5 ms·
EM drive is not an argument such that it might be refuted. It is a device. As such it has fitness for purpose, which depends entirely on the purpose at hand.
by aminorex 10y ago
EM drive is not an argument such that it might be refuted. It is a device. As such it has fitness for purpose, which depends entirely on the purpose at hand.
Snarkiness << skepticism.
- ceejayoz 10y ago"It doesn't work" is a fairly critical issue when talking about the device's fitness for purpose.
- aminorex 10y agoIf a device doesn't work for the purpose for which you built it, then you built it wrong. I can't help with that. What I can potentially help with is finding the purposes for which the EM drive mechanism can be useful, but I'm not there yet: The phenomenon is not yet understood well enough to determine those purposes.
- peterbonney 10y agoThe OP may not be a native English speaker (located in Europe), so any perceived snarkiness is likely based on an overly literal reading of his word choice. How about this alternative (which, btw, is how I interpreted the headline): "Principle behind EM Drive refuted" or "Experimental results of EM Drive refuted".
- tp1024 10y agoI'm the author of the article. The quote wasn't meant to be snarky. It was meant as an explanation why it is worthwhile to occasionally do experiments, even if you believe the device can't work the way it is supposed to. He also said it was excellent experiment for the purpose of teaching his students.
- zackbloom 10y agoSure, if you need a paperweight, it very well may be the device for you. But the question is it's fitness as a propulsion device.
- LoSboccacc 10y agoor discharge a battery very fast