very FIRST drive to not leave anything behind like that.

[Anonymous No.7233424]

>>7232869

Because you wouldn't have to haul reaction mass all over the place. That reaction mass requires additional reaction mass to push it around, and that's why rockets are 99% fuel.

[Anonymous No.7233427]

I hope they credit the real inventor of this thing.

[Anonymous No.7233452]

This is the ends of Science.
Your equations and maths mean nothing.

This is the start of troll physics.

[Anonymous No.7233464]

>>7233414
That's a really easy to describe example of a metatroll. If internet memetics ever becomes a field of study, this needs to be in a textbook for metatrolling.

[Anonymous No.7233470]

>>7233464

Thank you. I made it myself a while ago and I am quite pleased with it.

[Anonymous No.7233479]

>>7232984
>this
this

[Anonymous No.7233481]

>>7233422
false, what about that one thing with the magnets and the photons on the foil? it really works too

[Anonymous No.7233555]

>>7232316
>personally im scared and also excited.
If you think this works (you shouldn't) you fucking should be scared.
Reactionless thruster + Fission Reactor + time = easy relativistic kill weapon. There, l handily solved the Fermi paradox.
Where are all the aliens?
They were all killed by a single psychotic asteroid minder in a school-shooter mentality who decided to turn his EmDrive space tug into an R-bomb

[Anonymous No.7233557]

>>7230854
only 88 milinewtons? damn... I would fucking kill to see an EM drive producing 88 regular newtons

[Anonymous No.7233567]

>>7233557
If it works, give it a decade. Once we understand it, the application could be endless.

[Anonymous No.7233575]

Could this be the discovery that causes the aliens to uplift us?

[Anonymous No.7233580]

>>7233481
rail guns dont count faggot. you get one shot into space and thats it, its not really an engine that you can carry around and use whenever you want to. you still have to leave the magnets on earth as the spaceship launches forward which means im still correct.

[Anonymous No.7233582]

>>7233580
This guy is right, but on a technically correct side, the entire earth is your ejected mass.

[Anonymous No.7233595]

their experimental results seem pretty strong, what's left to debunk about it?

[Anonymous No.7233600]

>>7233595

doing it in a vaccum, aka a controlled envioment

[Anonymous No.7233605]

>>7233567
In a decade, it will be femtonewtons.

[Anonymous No.7233607]

>>7230815
>In an interview with IBTimes UK in August 2014, Shawyer said: "There was an element of not wanting to disrupt the industry, but also a total ignorance in the laws of physics. They did make life difficult for me for a while.

>""The space industry doesn't want to know about it as it's very disruptive. If the customer will spend hundreds of millions of dollars on launching a satellite, why would you want to make something that could do it cheaper?

Nothing makes me madder than holding back technology for money.

[Anonymous No.7233612]

>>7233595
Dude, that paper had almost no discussion of systematics or errors of any kind and one of the control tests (and I mean a resistive load, not the "remove the slots" test) was picking up a measurable force from the magnetic field from the testing apparatus. So as a start we're waiting for confirmation from some experiments that aren't complete jokes.

[Anonymous No.7233615]

>>7233607
Successfully trolled to be a shill.

[Anonymous No.7233616]

>>7233600
except they did that, same result

[Anonymous No.7233619]

>>7233607
>implying a satellite launching service wouldnt suck dick for this to make their costs dirt cheap and still charge a bundle

[Anonymous No.7233629]

>2500W 750mn

Ballpark figures.

Take the New Horizons' RTG. Weight 57Kg, 300W of power. We'll take 9 of them for 513kG and 2700W.

Take the weight of the New Horizon probe (478 kG) subtract, fuel, RTG, add in our RTG, brings us up to 856Kg. ( I don't know how much the EmDrive weighs mind you)

Assume Linear relationship between thrust and power, 0.3mn/W, or 810W initial thrust. Radioactive decay reduces our power source by about 5% per 4 years (1.25% per annum) (according to wikipedia anyway).

Although the concept of delta V doesn't apply per se, because we have no fuel mass, in practice as our reactor decays, our thrust decreases. A bit of dicking around in MATLAB shows that our velocity starts to level off after about the 200th year of acceleration, and is essentially static after the 400 year mark, giving us a pseudo-delta V of about: 2.3253e+06 m/s or.... 0.78% c.

Assuming a hyper-efficient spacecraft where everything that isn't RTG is weightless pushes that up to 1.3%c.

Using that, the ship ~420 years to Alpha Centauri, having reached the magical 1%c figure during the 118th year of acceleration.

It would have 3.8704e+15 J of kinetic energy, or just a hair less than a megaton of TNT.

Pretty disappointing tbh, I was expecting to at least leave the surely bonds of Newtonian mechanics and dust off the relativistic equations, but it didn't even get that far.

I know this is almost certainly bullshit but screw you I'm having fun.

[Anonymous No.7233630]

>>7232869
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equation..

Basically rockets fucking suck because they have to carry their own reaction mass with them, meaning that they are mostly ReMass by weight.

[Anonymous No.7233641]

Is it possible to get a straight answer about the theoretical reasoning behind this contraption? No one seems to be able to explain precisely how it's supposed to work.

[Anonymous No.7233642]

>>7233629
Now do the calculations for a super conducting EM drive that can produce Newtons worth of thrust. Make whatever assumptions you want.

[Anonymous No.7233646]

>>7233642
At that point I may as well start trawling wookiepedia for info and do the numbers for the millennium falcon

[Anonymous No.7233655]

>>7233641
Thats why its being discussed so much. No one can convincingly explain why it works including the inventor whose explaination is utter shit.

[Anonymous No.7233658]

>>7233655

Yeah I read his explanation, it makes zero sense. Something about momentum, as a quantum property, being transmitted at the group velocity.

Some people have speculated that the microwaves are somehow causing metal to flake off the outside of the unit and fly away, causing the force. Is this also utter shit?

[Anonymous No.7233666]

>>7233658

That would be detectable I'd imagine.

[Anonymous No.7233669]

>>7233666
If it was relativity few particles moving at a great enough speed, they may not be detected without intentionally looking for them.

[Anonymous No.7233678]

>>7233669
>m1 weight of thing before experiment
>m2 weight of thing after experiment
>If m1>m2, thing is not a magic reaction-less drive

[Anonymous No.7233682]

>>7233678
What if m2>m1?

[Anonymous No.7233687]

>>7233682
>What if m2>m1?
You touched it your disgusting unwashed hands and got some finger grease on it.
Or the magic reaction-less drive is also a magic mass creator.

[Anonymous No.7233694]

>>7233678
relatively few particles means a negligible difference in mass.

[Anonymous No.7233695]

>>7233658
Here's a good summary of what's been determined so far: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

Also:
reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/

>>7233687
You can create mass from energy, but i doubt that's the case here since that normally requires very high energy levels.

[Anonymous No.7233698]

>>7233694
Because NASA can't weight things accuratly
>>7233695
Not with 20W of RF power you can't

[Anonymous No.7233700]

>>7233694
You would be very surprised how sensitively we can measure mass these days

[Anonymous No.7233702]

>>7233698
Just because you can weigh accurately doesn't mean you can weigh the difference between a copper cone and a copper cone with a few atoms knocked off

[Anonymous No.7233713]

>>7230870
Oh shit, going to orbit is going to be dirt cheap considering the fuel can be supplied directly from the ground.

I'm super hyped and if it turns out to be shit i'm going to be all sad.

[Anonymous No.7233730]

even if this works, this thing wont enter the market for another 30 years

the elite can't risk losing oil market space

[Anonymous No.7233734]

>>7233730

Oil isn't actually used for rockets.

[Anonymous No.7233746]

>>7233734
The fuel is made by hydrocarbons but it's a very small segment of the oil market.

Also nothing prevents you from using hydrocarbons as the energy source for the EMdrive for short hauls

[Anonymous No.7233749]

sounds legit

[Anonymous No.7233806]

>>7230992
>they should actually be working to convince the world of science there results aren't crap

But they are.

[Anonymous No.7233812]

>>7233806
But they haven't, and that should be done before making claims about how this will change everything.

[Anonymous No.7233816]

>>7233812
They aren't making claims about how this -will- change everything but about how this -would- change everything.

[Anonymous No.7233837]

>>7230815
>>7230845
>>7230854
>>7230862
>>7230868
>>7230870
>>7230898
>>7230900
>>7230912
>>7230944
>>7230945
>>7230968
>>7230972
>>7230980
>>7230984
>>7230987
>>7230996
>>7231001
>>7231006
>>7231010
>>7231119
>>7231139
>>7231216
>>7231236
>>7231237
>>7231720
>>7232187
>>7232316
>>7232427
>>7232581
>>7232700
>>7233713
>>7233730
Holy fuck you faggots are retarded, I hope some of you are joking. I've seen 100 times more critical thinking in fucking Discovery.com article comments, You sound like a bunch of 20-year old Star Trek fans. How many of you faggots also believed the FTL neutrino thing? I bet half of you are the same faggots who worship Nikola Tesla. Maybe when you get older you'll have been through enough "omg we broke the reules of siense lmao!!" bullshit news to know bullshit when you see it.

This thing has all the hallmarks of a bullshit discovery:
>originally pushed by a crackpot
>researchers spend half their time speculating on how long it will take to go to Alpha Centauri with this thing
>no serious publication reports on it
>every article is about a non-NASA website with NASA in its name
>basically reporting on a forum thread
>breaks laws of physics lmao
>we don't even understand how or why it works
>basically just a magnetron in a dog's shame cone
>the whole tapered cavity explanation is some troll science level bullshit
>two different experiments disagree on thrust by like 3 orders of magnitude
other than that it all looks super legit, Star Trek anytime soon you guys

also
>experiment gives resulting thrust in micronewtons
>ITT: wow guys if we slap a RTG on those things how fast can we go to Alpha Centauri guys?

I don't normally go to /sci/ because you faggots are usually bad enough as it is, but I couldn't find much in the way of critical reporting about this whole bullshit that won't get off my Google News page. You let me down /sci/.

[Anonymous No.7233842]

>>7233806
And yet their conference proceeding contained zero errors and no detailed analysis of systematic, but it did contain s study of a Mars mission. They're priorities are screwed.

[Anonymous No.7233845]

>>7233842
Fuck that noise, space colonisation now.
If it works it works, fuck your laws of physics.

[Anonymous No.7233854]

>>7233845
The point is to establish whether or not it works.

[Anonymous No.7233857]

>>7233837

This!

/thread

[Anonymous No.7233863]

>>7233837
Agreed. the worst part is, all of this is coming from what is essentially a fansite.
Call me back when you have the same story with .gov in the adress bar

[Anonymous No.7233892]

>>7233837
How about you read the actual source instead of respouting hot opinions

That thing is generating thrust and nobody has an explanation for it.

The best computer model somebody was able to come up with were interactions with the metal vacuum chamber, but that one has been falsified

>Two experiments use different magnitudes of input power and cone shapes
>Output power is magnitudes different
>woooooow

[Anonymous No.7233923]

>make this little nigga runs in cars, motorcycles etc
>shit cost too much to average person afford
>muh petrolium

[Anonymous No.7233924]

>>7232984
That article is inaccurate as fuck. It said Sawyer claimed a possible warp bubble when it really was NASA's Dr. White.

[Anonymous No.7234264]

If this is true then how come my microwave oven doesn't float around when I heat up my hotpockets.

[Anonymous No.7234367]

>>7233837
I'd rather let the 3 independent labs as well as the people at nasa test the device and figure out if it works or not rather than spout bullshit like what you're doing. kill yourself faggot and leave /sci/ forever.

[Anonymous No.7234466]

>>7233646
superconductors only require cooling below a certain temp, which is rather easy in space

[Anonymous No.7234468]

>>7233837
so how did three independent labs come to similar conclusions? and show pretty similar thrust to power ratios?

can you explain why it works?

[Anonymous No.7234480]

>>7234466
>rather easy in space
In some ways yes, in other ways no. Everything that generates heat, the cooling pumps included, will need huge radiators to keep at workable temperature. You don't need fancy insulation though.

[Anonymous No.7234781]

>>7233923
>copper case and some electricity
>costing more than petroleum. And the engine.
kek