/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 307 KB, 2152x1392, FOR THE EMPEROR!.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon May 18 04:46:23 2015 No.7269031 [Reply] [Original]

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 Mon May 18 04:48:30 2015 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 Mon May 18 04:53:12 2015 No.7269041 https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 04:53:36 2015 No.7269042 >>7269031 Yeah it's time for me to leave /sci/.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:00:57 2015 No.7269051 >>7269031 >trash bin on few strings >created by a dropout engineer no less >scientist >emdrive Get the fuck out of here, you plebeian.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:16:21 2015 No.7269067 >>7269035 So why won't he show it thrusting in different directions? It's either hot air buoyancy or a jet stream of air leaving the vessel.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:20:45 2015 No.7269072 >>7269067 There's no fire, so where would the hot air come from? He doesn't show it thrusting in different directions because gravity points downward. You can't measure something sideways, because sideways thrust has no weight and doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:26:42 2015 No.7269082 >>7269072 >You can't measure something sideways, because sideways thrust has no weight and doesn't exist. What is this supposed to mean?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:27:25 2015 No.7269084 >>7269072 there's a microwave generator that heats up >He doesn't show it thrusting in different directions because gravity points downward. You can't measure something sideways, because sideways thrust has no weight and doesn't exist. I don't even

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:28:53 2015 No.7269085 File: 101 KB, 316x312, 88HiV.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269072 >There's no fire, so where would the hot air come from?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:29:03 2015 No.7269086 >>7269082 You can't thrust something sideways fucking retard cause gravity only points down so you can only make things go opposite gravity. Otherwise why would rockets only go up and not sideways? smh

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:31:57 2015 No.7269090 >>7269086 Oh ok, you're trolling. Sorry, I thought you were just retarded.

Anonymous Mon May 18 05:33:17 2015 No.7269092

>>7269084
>there's a microwave generator that heats up
Lol fucking bullshit don't try to act smart when you ain't no shit. Microwave generator? Is that even a word lol? What is that thing supposed to build microwaves or something idiot? Supposed to stack piles of microwaves and build some kind of tower or fuck shit? smh

>I don't even
Yeah you don't even no jack. So don't talk like you do. K? aight then.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:33:49 2015 No.7269095 >>7269072 A blood vessel in my brain exploded while reading your post.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:34:39 2015 No.7269098 >>7269090 Uhuh so when someone has a different opinion from you it's trolling huh? Go back to reddit if you want upvotes. smh..

Anonymous Mon May 18 05:37:26 2015 No.7269100

Why is there a huge metal plate under the suspending beam? How would the momentum of the photon generate 0.5 N of force (remember that the entire sun exerts only a very small force by radiating pressure over the entire earth)? Why does he not account for magnetic fields manipulating the measurement?

Seems like rubbish to me, almost as bad as those free energy chumps.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:38:22 2015 No.7269103 >>7269098 you're unfunny, please sage.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:39:45 2015 No.7269106 sigh

Anonymous Mon May 18 05:40:26 2015 No.7269107

>>7269100
Free energy is actually real. You just think it's stupid because you've been brainwashed by the media to view those people as nuts. My uncle built a free energy generator that could harvest gravity, but he told us we couldn't see it because people from some controlling corporation like Tesla or GM would probably kill him and then us.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:41:37 2015 No.7269110 >>7269100 at the end of the video he says it's to prevent microwaves from interfering with the scales

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:41:38 2015 No.7269111 File: 20 KB, 391x411, 1360153239800.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269098 >>7269092 >>7269086 >>7269072 In my day, trolling used to mean something

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:41:57 2015 No.7269112 >>7269103 And you're ignorant. I was half joking with my reddit comment, but now I'm serious. Please leave if you're not going to be open minded.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:46:10 2015 No.7269116 >>7269112 I'm not going to open my mind to woo-woo batshit crazy bullshit, thank you. Enjoy your homeopathy when you have cancer, faggot.

Anonymous Mon May 18 05:51:56 2015 No.7269132

>>7269116
Last time I checked, this is a science board and science is all about being open minded and accepting alternative theories as fact.

>woo-woo batshit
Real mature. Please explain then why rockets only go up instead of traveling sideways until they go off into space at a sideways angle so they don't have to go really high? Idiot.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:53:53 2015 No.7269135 >>7269132 >Last time I checked, this is a science board and science is all about being open minded and accepting alternative theories as fact. -1/12

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:56:57 2015 No.7269144 >>7269135 Nice meme you got there. Too bad that's all you can do, and you can't prove me wrong.

Anonymous Mon May 18 05:57:21 2015 No.7269145

>>7269132
>implying rockets cannot go horizontal
Never seen a Scud rocket or RPG? Also the reason is mostly because rockets don't have large wings so they would need to go very fast to sustain enough lift. Note you are also suggesting that forces cannot have a horizontal component, which is bollocks. If you are literally this stupid I highly advise yourself to seek professional help.

In your language so you get it better:
Fast fast rocket fly tiny wings rocket go fast fast rocket stays up.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:58:22 2015 No.7269147 >>7269132 Explain why planes have to go sideways before being even slightly able to go up.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 05:59:45 2015 No.7269149 >>7269051 so much this the signal/noise ration is ridiculously low, even Michael J Fox could produce more accurate measurements

Anonymous Mon May 18 06:02:54 2015 No.7269158

>>7269145
Let me put it in your simple minded language. Since the Earth is round, if you could create thrust horizontally, then if you were in a magic "horizontal rocket" eventually the Earth would curve away from you and you could enter space without going a foot off of the ground. Oh wait, that doesn't make sense because that would literally use no energy at all and would violate the second law of thermodynamics.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:04:11 2015 No.7269159 >>7269158 Just say you're trolling man jeez.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:04:35 2015 No.7269161 File: 25 KB, 288x288, dont_feed_the_troll.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269116 >>7269145 You're totally playing his game.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:05:04 2015 No.7269162 >>7269147 Planes are not rockets and you shouldn't compare them. Rockets create thrust and planes do not. Planes move by using air currents and NOT by using rocket engines.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:06:25 2015 No.7269165 >>7269159 Just say that you literally have no argument at this point. Anything else you could say is beyond your high school level of knowledge.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:09:17 2015 No.7269172 >>7269162 Explain then rocket planes like the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet. Checkmate! Hitler 1 - Atheists 0

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:11:15 2015 No.7269176 >>7269158 >drag force doesn't exists >gravity doesn't exist You forgot to mention microwave forces don't exist

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:13:28 2015 No.7269185 >>7269172 The Nazis did some pretty weird shit. I'm not sure how they pulled that off, but some things just shouldn't be messed with.

Anonymous Mon May 18 06:20:39 2015 No.7269197

>>7269158
You see, this wouldn't work. The moment the rocket would to into orbit the magnetic resistive oscillators inside the electromagnetic quantum resonators would immediately destabilize the electric quantum field flux dial tokens, completely rendering any decrease in entropy void. In other words, assuming your are working in curvilinear subspaces of Hilbert hotels, the solutions can only be found when superimposing horizontal Barnett forces onto the vertical vector components of the time dependent positioning functions.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:20:44 2015 No.7269198 >>7269185 Just think what would have happened if nazis won the war: today we would all be able to fly sideways!

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:39:17 2015 No.7269216 >>7269031 >Romanian >copper bucked, probably stolen >fedora as profile picture Fucking dropped.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 06:54:09 2015 No.7269230 >>7269162 >Rockets create thrust and planes do not. >planes do not. You wot?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 07:11:05 2015 No.7269253 File: 177 KB, 440x800, 1351192758920.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269176 >microwave forces This thread is failing fast

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 07:35:32 2015 No.7269282 >>7269031 Hey not bad Those motherfuckers have been busy at the forums trying to replicate shawyers work xp

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 07:57:26 2015 No.7269300 >neo /sci/

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 09:27:02 2015 No.7269426 File: 148 KB, 410x391, 1411583018037.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269197

Not OP Mon May 18 09:50:25 2015 No.7269464

>>7269144
Yeah, exactly. Everything you're posting is unfalsifiable bullshit that can't be tested. It's okay to be wrong about the magic EMdrive this guy made in his living room,maybe NASA will actually do it successfully one day, if it's worth anything, but this thread is done.

OP pls go

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 10:39:35 2015 No.7269539 File: 1.99 MB, 317x208, rocket tank.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269132 >Please explain then why rockets only go up instead of traveling sideways >rockets only go up

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 12:46:45 2015 No.7269855 File: 8 KB, 141x176, 1430331253399.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] nice thread

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 12:53:55 2015 No.7269866 http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/ Daily reminder.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:09:33 2015 No.7269899 The people who fell for this are the same people who gave money to Mars One.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:15:00 2015 No.7269908 >>7269072 >You can't measure something sideways Nice try, but your dick is still below average.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:31:14 2015 No.7269926 File: 59 KB, 519x564, 1369768226280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269031 All these threads are making me feel that I should put a magnatron into a copper nozzle. Everybody's doing it...

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:34:37 2015 No.7269937 All I want to know is whether or not my microwave has thrust

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:35:03 2015 No.7269939 >>7269926 >Everybody's doing it... Let's see how long it takes until someone kills themselves with this.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:36:45 2015 No.7269941 File: 147 KB, 400x324, 1328967201415.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269937 >my microwave has thrust Is this the birth of an epic new internet meme?

Anonymous Mon May 18 13:38:15 2015 No.7269944

>>7269941
If this things turns out to be real?

Definitely.

Imagine the communities full of microwave modders that would come into existence.

The skateboards using solar propulsion.

The hoverboard attempts.

The people trying to drive hoverboards by employing wireless electricity.

The people dieing from wireless electricity.

Anonymous Mon May 18 13:39:34 2015 No.7269948

>>7269937
Yes, an ordinary microwave oven generates thrust (via magic). This phenomenon was not discovered at any point in the half century since microwaves started being used to everything, but since low-quality internet people will believe anything if it has the word 'quantum' in it there is no reason to be skeptical.

Anonymous Mon May 18 13:45:02 2015 No.7269961
File: 125 KB, 950x593, 1430871335547.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7269944
>The skateboards using solar propulsion.
>The hoverboard attempts.
>The people trying to drive hoverboards by employing wireless electricity.
>The people dieing from wireless electricity.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:45:23 2015 No.7269962 >>7269944 >The people dieing This is all that can come of this technology Microwaved genitals

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:49:22 2015 No.7269966 >>7269962 >an entire generation of our most adventurous and intelligent minds will be cut off from ever passing on their genes

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:51:42 2015 No.7269970 >>7269937 Yes, put it on wheels, strap some wings on it and show the Concorde what supersonic flight is.

Anonymous Mon May 18 13:53:04 2015 No.7269972

>>7269944
>The mass discord that erupts when these experiments end up jamming everybody's wifi and cell phones
>The rioting and looting that transpires because people have forgotten how to exist without internet
>The feeble crackdown attempts by the FCC
>The declaration of martial law and usage of ELINT/SEAD aircraft to obliterate any households responsible for these disruptive experiments

Anonymous Mon May 18 13:54:32 2015 No.7269973

>>7269072
>https://www.reddit.com/r/EmDrive/

Has the sci reaction to this post driven it home to you that you are a moron an incapable of assessing the validity of the claims these EMDrive people are making? Is there any chance at all that have learned just how pathetic your naked shillposting is?

Probably not.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:55:07 2015 No.7269974 >>7269966 >intelligent >doesn't realize risk of microwave exposure >thinks conservation of momentum can be violated Yeah, no. Good riddance.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:57:07 2015 No.7269975 >>7269031 Jesus, /sci/. Do we really have to discredit this thing every single week? Just look in the archive, the whole thing's a hoax.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 13:59:22 2015 No.7269978 File: 93 KB, 400x600, 1417988255915.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269972 Will quantum microwaves finally bring the beta uprising?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:06:49 2015 No.7270000 File: 1.56 MB, 1280x720, arab rocket science.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269975 you probably think that cold fusion is debunked

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:09:19 2015 No.7270006 >>7270000 That's pretty rich coming from somebody who believes every loony conspiracy theory that Infowars shits out.

Anonymous Mon May 18 14:10:08 2015 No.7270007

I don't think anyone ITT realises that all of the possible explanations for this don't violate conservation of momentum. A lot of them use some exploit in special relativity.

That being said, I hope to God it works, but I'm very skeptical and will continue to be until we see those hard vacuum test results. That's when we really should get hyped or just go home. Only time will tell, this particular experiment looks dodgy as fuck.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:10:55 2015 No.7270010 File: 141 KB, 803x688, 1431233620658.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270006 >loony conspiracy theory that Infowars shits out

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:11:10 2015 No.7270013 >>7270007 They use physics that haven't been observed anywhere else in the universe and are mathematically incoherent.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:12:33 2015 No.7270016 >>7270013 Yeah, fuck string theory

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:13:35 2015 No.7270019 >>7270007 Special relativity doesn't allow violations of the conservation of momentum. Neither does general relativity or QFT or any other string wackey buzzwords Dr. Harold "memes2dank4u" White throws out.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:13:36 2015 No.7270020 >>7269072 reddit the post. fuck off with your meme drive faggot.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:15:27 2015 No.7270025 File: 151 KB, 611x427, EMdrive.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7269941

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:16:47 2015 No.7270028 >>7269937 Christ, you won't believe the game of tag I have to play with my microwave every time I wanna warm up some Hot Pockets.

Anonymous Mon May 18 14:17:34 2015 No.7270029

>>7270013
However, Paul March, an engineer at NASA Eagleworks, recently reported in NASASpaceFlight.com’s forum (on a thread now over 500,000 views) that NASA has successfully tested their EM Drive in a hard vacuum – the first time any organization has reported such a successful test.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:18:31 2015 No.7270033 >>7270025 Top kek

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:19:16 2015 No.7270035 >>7270029 Look where he is now. He hasn't posted since "science reporters" misquoted him and reported that NASA is creating a warp drive, and NASA PR isn't allowing him or White to give any interviews.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 14:31:36 2015 No.7270075 >>7270029 Well if nasaspaceflight.com says it's true, it must be!

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 15:30:22 2015 No.7270193 So is this memedrive thing real or not?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 15:37:12 2015 No.7270212 >>7270193 https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/thoughts-on-the-emdrive.812279/

Anonymous Mon May 18 15:38:58 2015 No.7270217

>>7270193
The reason we're all arguing is we don't know how or why. There have been multiple experiments that have shown positive results, one done in a hard vacuum by some guys at eagleworks, but as of yet nobody can give a concrete answer as to how ir why it works.

The short answer is, we hope it does.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 15:47:20 2015 No.7270235 File: 26 KB, 510x476, 1427334283884.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] At what frequencies are those magnetrons blasting ?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 15:49:48 2015 No.7270242 >>7270193 Most probably its equipment sensitivity issues, but It would be cool if it worked.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 15:50:32 2015 No.7270245 >not a single publication

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:01:39 2015 No.7270276 >>7270245 White had his work rejected from arXiv. That's what REAL physicists think of MemeDrive.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:03:19 2015 No.7270279 >>7270212 >>7270242 That's what I'm thinking. FTL neutrinos and stem cells from RBCs all over again.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:07:37 2015 No.7270292 File: 66 KB, 740x280, quantumvacuumvirtualplasma.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270279 /sci/ should be better than this, there should be a quick rebuttal then everyone ignores the pseudoscience thread

Anonymous Mon May 18 16:09:06 2015 No.7270297

>>7270292
>there should be a quick rebuttal then everyone ignores the pseudoscience thread
Or maybe there should be hundreds of people all across the world testing it to find out if it REALLY doesn't work.

I see you don't believe in the scientific method.

Anonymous Mon May 18 16:13:52 2015 No.7270309
File: 420 KB, 2804x2044, EM drive debunk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Physics undergrad here. The reason this shit doesn't work is quite simple: in order to generate 0.5 N of force by photons alone you will need to output 150 MW of power. And this is assuming 100% efficiency of the microwave. To put this into perspective: http://cleantechnica.com/2013/04/07/first-solar-buys-150-mw-california-solar-power-plant-to-be-done-2014/

Proof in pic. Memedrive debunked.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:19:53 2015 No.7270327 File: 262 KB, 684x1116, smbc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] dont trust the thrust

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:23:47 2015 No.7270338 >>7270235 about tree fiddy give or take

Nuka-Cola: Gamma Grape Mon May 18 16:36:11 2015 No.7270366
File: 834 KB, 440x248, 1419555526833.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>tfw read all the papers and such
>think there might be something to this
>its certainly worth at least scaling up and making the test rig more robust
>and those laser interferometer tests were baffling.
>all the conspiracy theories loonies are coming out of the woodwork and de-ligitimizing the entire thing with their presence

GOD DAMNIT FUCK OFF BACK TO LOOSE CHANGE

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:38:06 2015 No.7270369 Out of interest, how much thrust could you generate against the Earth/Sun's magnetic field with a kW of power using a conventional electromagnet?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:39:18 2015 No.7270371 >>7270309 That's some sexy writing. Can I ask what pen you use/d?

Anonymous Mon May 18 16:40:50 2015 No.7270376
File: 177 KB, 625x417, 1429740744500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7270309
exept it was never supposed to rely on the momentum of the photons alone, that's why it's acalled reactionless drive and violate the law of conservation of energy
pic not related

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:42:40 2015 No.7270381 >sit inside a closed crate >push on the roof of the crate >lift myself into the air this is what emdrive actually believe

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:47:29 2015 No.7270388 >>7270366 >delegitimizing a device that produces thrust by bouncing microwaves in a copper ice cream cone

Anonymous Mon May 18 16:53:55 2015 No.7270397

Shit, terribly sorry guys, I put a copper coated ice cream cone in my microwave, it's now a small black hole. I tried to poison it by dropping bleach and Raid in but it just got bigger (also, it turns out that an SUV hitting a black hole doesn't kill it either). I figure we've got a few hours left so get fornicating.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 16:55:49 2015 No.7270400 >>7270369 http://spacecraftresearch.com/files/StreetmanPeck_GNC2006.pdf

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 17:20:06 2015 No.7270443 >>7270400 Thanks

Anonymous Mon May 18 17:32:46 2015 No.7270460

>>7270297
>Or maybe there should be hundreds of people all across the world testing it to find out if it REALLY doesn't work.
Meme drives have been around for over a year now and all we've gotten is bullshit. The fact that its taken this long to adequately test the damn thing pretty much tells me its garbage. You realize if it really worked then we would already have plans to put one of these on a satellite and see if it can keep itself in orbit.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 17:34:48 2015 No.7270464 >>7270397 Put your dick in it.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 17:55:59 2015 No.7270487 What the fuck is this? Can someone explain what I'm looking at? t. dumbass

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:01:33 2015 No.7270495 >>7270487 You're sitting in a car. It's sitting in neutral on an infinite flat plane. You push on the dashboard. The car begins to move forward.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:05:05 2015 No.7270501 >>7270495 It's kinda possible but only if you gave a Juggernaut-tier push to the dashboard. Which won't happen.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:07:13 2015 No.7270503 File: 318 KB, 530x530, gwen_stefani.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270501

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:09:08 2015 No.7270507 File: 10 KB, 255x95, Now we're there.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270501 ...Are you really this dumb, or did I fall for a troll?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:09:23 2015 No.7270508 >>7270495 that's not how cars work stupid nerd

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:10:22 2015 No.7270511 >>7270503 >>7270507 Have you never picked yourself up by your waist? Come on guys. It's the same principle.

Anonymous Mon May 18 18:12:03 2015 No.7270518

>be retarded at math and physics
>skim thread just to check for any updates regarding effective space travel possibilities (last thing I heard of was the whole "impossible engine" deal but from skimming, it doesn't seem as if much has improved or been discovered since)
>get a bunch of shitposting and newfags calling everything a 'meme' in attempts to fit in with their like-minded shitposting brethren
Well fuck.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:20:24 2015 No.7270540 >>7270376 Ah, so it works through magic. This is indeed a much more sound explanation.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:24:59 2015 No.7270552 >>7270309 Obviously, your math is wrong. All photon energy is being converted into momentum.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:27:37 2015 No.7270557 >>7270309 >drive breaks all established physics >try to use established physics to disapprove it you are not very smart are you?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:28:14 2015 No.7270558 File: 255 KB, 432x426, 1431315203039.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270495 >tfw I push so hard that space time stretches

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:32:09 2015 No.7270568 >>7270552 No losses are taken into account, true. But taking the losses into account would only worsen the performance. >>7270557 I doubt this thing breaks anything but the bank.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:51:48 2015 No.7270602 >>7270501 CANT BE STOPPED

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 18:56:58 2015 No.7270612 >>7269031 >claimed perpetual motion machine >still has an external power source Into the trash it goes.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 19:05:21 2015 No.7270620 >>7270612 That is not what the emdrive is advertising...

Anonymous Mon May 18 19:09:34 2015 No.7270626

>>7270620
They're claiming more kinetic energy (given the right reference frame) out than electrical energy in. That's overunity. If it's actually an aether paddle instead, then let them put it on a turntable and show us which way the aether is flowing.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 19:10:59 2015 No.7270633 >>7270612 Nice shitpost

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 19:13:30 2015 No.7270638 >>7270633 0.4 newtons of thrust at 1 kW is overunity at a paltry 2500 m/s. Basic freshman mechanics.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 19:20:29 2015 No.7270650 >>7270000 That's right on target unless that wasn't supposed to happen.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 19:24:25 2015 No.7270661 >>7270650 >That's right on target unless that wasn't supposed to happen. That's a Mosque

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 20:03:28 2015 No.7270739 File: 59 KB, 985x1024, CCw-CYEWYAALazx.jpg-l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270661 Look like that was a Russian BUK.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 20:08:18 2015 No.7270756 File: 2.99 MB, 452x254, 1431212784137.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270739 >my sides are gone ty anon

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 21:06:41 2015 No.7270854 File: 52 KB, 1024x768, the_flash-132475.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270558 >tfw i punch reality like the bitch it is

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 21:14:31 2015 No.7270871 >>7270626 No thats not even close to what they are claiming. We all know the MemeDrive doesn't work but at least understand why you retard.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 21:15:31 2015 No.7270876 >>7270638 1 KW is more than enough to make 0.4 newtons of thrust you nigger.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 21:51:59 2015 No.7270939 >>7270495 i dont think the analogy even works with quantum foam i guess >you push on the air >the car moves forward

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 22:43:44 2015 No.7271024 >>7270871 >>7270876 Suggest you review your basic physics. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/pow.html#pw

>>	Anonymous Mon May 18 22:45:58 2015 No.7271027 >>7270854 If believers said that the memedrive worked by using the Speed Force it would be grounded in science more legitimate than it currently is.

Anonymous Mon May 18 22:47:56 2015 No.7271029

>>7271024
The problem with the memedrive isn't that it's some kind of free energy device where you can tie it to a flywheel and get infinite power forever. The problem is that it gets its supposed thrust through an unrecognized physical phenomenon that doesn't seem to occur anywhere else in the universe.

Anonymous Mon May 18 23:01:20 2015 No.7271051

>>7271029
>The problem with the memedrive isn't that it's some kind of free energy device where you can tie it to a flywheel and get infinite power forever.

If it actually worked as described, it would be. Or to be more complete, if it works, there are four possibilities:

1. It is an unlimited energy source.
2. It allows you to extract energy from the earth's motion through the aether (where "aether" is anything that gives you a preferred reference frame).
3. It only works up to a certain velocity relative to the aether. This is easy to test for since it would mean the device only works in one direction.
4. (What's probably actually happening falls into this category.) The "reactionless" thrust involves an interaction, direct or indirect, with the earth, most likely through ordinary forces we know about but weren't properly accounted for in the experiments. The device will not work in space.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 00:05:41 2015 No.7271178 >>7270854 >outrunning the personified concept of death

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 00:42:39 2015 No.7271239 >>7270557 >>7270557 >>7270557 The above equations are mathematical relations. They're basically definitions. You can't break definitions, idiot.

Anonymous Tue May 19 01:02:29 2015 No.7271270

>>7271051
You're retarded. There are two options, it works or it doesnt.

It works:
1. it works through some unknown method and converts 1KW of power to 0.4 newtons. Tons of convetional methods can convert 1KW of power to well over 0.4 newtons so there really isnt a problem here when talking about power to force conversions. Over-unity has nothing to do with this here.

It doesnt work:
1. it doesnt work so who cares about it.

No matter what scenario we have there is nothing about an unlimited energy source or some shit involved in this. You're trying to argue that this drive doesnt work because its an unlimited energy source. But if it DOES end up working then that means you're wrong for obvious reasons. No matter how you look at it, over-unity has no relevance to this device.

Anonymous Tue May 19 02:17:54 2015 No.7271387

>>7271270
He's right, though. If this drive can supposedly produce 0.4 N of thrust using 1 kW of power, REGARDLESS OF REFERENCE FRAME, without any sort of reaction mass, then it absolutely would violate the conservation of energy. Look at it this way:
>Put EM drive in orbit; 7.8 km/s ground-relative velocity
>Thrust prograde w/ 1000 W of power
>Make 0.4 N of thrust
>0.4 N * 7800 m/s = 3120 W of propulsive power
So where is this energy coming from? With conventional thrusters drawing the same amount of power per thrust, the answer is easy: it comes from the change in kinetic energy of the reaction mass. But if you take the reaction mass out of the equation, you suddenly have a paradox on your hands.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 02:21:19 2015 No.7271391 >>7271387 >when faggots don't understand the quantu, vacuum This is painful.

Anonymous Tue May 19 03:45:24 2015 No.7271518

>>7271387
The energy required for a suicide jumper in a space suit to climb a flight of stairs in a skyscraper in a vacuum is linear. The kinetic energy he gains as he falls is exponential. Is the suicide jumper an overunity device or is the skyscraper propellent? If the Emdrive is pushing off some magical aether then is it not climbing some stairway into the heavens and therefore not restrained by propulsion?

Anonymous Tue May 19 03:56:35 2015 No.7271524

>>7271518
>The energy required for a suicide jumper in a space suit to climb a flight of stairs in a skyscraper in a vacuum is linear.
True (at least, on a small scale wrt Earth's radius, obviously).
>The kinetic energy he gains as he falls is exponential.
With respect to height? Incorrect. Still very much linear.
>Is the suicide jumper an overunity device
I don't see where you're possibly getting the notion that he is.
>or is the skyscraper propellent?
The skyscraper (along with the Earth it is attached to) is indeed the reaction mass.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 04:22:47 2015 No.7271542 >>7271524 So what's with the whole 9.8 m/s2 thing? Also if there is such a thing as a quantum vacuum why can't you use it as reaction mass?

Anonymous Tue May 19 04:36:46 2015 No.7271569

>>7271387
If you're aren't a physics or engineering major, basically the mass lost in a nuclear reaction releases energy which eventually spins a generator which then generates electricity and finally manifests as energy loss in the creation of Electromagnetic radiation.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 04:40:11 2015 No.7271575 >>7270279 >>7270242 The more positive results there are, the less likely that explanation becomes.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 04:45:18 2015 No.7271580 >>7271575 Except that these positive results aren't.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 04:47:09 2015 No.7271582 >>7271580 It's doing something. We need that Romanian guy to put this thing in a vacuum chamber.

Anonymous Tue May 19 05:18:36 2015 No.7271603

What's the big deal if its an infinite energy source anyway? What if it really did work that way, what would change?

You can only get 0,4 N of "free power" from it anyway, who gives a fuck. I can't even pick up a book with that few newtons. Sure it might be great for small things, like an infinite battery for you cellphone or laptop but this won't change anything major.

People already expect us to have flying cars and shit in the future, I don't think an infinite 1,5 volt battery will be that impressive. convenient yes, and I would be smiling at never having to change the battery or having lights that never went out, but shouldn't we expect that from the world of tomorrow anyway?

Seems acceptable to me, that we would get small conveniences like this figured out as we advanced in science. I don't see reason to believe that there isn't some "cheating" way to do that that violates the laws science etc. Solar power is the same way during the day, no? infinite power as long as you make more panels to soak it up, so too would you stack these little 0,4 engines for some effect.

Basically, its not all that impressive

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 05:36:29 2015 No.7271624 >>7270376 >Pic not related Are you sure? I'm pretty sure it is.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 05:55:51 2015 No.7271670 >>7270540 Which parts of our modern technology aren't essentially magic?

Anonymous Tue May 19 06:11:50 2015 No.7271679

>>7271542
>So what's with the whole 9.8 m/s2 thing?
It's a unit of acceleration. Meters per SECOND squared. Alternatively expressed as Joules per meter-kilogram, if you want to relate it to energy (notice, no more exponent). And it works the same way on the way up as on the way down. So I'm sorry to break it to you, but your little insight is plainly wrong. For g to behave the way you're saying it does, it would need to have the units J/kg-m on the way up and then suddenly change the laws of physics at the top so that it can become J/kg-m^2.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 06:52:22 2015 No.7271717 >>7269866 People in the whole thread ignoring you Feels bad

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 08:18:56 2015 No.7271807 >>7269197 >Hilbert hotels

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 08:51:54 2015 No.7271846 >>7271575 >Inductivism What is this, 1615?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 10:46:53 2015 No.7271995 >>7269197 Paul March here, this is accurate.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 22:00:09 2015 No.7273059 >>7271679 You are looking at one part of my point in isolation. If the device is using virtual particles as a reaction mass then conservation of momentum is maintained and it does not matter how fast this device accelerates.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 22:13:32 2015 No.7273085 >>7269031 someone post some shit people said when they built the first plane. "it will never be practical for anything other than novelty" was a pretty popular sentiment.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 22:15:23 2015 No.7273088 I've been waiting for a reason to learn HFSS. Now I've got one

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 22:18:23 2015 No.7273091 https://strawpoll.me/4404722 Get your votes in.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 22:22:43 2015 No.7273096 reminder every single person ITT would have called the casmir effect a hoax

>>	Anonymous Tue May 19 22:54:26 2015 No.7273132 File: 251 KB, 500x789, Muenchhausen_Herrfurth_7_500x789.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7270511

Anonymous Tue May 19 23:26:49 2015 No.7273186

i must just be too stupid to understand why people have such a problem with this.

the idea of it pushing against QV to explain how it works (if it does) is fine with me - i'm confused how people jump to the conclusion that this is breaking conservation of momentum.

the fact that there hasnt been enough tests is fine too. just take it for what it is, nothing more, nothing less. the people that are literally saying it's fake are almost as retarded as the people screaming "warp drive" from my persepctive.

>>7273088
HFSS?

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 08:21:38 2015 No.7273696 File: 175 KB, 954x531, 1432014311897.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] It's easy, guys. Gravity is just energy.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 08:59:03 2015 No.7273724 gravity is the lack of energy because when there's a lot of mass all that room is being taken up by matter so it creates a negative energy vacuum that pushes down on you.

Anonymous Wed May 20 09:13:56 2015 No.7273736

>>7273186
>why people have such a problem with this.
People like their 'laws of nature' too much and consider them divine commandments of physical reality and not just verbalized descriptions based on limited observation.

At the end of the day it's just exploiting some physical property of reality, if it works it works and that's it, nothing stranger than chipping off stone flakes to make a spearhead or tossing a neutron to a fissible element and getting energy out of it.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 09:24:28 2015 No.7273746 >>7273736 >limited observation Get out.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 09:34:49 2015 No.7273769 >>7269162 >what is JATO

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 09:37:51 2015 No.7273772 >>7273746 Take your faith in unfallible science and scurry back to iflscience if you don't understand the limitations we're subject to.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 12:22:12 2015 No.7274129 >>7273091 It's not necessarily a hoax. Some of the experiments are more likely to be fuckups. The fact that the results are always close to the smallest force they can detect is consistent with this.

>>	Anonymous Wed May 20 12:31:50 2015 No.7274151 File: 26 KB, 800x800, emdrive physics.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] OC coming through

Anonymous Wed May 20 12:41:31 2015 No.7274171

>>7273186
The vacuum isn't a thing, it's a state. You can put momentum into the vacuum; that's called emitting a particle, and after doing so, it's not vacuum anymore. But with the thrusts claimed, they would have to be emitting tachyons.

But the more important question is, if the vacuum is filled with enormous amounts of energy (Yes, energy. Breaking momentum conservation breaks energy conservation unless it only works in one frame.) that can be extracted by merely bouncing microwaves around in a can, why haven't we seen it already? One would have expected natural processes to release this energy, with devastating consequences (We would not be here.).

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 08:30:35 2015 No.7275907 File: 11 KB, 624x309, Energy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7271387 >>7275506

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 09:52:36 2015 No.7275996 >>7269031 >>7269035 Call me stupid but this shit looks like an electro magnet Where is the trust? All I see is an electro magnet made from a copper bucket attract a metal plate that is measured with a lever on a drug scale

Anonymous Thu May 21 09:57:09 2015 No.7276002

>>7269107
eventhough you're joking but this is a real thing.

If you someday stumble upon something that may change the world, you better go loud right away so you have no more secrets

As soon as you start to form a threat to big companies youre in danger

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 09:59:46 2015 No.7276005 >>7269162 >Rockets create thrust and planes do not. Seriously why arent you still removed then how do planes fly genius

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:08:54 2015 No.7276020 >>7269031 https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/how-to-fool-the-world-with-bad-science-7a9318dd1ae6

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:10:02 2015 No.7276024 >>7271717 Nice numbers Off by 10000 No palidrom...

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:18:07 2015 No.7276037 >>7269961 I keked

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:21:51 2015 No.7276044 >>7270000 >It blew up the fucking mosque ns gj ggwp

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:26:00 2015 No.7276046 >>7276002 >>7269107 >Actually believing there is "free energy" I hope you are b8ing big time or you should get >>>/out/

Anonymous Thu May 21 10:38:03 2015 No.7276058
File: 56 KB, 289x300, homie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I've built one of these myself, I can verify the results are not affirmative for anti-gravity.

the digital scale has a frequency dependency, vibrations are measured as affirmative digits but the results are from vibratory bias of the scale's internal chip.

this means that the incredibly small electrical vibrations of the copper 'bucket' produce kinetic 'differential' in the protruding length of the stick he's weighing it on.

My way of changing the setup to verify the false reading was by moving the bucket farther and closet to the end. You'd expect no different reading in the setup if you cut the length of the ruler so that it falls exactly where the device is tied on the length.

think of hitting your ruler while holding it down against the desk with your other hand.

DOING

cut it= less DOING

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:39:14 2015 No.7276061 >>7276058 shit

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:54:28 2015 No.7276074 >>7276058 Sounds like a simple and obvious think to dick around with. That actually sounded scientific and reasonable to do immediately to see.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 10:55:35 2015 No.7276076 >>7276058 More DOING, actually.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 11:52:11 2015 No.7276150 >>7270276 dafuq? arXiv doesn't even have review.

Anonymous Thu May 21 12:02:38 2015 No.7276167

>>7271387
>He's right, though. If this drive can supposedly produce 0.4 N of thrust using 1 kW of power, REGARDLESS OF REFERENCE FRAME
nope, none of that has been proven so far, you're literally just making shit up to try and argue that this device doesnt work.

Anonymous Thu May 21 12:08:09 2015 No.7276178

>>7271670

All of them are not magic.
You wax poetic, but reveal an ignorance of the workings of the world around you.
It's all miracles to you, and so you can't understand why scientists say *this* miracle can't be real.
You suspect the scientists are mean or rude to exclude and dismiss this miracle.
But they're not miracles to us.
We understand the forces at play, and we understand what they are and are not capable of doing.
This device is not capable of doing what it claims to do with the forces it claims to use.
>maybe it uses an as-yet unknown force, then
It is difficult to express just how unlikely that possibility is. As unlikely as discovering a new state of matter by playing with marshmellows. Is it more likely that this claimed observation of an effect is wrong, or that all other observations of the forces involved have been wrong? Because they cannot both be right.
>It would make a better story if against all odds, this effect was real and all other observations of the forces involved have been wrong.
And that is why the claim perpetuates. It makes for a great story. This unfortunately does not make it less wrong.

Anonymous Thu May 21 12:11:47 2015 No.7276186

>>7276178
>We understand the forces at play, and we understand what they are and are not capable of doing.
You don't.
You understand the abstraction layer that you are using to model the laws of the universe.
You do not know, however, even a lick about how reality actually works. You are just making assumptions based on prior observations.

Get off your high horse, assburger.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:15:14 2015 No.7276198 >>7276186 >You are just making assumptions based on prior observations. How foolish of me.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:15:32 2015 No.7276200 >calls himself a scientist >has a dogmatic reactionary world-view you faggots would be have been the ones defending aether to the death 100 years ago.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:17:20 2015 No.7276204 All of you faggots read THIS >>7276058 IT DOESNT WORK FAGGOTS WHO CARES ABOUT THE STUPID FUCKING MEMEDRIVE. THE ONLY THING LEFT TO DO NOW IS MAKE FUN OF REDDIT FOR BEING FAGS AND ACTUALLY BELIEVING THAT IT WORKED.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:20:43 2015 No.7276210 >>7276204 >All of you faggots read THIS NO

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:24:36 2015 No.7276212 >>7276058 Pics / video?

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:42:01 2015 No.7276234 >>7276204 /r/physics discounted it immediately. Your fault for going to some shit like /r/technology

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:44:08 2015 No.7276239 >>7270397 Rip

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 12:59:56 2015 No.7276267 >>7276234 >/r/physics discounted it immediately. saying LOL NO IT DOESNT WORK doesnt count. you need to have actually run an experiment in order to falsify it. 4chan: 1 reddit: -infinity

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 13:42:26 2015 No.7276323 >>7274151 That pretty much sums it up really.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 13:43:54 2015 No.7276325 >>7275996 The magnetrons used in microwave ovens are electromagnets.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 14:44:14 2015 No.7276423 >>7276267 >you need to have actually run an experiment in order to falsify it. Unless you're Russian, the burden of proof is on you. If I claim I have a 12inch dick its not on you to disprove it, its on me to prove it.

Anonymous Thu May 21 14:56:03 2015 No.7276439

>>7276423
ya but nobody was ever talking about proof were they?

What that guy was talking about is apparently faggots on reddit being such fucking geniuses they can ignore observational evidence because "lol it just doesn't make sense guys think about it"

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:12:28 2015 No.7276471 Is it me or is technological progress slowing down? Nothing good has been invented since the smartphone last decade. All we have now are smartphones packed into a watch and the MemeDrive™

Anonymous Thu May 21 15:18:38 2015 No.7276488

>>7276439
No, it can be ignored because the "observational data" on the device is inconsistent between groups and pretty much at the limit of detection of the measuring device in the case of Eagleworks. Both are a good enough reason to dismiss it out of hand as quackery, but the later let's us ignore Eagleworks grandiose claims when their supporting observations are very lack luster, especially when we consider the complete lack of a detailed account for error.

Anonymous Thu May 21 15:22:52 2015 No.7276495

>>7276471
"Technology" is not necessarily new devices for you to waste time with. There wasn't any revolutionary new technology in smartphones when they appeared; it was just a novel way of putting known bits together to make something that was highly marketable. Generally, technological advancement is not apparent because it just leads to "better" smartphones with longer battery lives while new gadgets are the result of marketing campaigns and cosmetics.

Anonymous Thu May 21 15:26:54 2015 No.7276503 [DELETED]

>>7276471

You're looking at it the wrong way, because you have the context of past scientific breakthroughs. The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of science and engineering is done in one of the quiet, vanilla offices you pass by on your way to work every day. It's findings are published in dull journals like the IEEE times which are buried

Anonymous Thu May 21 15:29:12 2015 No.7276508

>>7276471
The smartphone wasn't much of an invention. It just combined the phone and laptop.

Tech progress has been increasing at a greater-than-linear rate, but it won't explode in a visible way until a key advancement is made.

In my opinion, that key advancement is the perfection of image recognition.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:32:43 2015 No.7276516 >>7276508 >It just combined the phone and laptop. What. No, the smartphone just added programming APIs to phones. A smartphone is literally just a phone that is made to accept third party software.

Anonymous Thu May 21 15:34:13 2015 No.7276522
File: 99 KB, 620x388, dishwasher50s_2417758b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7276471

You're looking at it the wrong way, because you have the context of past scientific breakthroughs. The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of science and engineering is done in one of the quiet, vanilla offices you pass by on your way to work every day. It's findings are published in dull journals like the IEEE times which are buried under a mountain of tech "journalism" sensationalism over a few cherrypicked things that sound or look cool.

Technological progress, if anything, has sped up exponentially with the rise of the telegraph, telephone, fax and most recently the Internet. We already hear stories about all the interesting info Google and Apple get from tracking your phone everywhere. More information leads to more innovation, even if it's not readily apparent.

What has changed however, is the rate of which these things effect normal people. Industrialization completely changed the average human's way of life, with people trading rural lifestyles for cosmopolitan ones inside dense cities such that less than 1% of the US is employed directly in agriculture. The second world war was the peak of this, when everyone was employed in a factory. The 1950s was just improvements on existing technology as phones became clearer, washing machines faster and ovens hotter. Cars became faster and easier to use with power steering and braking, along with the automatic transmission.

More importantly, the development of the microchip allowed for much faster data processing. It took almost a century (1880-1980) to connect the entire US into the phone network, and then only another 20 to put a desktop in each home. It took 10 to put a phone in everyone's pocket and right now the Internet of Things is taking off with connected cars, appliances, TVs, lights and thermostats. But the average person doesn't have the sea change our great grandparents did because we're already cosmopolitan.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:35:14 2015 No.7276528 >>7276516 >A smartphone is literally just a phone that is made to accept third party software. Yes, basically a laptop with a sim card and builtin VOIP.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:39:35 2015 No.7276544 >>7276528 ...Or a phone that can run software. Are you also saying that iPad-type tablets are undersized laptops with touch and old-school tablets are oversized smartphones with resistive touch screens? You got this stuff completely reversed.

Anonymous Thu May 21 15:41:46 2015 No.7276551

>>7276522
>(1880-1980)
I didn't get connected until 1995. I still remember the day, they had spent weeks digging up the road with this giant machine and finally they sent us the beige AT&T telephone in the post. Before that we just sent letters to each other. Fuck I haven't sent a casual hand written letter for 20 years.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:49:07 2015 No.7276576 >>7276551 >living in the midwest I'm so sorry.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:58:47 2015 No.7276594 >>7276439 >machine turned on >scale shows measured force of 0.0 >"huh. hey, what is margin of error on scale?" >"+/-0.05" >Headlines: "INCREDIBLE INVENTION CREATES REACTIONLESS FORCE OF UP TO 0.05!! SCIENTISTS BAFFLED!"

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 15:59:51 2015 No.7276598 >>7276576 Caribbean actually, we use AT&T too. Meh, the weather was good.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 16:01:41 2015 No.7276600 >>7276598 >Caribbean Notice how I said "to connect the entire US" not "to connect every afrobeaner shithole".

Anonymous Thu May 21 16:01:48 2015 No.7276601

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

He just tested it upside down.
His downward thrust is lower than his upward thrust, by a rather big margin.

Seems like there was an effect from heated air, but it also seems that it might still be working.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 16:06:36 2015 No.7276607 you should know better, /sci/ someone should write a concise explanation as to why this is wrong and everyone else should not reply

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 16:07:23 2015 No.7276608 >>7276600 I dunno why I chipped in, proximity to the USA and using the same provider I guess. Anyway it's not like there are no afrobeaner shitholes in the USA.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 16:08:28 2015 No.7276612 File: 1.83 MB, 1000x750, 1370005072374.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7276594 > guy does science just because fuck you HOW DARE HE TO DO SCIENCE! TO THE STOCKADES WITH HIM! HERETIC!

Anonymous Thu May 21 16:20:18 2015 No.7276635

>>7276508
>The smartphone wasn't much of an invention. It just combined the phone and laptop.
>The internet wasn't much of an invention. It just combined computers and Telephone lines
>The X wasn't much of an invention. It just combined C and D.
You're fucking retarded

Anonymous Thu May 21 16:57:45 2015 No.7276725

>>7276601

!!Maybe it's downward thrust is lower because it is a true anti gravitational device that does infact resist the pull of matter!!

Then it would resist being pushed downwards when compared to other orientations. Think about it. It makes complete sense.

Anonymous Thu May 21 17:51:11 2015 No.7276838

>>7276601
>He just tested it upside down.
>His downward thrust is lower than his upward thrust, by a rather big margin.

>Seems like there was an effect from heated air, but it also seems that it might still be working.

Indeed; assuming the difference in measurement can be ascribed to thermal buoyancy, 43% of the measured displacement is thermal. That still leaves us with ~0.2 grams per watt of input power to explain.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 17:52:48 2015 No.7276841 the only way to test it conclusively is to blast a drive with a couple gigawatt and see what happens.

Anonymous Thu May 21 21:36:04 2015 No.7277195

>>7276838

Or we could just put it in space with some solar panels and either it will have a delta-v of infinity (cheap planet smasher!) or the effect will mysteriously vanish. Seeing as the smart money is on the later, I vote that its proponents be the ones to fund the launch. I'm sure they will have no difficulty securing funding.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 21:53:46 2015 No.7277220 Will the memedrive be the greatest scientific meme of our time?

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 22:07:40 2015 No.7277247 >>7277220 nah, its going the way of FTL neutrinos and shit.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 22:33:29 2015 No.7277301 >>7277220 Was the e-cat ever a big meme on here?

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 22:37:29 2015 No.7277315 >>7277301 No; it's always been just too bullshitty to really catch on. Enough people are taking the EmDrive seriously to actually get interest. My money's still on the Eagleworks team being shit at eliminating measurement error.

>>	Anonymous Thu May 21 23:42:56 2015 No.7277429 >>7277315 Since it's NASA, maybe they just mixed up their metric and English units. >Oops, we measured force in ounces instead of Newtons.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 04:27:44 2015 No.7277765 Life is too shitty for something like this to be true. Therefore it's not Q.E.D.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 12:42:26 2015 No.7278344 Yo /sci/! an update on my Romanian Engineer! He found the thrust was still being generated upside down to eliminate thermal convection currents! He experiments on weekends and takes requests! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAMttfMC8PI

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 13:41:45 2015 No.7278433 >>7278344 Sweet!

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 13:45:25 2015 No.7278442 >>7277429 Converting is not that hard to do..

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 13:57:39 2015 No.7278458 >>7278344 one of the comments: >this man needs to be funded on kickstarter I couldn't agree more. >pls b rel pls b rel pls b rel pls b rel

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 13:59:29 2015 No.7278461 File: 31 KB, 228x243, HarleySmart.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7278344 >Downward thrust So much for the thermal expansion naysayers

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:01:26 2015 No.7278463 >>7278461 Note: First test was in the direction of a spring. Second test is opposite direction of the spring. This means that the measured thrust might actually be inhibited by the spring. The actual thrust might be a bit higher.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:01:45 2015 No.7278464 >>7278344 Wait Hold on a second Are we seriously seriously pinning our hopes of interstellar travel on the tinkerings of some Eastern European neckbeard?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:04:23 2015 No.7278465 >>7278464 Slavs and nerds are the two key demographic contributers to space science

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:09:57 2015 No.7278474 File: 251 KB, 734x950, Emperor_of_Mankind_by_genzoman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7278344 GLORY! ALL HAIL TO THE EMPEROR!

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:10:27 2015 No.7278475 >>7278464 Have you ever played a slav game? They are basically honorary Germans with a militaristic streak.

Anonymous Fri May 22 14:18:05 2015 No.7278489
File: 103 KB, 480x320, Space_Miner,_Space_Ore_Bust.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7278464
To be fair its his tinkering that we can see...
white and the others are too secretive.....
However...a team has also risen to the challenge!

https://hackaday.io/project/5596-em-drive

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:23:16 2015 No.7278495 >>7278489 >publicizing your ideas I swear the internet has removed the brains of people. You work on that shit in secret then patent it for $$$. This modern open source trend is retarded as fuck.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:32:58 2015 No.7278514 >>7278495 Rotten capitalist mentality coming through.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:37:20 2015 No.7278518 >>7278514 It's a dog eat dog world out there m8.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:42:09 2015 No.7278522 >>7278495 It's already patented, so it doesn't matter. Also, this shit is too huge to patent. It's too important for the world.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:45:00 2015 No.7278528 >>7271603 Assuming it is correct and capable of being scaled, refined, and made efficient the implications are massive.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:47:10 2015 No.7278532 >>7271603 >le ebin cynism meme

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 14:50:04 2015 No.7278538 >>7269067 Eagleworks successfully tested the EMDrive in a vacuum. And everybody knows theres no air in a vacuum.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 15:16:08 2015 No.7278601 >>7278474 Now all we need are Geller fields...

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 15:25:00 2015 No.7278618 >>7278464 Tesla emigrated from Serbia. Slavs have been in science for a long time. Sikorsky was eastern European too.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 15:48:26 2015 No.7278667 >>7278344 >>7269035 I thought it was supposed to generate thrust in the direction of the bigger side. He has it working backwards.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 15:55:05 2015 No.7278683 >>7269067 Their device also includes some magnetic systems which the demonstrate interacting with their wiring. They, however, make no account for how adding in the device will change this interaction and entirely ignore the effects in their claims.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 15:56:20 2015 No.7278684 >>7278667 Not necessarily http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36313.4040

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:07:32 2015 No.7278709 >>7269067 >>7269072 >>7269899 >>7269975 >>7270019 >>7270029 >>7270276 so many autists in this thread.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:11:43 2015 No.7278714 >>7278475 Romanians aren't slavs, they speak a Latin language., hence the name Romania.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:11:56 2015 No.7278715 File: 17 KB, 297x300, in-awe-face-sparkly-eyes-drawing-297x300.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7278344 My space erection IS MASSIVE HNNNNNNNNNNNGH!

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:12:28 2015 No.7278717 >>7270212 There used to be a time when Heliocentrism was considered crackpottery. These people have no right to call themselves scientists.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:28:16 2015 No.7278746 >>7278442 It's something they screwed up before. >Metric mishap caused loss of NASA orbiter http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:34:14 2015 No.7278763 >>7271239 ...Definitions based on our understanding of physics, retard. Theory is made to fit experimentation, and if experimentation says to jump, theory better jump. That said, it's a memedrive. There's an experimental error eluding everyone.

Anonymous Fri May 22 16:51:58 2015 No.7278805 [DELETED]

File: 48 KB, 400x462, 1420486179812.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

ITT: people who don't know physics. This is on /sci/. Reminds me not to come here anymore. physicsforums instalocks crackpot threads yet on sci is just some meme circlejerk trollfest. *sigh*

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 16:58:38 2015 No.7278826 >>7278805 herpa derp a derpa herp

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:00:53 2015 No.7278835 >>7278805 >treating science like the 10 fucking commandments get the fuck out sperglord

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:01:53 2015 No.7278841 File: 242 KB, 550x578, 1389303243396.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7278805

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:02:50 2015 No.7278843 >>7278826 >>7278835 >>7278841 >taking an ironic shitpost seriously Yes, ironic shitposts are still shitposts. But why the fuck would you give newfags the impression that these posts are worth responding to?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:04:11 2015 No.7278850 >>7278843 derp diddily derp

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:05:55 2015 No.7278857 >>7278538 there is dark air in a vacuum. nasa btfo.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:20:19 2015 No.7278921 >>7278843 because 90% of "i fucking love science" autists actually believe exactly that.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:26:28 2015 No.7278942 >>7278921 He wrote a juvenile run-on sentence and ended with action. It was a blatantly obvious shitpost.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:28:30 2015 No.7278951 >>7278942 Again, pretty typical of "I fucking love science" autists that populate science forums with their pseudointelligence.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:35:44 2015 No.7278972 File: 35 KB, 500x611, 1415266491058.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7278951 >Again, pretty typical of "I fucking love science" autists that populate science forums with their pseudointelligence. sigh takes a sip vanishes tipping

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 17:41:20 2015 No.7278992 File: 891 KB, 325x252, 1422992437856.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7278972 gud 1

Anonymous Fri May 22 18:03:08 2015 No.7279038

>>7270019
As someone succinctly pointed out in a much earlier thread about this, if you couldn't see water, a boat propeller would seem to violate conservation of momentum

Perhaps this device is pushing something out to generate thrust, we just haven't the ability to perceive it yet

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 18:03:53 2015 No.7279039 >>7278714 Eastern bloc is slav

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 18:09:38 2015 No.7279046 >>7279038 the difference between the EMdrive and a boat is that the EMdrive has the motor (microwave generator) in a closed cavity

Anonymous Fri May 22 18:31:52 2015 No.7279094
File: 468 KB, 500x270, the mist.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7279046
I believe that is inherent of what we're talking about though; that the "material" we are pushing against isn't necessarily forced to interact with the metal cone in question.

I keep having this recurring image of creatures that live in higher or different dimensions, swimming in a medium of these particles that we think we're interacting with, and every time this crazy slav turns on his commandeered microwave they are seeing magical "flow" of their environment and don't know what it is.

either that, or it's going to be something like the movie "the mist" and once we start interfering with all this shit a bunch of weird ass creatures come out and fuck us all up

Anonymous Fri May 22 18:39:15 2015 No.7279115

Moron here. I know zero science.
Say I had an oatmeal can full of bees with something on the inside on one end that attracts bees, whatever that might be, shook the can to piss them off, and they started ramming all sides of the can, but showed a preference to that one side.

Would this be a better analogy for this gadget than shoving on the steering wheel of an SUV, since your ass is still pushing back on the seat, equalizing your force?

Would the can actually show thrust in the direction the bees prefer, and would more bees == more thrust?

Anonymous Fri May 22 18:50:26 2015 No.7279133
File: 38 KB, 1004x629, BEES BOBBY.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7279115
>would more bees = more thrust

idk why but that made me laugh uncontrollably.

So, there's two diff scenarios here.

where is the bees thrust coming from? The air, right? their wings are _pushing_ against the air (every action has = and opposite reaction), so the bee is "thrusted" up, and the air is pushed down and away from the bees.

Now, if the can is open on the bottom, the bees start flying up and hiting the can, then the thrust from the bees does not create an ____equal and opposite reaction force____ on the can that would balance the bee force, and the can can now take flight.

If the can was close however, that ___equal and opposite reaction___ from the air would hit the bottom of the can and cancel out the bee force, and the can would NOT take flight.

Now if you actually did this IRL with a closed can, if the bees started at the bottom of the can and ran into the top of it, the can would jump but not take consistent flight. the initial reactionary force from the air would be canceled out by the normal force of the ground or table or whatever that the can was sitting on. so the bees could gain some momentum and make the can "jump" a bit, but no such thing as constant thrust

Anonymous Fri May 22 18:55:57 2015 No.7279142

>>7279133
Like I said, I am a moron, and
>
where is the bees thrust coming from? The air, right? their wings are _pushing_ against the air (every action has = and opposite reaction), so the bee is "thrusted" up, and the air is pushed down and away from the bees.
Did occur to me about five minutes after I posted, which naturally led to
>Now, if the can is open on the bottom,...
Now,
>Now if you actually did this IRL with a closed can, if the bees started at the bottom of the can and ran into the top of it, the can would jump but not take consistent flight. the initial reactionary force from the air would be canceled out by the normal force of the ground or table or whatever that the can was sitting on. so the bees could gain some momentum and make the can "jump" a bit, but no such thing as constant thrust
Is kind of interesting, because in Romania test 3, this is similar to what happened. The scale value went hard negative for a sec, then evened out a little below zero. I think the same thing just happened with positive values in test 3.1. He is adding a functionally infinite amount of bees, and there is energy leaving the system as heat from the magnetron (open can at the bottom?). Not sure how it adds up, but more stuff to think about.

Anonymous Fri May 22 19:04:37 2015 No.7279165

>>7279142
Well for that matter, there's probably heat going through the actual copper eventually, and I would think it would radiate easier off the big plate than the little one. No clue about the sides.

Also really curious what's gonna happen if and when he can tune the length of the can to be more resonant with regard to the wavelength he's shooting into it, and if somebody decides to play with the shapes of the sides to improve the resonance. Could be the difference between a saxophone and a candy whistle as far as optimizing whatever phenomenon is going on here, if there is a phenomenon going on here.

norsefat !!FzJtFo0j4ph Fri May 22 19:08:44 2015 No.7279172

>>7279142
Yup, those are the primary mechanisms people are concerned with in this experiment.

However, the upside down test needs to be done differently for some.

Do you know how springs work? this is the main reason for the magnitude change in the upside down test. Yes, the initial push is greater, which is one of my concerns (in both tests), but the drive also has to fight the spring constant from the setup. Under this circumstance, some of that force that was previously being applied to the plate of the scale is now being transferred to displacing the spring, and it's a disproportionate amount (not intuitive if you don't undertstand springs) because the amount of force a spring produces is a function of the spring constant( physical property of material and geometry, a constant in this case) and a function of the displacement - so as you stretch a spring out, it requires more and more force to stretch is the same distance.

>to stretch a spring at rest out 1 meter it could take 1 newton
>to stretch that spring from 1 meter to 2 meters out could require 4 newtons
>to stretch that spring from 2 meters to 3 meters out could require 25 newtons

If that doesn't make sense I apologize.

Anonymous Fri May 22 19:13:38 2015 No.7279186

>>7279172
fuuuuuuuuuucking christ. tripping on other boards fucks me over some times....

w/e... sorry for trip.

>>7279165
this is something I've wondered about as well, specifically the can tuning.

I can only hope with all of my boyhood dreams that we're only touching the tip of the iceberg with all these EMdrive experiments, and somehow were just barely inside of the range of where these things operate, which is leading to the barely visible tests, and with some monkeying around some one will find out a much better range to run them in and things will become much more concrete very quickly

Anonymous Fri May 22 19:31:45 2015 No.7279231

>>7278464
Yes.
Because modern science turned into armchair contests about who can diss the other one best.

Nobody is claiming the EMdrive works, but we fucking want to know anyway so a few people do experiments. Response from "scientists": fake, can't work, breaks laws blabla
They trust their theory so much that they completely forgot the basis for science: Experimentation and observable results.

You won't hear anything from them if it turns out it works, and they will scream at the top of their lungs if it doesn't(likely)

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 19:34:52 2015 No.7279241 >yfw the discovery of the warp dimension >yfw it's what the emdrive pushes against somehow

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 19:37:19 2015 No.7279249 It just hit me, if this works we can also DIRECTLY convert mechanical movement to photons.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 19:37:54 2015 No.7279251 >>7279172 Back to /fit/

Anonymous Fri May 22 19:43:37 2015 No.7279258

>>7279231
This pretty much sums it up IMO.

It's very frustrating that there is something that is at LEAST worth spending a small amount of time and money on to make certain that we aren't getting a false positive / confirm null theory, but people think we can write it off....

you put it the best tbh
>they trust so much.... they completely forgot the basis of science

>>7279251
I-i'm sorry sparrow

Anonymous Fri May 22 19:55:59 2015 No.7279290

>>7279249
What so great about that?
>Gerbil runs on treadmill
>"Photon emitter" shoots out light
I'm not getting the importance here, is skipping the step involving the rotating copper coils (generator) all that important? I thought rotational motion -> electricity was already 90% efficient.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 19:58:59 2015 No.7279295 >>7279290 photons also include EM. I was just stating a fact, no idea about usage.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 20:19:24 2015 No.7279337 >>7279258 You're right, we should put millions of dollars into every crackpot and con artist who claims to have discovered magic.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 20:24:00 2015 No.7279345 >>7279337 >stringing together a magnetron with a copper cavity is millions of dollars when the experiment is this easy and has so much implications, you don't fucking ignore it.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 20:25:16 2015 No.7279346 >>7279249 you do realize you're emitting photons in the infrared energy range just by sitting at your computer right?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 20:32:52 2015 No.7279358 >>7277301 Yes.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 20:48:26 2015 No.7279394 >>7279231 >Why isn't science instant? Calm down, with the attention this thing has gotten, it's likely someone competent will test it out, but you'll have to wait for the results.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 20:57:10 2015 No.7279412 >>7279249 That's already been done, sorta, with a vibrating mirror.

Anonymous Fri May 22 21:00:56 2015 No.7279422

>>7279337

I would say the chances of this thing being as significant as people claim it is / could be are around... 0.05% ? i mean, if i just had to take a shot in the dark with my gut feeling of course. I say this because of the (somewhat) consistency between the experiments, and when testing the main theories as to why it was giving us these numbers, those tests proved those main ideas (convection primarily) as a "false negative" if you will.

Now, i agree with what you're saying. if we gave equal attention to every single idea out there, we would be spread too thin and money and time would be wasted.

the only argument here is weather or not this thing (the EMdrive) is worth pursuing experimentally.

In my eyes
>very low cost for experiment (relative)
>so far no one has been able to "prove it wrong"
>IF it is true, huge implications for human energy usage, space flight, pretty much everything.

the primary counter argument that is being presented currently is
>It can't be true base on what we (think) we know

In my eyes, trying to see it objectively, I think it's silly not to take the experiment serious
>note
taking the experiment serious is not the same as taking the EM drive serious.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 21:23:53 2015 No.7279480 >>7279422 I'd recommend that you use your own money for this wild goose chase instead of wasting taxpayer dollars, but you are probably broke after giving away everything to Mars One.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 21:29:01 2015 No.7279487 >>7279480 be butt blasted somewhere else, faggot

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 21:30:51 2015 No.7279490 >>7279487 Nice counterargument. This is the quality of discourse I should expect from people who think that microwave overs can be used as thrusters.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 21:32:30 2015 No.7279491 File: 17 KB, 305x277, 1353961981665.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7279490 aight, be reactionary somewhere else

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 21:38:17 2015 No.7279496 >>7279422 >(somewhat) consistency between the experiments Congratulations on a post number with one thousand consecutive same digits!

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 21:42:18 2015 No.7279504 >>7279422 >so far no one has been able to "prove it wrong" Given the negative result from NASA, I don't have any idea what you would accept as proving it wrong.

Anonymous Fri May 22 21:58:33 2015 No.7279523

>>7279480
I never once mentioned taxpayer dollars friend.

I just said it should be funded.

also, nice reply to a well thought out counter point.

>trying to imply fault or stupidity to defuse a point

pretty ironic for considering >>7279490

>>7279487 wasn't be btw.

>>7279496
yipppeeee

>>7279504
Are you getting the null test mixed up? I've been following this for a while, but it seems a good chunk of people who think it was "disproven" are misinterpreting the null test.

also, don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way saying it has been proven right.

But it's much more complicated than "proving it wrong or right"

Proving it right has many implications for rendering that true,

and proving it wrong has less, but still a large amount.

I really hate make these threads seem like an echo chamber, but think of most large scale inventions. They did NOT just "click" and work. it required an original Idea that sounded crazy, an inital design / attempt, failure, analysis of that failure, restructure, and a hundred thousand repeats of that process until it worked.

And heck, if you really want to get into some silly nilly points;

If this thing is SO worthless, so absolutely stupid, impossible, never going to work, etc, then why has it caught so much traction? It isn't just because of the huge media spoof on it. any one with half a brain sees that kind of stuff "NASA DISCOVERS WARP DRIVE" and knows that it's retarded.

Sure, it could end up like the FTL neutrinos. and be nothing. Thats science.

man that was a long rant. sry

Anonymous Fri May 22 22:03:38 2015 No.7279533

>>7279523
>Are you getting the null test mixed up? I've been following this for a while, but it seems a good chunk of people who think it was "disproven" are misinterpreting the null test.

This one in particular drives me nuts. Two of the EM drives they looked at were Cannae types. The creator of the device had claimed that placing slots in the resonating cavity were vital to the drive's functionality. To that end, a slotted test article, and an unslotted, null test article were provided. This null test device, the unslotted Cannae device, is the one that the papers are referring to.

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 22:09:08 2015 No.7279547 >>7279533 yup. I see this one quite frequently. Care to make a nice flow sheet to explain that? people seem to get this misunderstood quite frequently. >i'm too lazy and i'm making food

Anonymous Fri May 22 22:11:20 2015 No.7279559

>>7279523
It's a negative result because they didn't reproduce thrust at the levels claimed by previous experiments. That's really all we can say because they hadn't made any estimate of how much thrust they would expect from mundane sources like EM forces, etc.

Anonymous Fri May 22 22:17:14 2015 No.7279574

>>7279547
Don't forget that for the other device (Shayer's design, I think), the dummy load did give them nonzero force (albeit less than the non-dummy loads). For the Cannae device they claimed "no measurable force" from the dummy load, but they don't say what that means.

Anonymous Fri May 22 22:42:28 2015 No.7279620

>conservation of momentum is gospel
>virtual particles acting at infinite distances and multiverse superstring branes is totally logical
>can combine two gamma rays into electron positron pairs which then anhilate back into gamma rays
Did you see the article about the new (solid iron alloy) magnet in Korea that changes volume in response to magnetic field?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 23:00:20 2015 No.7279635 >>7279620 how about you post that article instead of just asking if we've seen it?

>>	Anonymous Fri May 22 23:35:00 2015 No.7279682 >>7279635 http://m.phys.org/news/2015-05-year-old-principle-class-magnets-potential.html

Anonymous Sat May 23 00:24:38 2015 No.7279733

>>7279523
>If this thing is SO worthless, so absolutely stupid, impossible, never going to work, etc, then why has it caught so much traction?

The same reason FTL neutrinos got so much traction. Anti-science fans are butthurt either over science insisting the earth is more than 5000 years old, or for scoffing at the immedietly preceeding piece of quackery (was it overunity or psychic energies?).

Nutters embrace quackery, science wisely scoffs, nutters smolder over the slight. Quakery is then proven false. Nutters distance themselves from quackery, but insist science was still wrong to scoff. Deep down they swear to make science pay for scoffing. The next piece of quackery comes along. This is it! Just the thing to wipe thay smug face off science folks. Nutters embrace new quackery ever the tighter, having learned exactly nothing.

Anonymous Sat May 23 03:07:31 2015 No.7279922

>>7279733
You don't know what you're talking about.

You actually have it backwards. "Anti-science fans" are the ones who act smug about the whole thing as if they always knew that science had it wrong and make fun of the fact that scientists are just starting to figure that out.
Real scientists do in fact get very excited about this stuff.

There is nobody on this planet that gets more excited at the prospect of fundamental theories being challenged than real scientists.
and if you were around enough real physicists or went to conferences during the whole FTL neutrino thing instead of just hearing all about it on /sci/, you would know that the general consensus was one of excitement. Almost any physicist you would talk to about it would say that they were 99% sure it's false but that it would be an extremely exciting development for physics if it weren't.

Anonymous Sat May 23 06:29:52 2015 No.7280166

>>7279922
I wonder:
Are there school systems that do not explain what the term "science" actually means?
How come so many people misunderstand the core of science?
Why are there so many fedora neckbeards that treat science like a religion? Did they get homeschooled or something?

Anonymous Sat May 23 06:33:52 2015 No.7280171

>>7279922
>There is nobody on this planet that gets more excited at the prospect of fundamental theories being challenged than real scientists.

Oh, I agree, but this does not constitute a challenge, any more than when four amatuers with no formal training in physics hook up a battery to a flywheel and become, "pretty sure, you guys", that they made a device that outputs more energy than it consumes. That does nothing to excite a real scientist, despite the fact that such a device would shatter everything we think we know about energy, and it does nothing to ecxite him or her because the track record of devices claiming to break the most fundimental laws of physics is not encouraging for the devices.

A real scientist hears a report of a device that would break conservation of momentum, and is filled not with excitement but with skepticism. When he or she then hears that the strength of the reported force strangely seems to vary wildly from test to test, always hovering right around the limits of measurement, where meaaurement error looms large, he or she rightly moves on to listen to something else.

Anonymous Sat May 23 06:38:57 2015 No.7280180

>>7280171
depends on how desperate they are.
and there are a lot of people so hopelessly desperate for something like this to be true. Not only for themselves but for the future of humanity

as long as desperate people still understand the score it doesn't really matter if they want to investigate further and talk about it

Anonymous Sat May 23 07:04:54 2015 No.7280209

>>7280180
It would be wonderful if this was true, especially if a superconducting cavity allowed for acceleration greater than one gravity.

So please disprove the experiments and show the actual source of thrust so we can move on and go back to exploring the universe with chemical rockets and ion engines.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 07:24:10 2015 No.7280230 >>7280171 >real scientist >makes wild assumptions and want to ignore interesting experimental data. go back to iflscience please.

Anonymous Sat May 23 07:24:21 2015 No.7280231

>>7280209

Measurement error. Happens all the time. My job is done. Experts in the field of physics reading the tests results remain unswayed that any real force has been demonstrated. When a test undeniably demonstrates thrust (obvious test: put one in space! ), I'll get hard at work explaining where it comes from.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 07:27:02 2015 No.7280234 >>7279682 my dicks works similarly

Anonymous Sat May 23 07:40:26 2015 No.7280248

>>7280230
>ignore interesting experimental data.

Not so much, "interesting," as, "suspect."

Test data showing a 96% efficent solar panel would be very interesting. Test data showing a 105% efficient solar panel would be suspect.

We're asking for exttaordinary evidence because breaking conservation of momentum is an extraordinary claim. Tell you what: put an emdrive in space. Have it demonstrate thrust not by measuring its weight with hypersensative scales, but by using that thrust to accelerate. If the emdrive accelerates, the thrust is real, plain as day.

And if it doesn't accelerate, we already know how the current test data came about: Measurement. Error.

Imagine being in a situation where the worse you measure something the more attention and funding you get to continue your work. What is going to happen?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 07:49:24 2015 No.7280257 >>7280248 >Not so much, "interesting," as, "suspect." It's suspect when you have one single measurement that cannot be repeated. It's interesting when several different agencies and sources get thrust signatures.

Anonymous Sat May 23 07:56:04 2015 No.7280261

>>7280257

I'm sure it'll work in space, then, right? Let me know when that happens. Until then, it's easily dismissed as measurement error, because it's not been measured independantly with anything resembling a consistant result.

One group measures an inexplicable force of X
The next group uses equipment ten times as sensative and measures an inexplicable force of 0.X
Could still be real, but this is just what measurement error looks like.

Put it in space = zero doubt

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 08:04:56 2015 No.7280267 >>7280248 A 96% efficent solar panel would be about as suspect as a magical space thruster made out of flower pots and microwaves.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 11:28:59 2015 No.7280521 >>7280248 >Imagine being in a situation where the worse you measure something the more attention and funding you get to continue your work. What is going to happen? You get climate science, for one thing.

Anonymous Sat May 23 15:03:50 2015 No.7280881

So this fgt doing it in his room and it generates thrust is one thing.

NASA doing it in a pretty high vacuum and there still is thrust is another thing.
I'm still not 100% sure this will really work but just thinking about what this would mean for space travel and the human race... This would be bigger than the invention of Computers, Combustion engines and Planes together.
It could pretty much solve the energy problem, which would solve the climate change.
If this gets tested on a probe in space and it still works, shit will hit the fan.

Anything on the topic that photons have moved faster than light in the thing? This is the point where I think it was a wrong measurement.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 17:45:52 2015 No.7281089 >>7280881 How the hell would it solve the energy problem?

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 18:18:27 2015 No.7281129 >>7281089 >attach to solar panels >put in space >wait while it accelerates into a relativistic bomb >hold world hostage >send messsge to world >"solve the energy problem now or everyone dies" >energy problem solved

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 18:20:49 2015 No.7281134 File: 25 KB, 588x418, 1377867311087.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7281129 Why don't we do this right now with nukes? That's a good idea.

Anonymous Sat May 23 18:24:29 2015 No.7281136

>>7280231
That is conjecture. You don't know it was a measurement error, you simply assumed your hypothesis is correct without testing it.

The scientific method has a hypothesis and a null hypothesis and an experiment intended to distinguish which is more likely.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 18:36:54 2015 No.7281151 >>7269031 this is imposible, is like having magnets without magnets only the magnetic field.

Anonymous Sat May 23 19:51:12 2015 No.7281221

>>7281136

And the emdrive did this, and the hypothesis test produced an effect, and the null hypithesis test also produced an effect, and that result suggested the effect is illusory, and this was recognized by everyone except those enamored with the emdrive.

It's quackery, no one needs to prove it's quackry, its proponants need to prove it *isn't,* and to the satisfaction of the *skeptics,* not themselves, and this is as it has always been with dubious devices attached to extraordinary claims.

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 21:28:44 2015 No.7281330 >>7281129 Just hit the earth anyway. In an instant, humanity will have produced more energy than it did in all of its history, so technically it will have solved the energy problem (a bit too hard).

>>	Anonymous Sat May 23 21:34:27 2015 No.7281337 >>7281221 You have misinterpreted. The null was a unslotted Cannae drive which had the same thrust as the slotted canna drive. The actual control produced zero thrust.

Anonymous Sat May 23 21:55:44 2015 No.7281365

>>7280261
>Until then, it's easily dismissed as measurement error
No.
Until then, shut the fuck up and be silent. Wait for results. Chalking it up to measurement error is a one-way trip to never testing it.
If it works in space a lot of people on the planet have a lot of head scratching to do.

Anonymous Sat May 23 21:58:27 2015 No.7281371

>>7281221
There was a null test, actual test and a control.
The null test only tested holes in the "bottom" section (or the lack of)
The actual test had the holes.
The null test disproved the notion that the holes improved efficiency somehow.
The control did not result in any thrust while the actual test did.
Stupid news outlets interpreting this wrong while hyping it up are the cancer

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]