4 ms·

1. studies consistently are showing that this seems to produce thrust without expelling any matter 2. we know that can't be possible I think most people are e

1. studies consistently are showing that this seems to produce thrust without expelling any matter 2. we know that can't be possible I think most people are excited about this not because they think we just proved 2 to be wrong, but instead because we know 2 must be true, so what the hell is going on with 1??? Most likely we will find out that we are NOT violating the known laws of the universe, but we're "not violating" them in a very interesting way.

goodcanadian 9y ago
By far the most likely scenario is that something subtle but utterly mundane is happening and no useful thrust is actually being produced. You say that: 1. studies consistently are showing that this seems to produce thrust without expelling any matter but this is in fact the first peer reviewed study, so we really only have a sample size of one (not to say other experiments are invalid, just that we have no reason to trust them). Even assuming it is down to subtle experimental error, we may still learn something interesting, of course. Far less likely is that this is actually producing useful thrust, and regardless of how it is doing it, that would be extremely interesting, and in all probability, new physics. Even if true, I don't expect it to completely overturn our understanding of physics, but it would be very exciting.
- Fjolsvith 9y ago
  Here's another article that proposes to explain why it works: http://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4953807 http://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4953807
- indolering 9y ago
  Others have tried to replicate the results but got thrust in the null position[0]. This indicates that the amount of thrust being generated is so small that it's likely the result of instrumentation error. [0]: https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/dateien/forschung/folder-2007-08-21-5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/JPC---Direct-Thrust-Measurements-of-an-EM-Drive-and-Evaluation-of-Possible-Side-Effects.pdf?lang=en https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/...
flukus 9y ago
> Most likely we will find out that we are NOT violating the known laws of the universe, but we're "not violating" them in a very interesting way. Most likely is still some sort of experimental error. I'd like it to be real but there is still tonnes of room for skepticism.
indolering 9y ago
>studies consistently are showing that this seems to produce thrust without expelling any matter Nope, others have been unable to reproduce their results. As for Eagle Works ... their data is crap. The paper consists of 18 data points and large amounts of variance. The largest thrust measurement comes from the middle power setting. Furthermore, they are measuring (at most!) 120 micro-newtons of thrust. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's ~1/100 the weight of a penny[0]. Even if they can produce these tiny amounts of of thrust reliably, they still need to eliminate other sources of error. Other false-positive results of similar devices have either generated thrust in the null condition or were later retracted after correcting for measurement error. >I think most people are excited about this not because they think we just proved 2 to be wrong, but instead because we know 2 must be true, so what the hell is going on with 1??? The EM drive literally entails perpetual motion. We know that's impossible, yet someone always manages to sell a new version of it every few years. >Most likely we will find out that we are NOT violating the known laws of the universe, but we're "not violating" them in a very interesting way. There is a reason this is in a journal dedicated to publishing experimental results from aerospace engineers and not a physics journal. Peer review isn't magic, it just means two out of three people signed off on a paper being published. [0]: Seems crazy small, math may be wacky off due to lack of sleep.
- flukus 9y ago
  > The EM drive literally entails perpetual motion. We know that's impossible, yet someone always manages to sell a new version of it every few years. Well the universe was created, so that seems to imply the energy can be created. We don't know that energy can't be created, just that the current laws of the universe don't allow for it, as far as we know. Not that I believe this will violate that law in anyway. Even if the drive turns out to be real I suspect it will be something like photon entanglement, where it appears data is travelling faster than light but it's in no way helpful.
- boznz 9y ago
  I'm not a scientist but it begs the question, how is 1.2milinewtons for 1KW input perpetual motion ? The only way it could be Perpetual motion I can see is if I could somehow generate 1KW with that 1.2milinewtons which would be science fiction.

goodcanadian 9y ago

By far the most likely scenario is that something subtle but utterly mundane is happening and no useful thrust is actually being produced. You say that: 1. studies consistently are showing that this seems to produce thrust without expelling any matter but this is in fact the first peer reviewed study, so we really only have a sample size of one (not to say other experiments are invalid, just that we have no reason to trust them). Even assuming it is down to subtle experimental error, we may still learn something interesting, of course. Far less likely is that this is actually producing useful thrust, and regardless of how it is doing it, that would be extremely interesting, and in all probability, new physics. Even if true, I don't expect it to completely overturn our understanding of physics, but it would be very exciting.

Fjolsvith 9y ago
Here's another article that proposes to explain why it works: http://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4953807 http://aip.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4953807
indolering 9y ago
Others have tried to replicate the results but got thrust in the null position[0]. This indicates that the amount of thrust being generated is so small that it's likely the result of instrumentation error. [0]: https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/dateien/forschung/folder-2007-08-21-5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/JPC---Direct-Thrust-Measurements-of-an-EM-Drive-and-Evaluation-of-Possible-Side-Effects.pdf?lang=en https://tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/...

flukus 9y ago

> Most likely we will find out that we are NOT violating the known laws of the universe, but we're "not violating" them in a very interesting way. Most likely is still some sort of experimental error. I'd like it to be real but there is still tonnes of room for skepticism.

indolering 9y ago

>studies consistently are showing that this seems to produce thrust without expelling any matter Nope, others have been unable to reproduce their results. As for Eagle Works ... their data is crap. The paper consists of 18 data points and large amounts of variance. The largest thrust measurement comes from the middle power setting. Furthermore, they are measuring (at most!) 120 micro-newtons of thrust. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's ~1/100 the weight of a penny[0]. Even if they can produce these tiny amounts of of thrust reliably, they still need to eliminate other sources of error. Other false-positive results of similar devices have either generated thrust in the null condition or were later retracted after correcting for measurement error. >I think most people are excited about this not because they think we just proved 2 to be wrong, but instead because we know 2 must be true, so what the hell is going on with 1??? The EM drive literally entails perpetual motion. We know that's impossible, yet someone always manages to sell a new version of it every few years. >Most likely we will find out that we are NOT violating the known laws of the universe, but we're "not violating" them in a very interesting way. There is a reason this is in a journal dedicated to publishing experimental results from aerospace engineers and not a physics journal. Peer review isn't magic, it just means two out of three people signed off on a paper being published. [0]: Seems crazy small, math may be wacky off due to lack of sleep.

flukus 9y ago
> The EM drive literally entails perpetual motion. We know that's impossible, yet someone always manages to sell a new version of it every few years. Well the universe was created, so that seems to imply the energy can be created. We don't know that energy can't be created, just that the current laws of the universe don't allow for it, as far as we know. Not that I believe this will violate that law in anyway. Even if the drive turns out to be real I suspect it will be something like photon entanglement, where it appears data is travelling faster than light but it's in no way helpful.
boznz 9y ago
I'm not a scientist but it begs the question, how is 1.2milinewtons for 1KW input perpetual motion ? The only way it could be Perpetual motion I can see is if I could somehow generate 1KW with that 1.2milinewtons which would be science fiction.