EM Drive

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Carl White
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by Carl White »

Roger Shawyer has made his paper recently published in Acta Astronautica available for access. Unfortunately, there's little to no data, just discussion of potential applications.

http://authors.elsevier.com/a/1RQaGLWHFbB5c

"Second generation EmDrive propulsion applied to SSTO launcher and interstellar probe"

Highlights

• The latest work on EmDrive propulsion for spacecraft is described.

• YBCO superconducting cavities are incorporated into the thrusters.

• Three engine types using multiple cavities are detailed.

• A Single-Stage-To-Orbit spaceplane is described and mission parameters given.

• An Interstellar Probe is described and mission parameters given.

He's made a 5 minute video as well:

http://audioslides.elsevier.com/ViewerS ... height=639

Carl White
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by Carl White »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/1109504.html

This is a link to a part of a presentation made by the inventor of the Cannae Drive. He talks about (and shows) the test apparatus and briefly looks at results obtained. He also challenges skeptics to analyze his mathematical model demonstrating why differential radiative pressure is produced within the Cannae vessel (available on the Numerical Methods section of cannae.com). Unfortunately, it doesn't seem accessible from the main page on that site?? EDIT: It's possible this video is dated.

Latest update on the website:
JULY 23, 2015
Cannae has moved into a new headquarters and laboratory. We are installing our vacuum chamber and superconducting test laboratory which will be operational in August 2015. We will be testing next-generation prototypes of the Cannae Drive technology in September 2015. Stay tuned!

Nydoc
Posts: 40
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:45 am

Re: EM Drive

Post by Nydoc »

Despite recent claims, the EmDrive remains long on speculation, short on proof

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/2113 ... t-on-proof

hanelyp
Posts: 2255
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by hanelyp »

Nydoc wrote:Despite recent claims, the EmDrive remains long on speculation, short on proof
Given the magnitude of thrust measured in the better experiments I have to agree. It's really hard to eliminate plausible error when the force is in micro-newtons.
The daylight is uncomfortably bright for eyes so long in the dark.

Diogenes
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by Diogenes »

‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

williatw
Posts: 1873
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: EM Drive

Post by williatw »

Dr. Harold "Sonny" White - Eagleworks Laboratories: Advanced Propulsion

Published on Nov 5, 2014

NASA Ames Research Director’s Colloquium, August 12, 2014. Human space exploration is currently still in Low Earth Orbit. But what would it eventually take for humans to explore the outer solar system? If the ultimate objective is the stars, then what might that look like? How hard is interstellar flight?

Dr. Harold White, Advanced Propulsion Theme Lead for the NASA Engineering Directorate, discusses a couple of advanced propulsion concepts that may one day be useful for helping us reach the stars.

The NASA Ames Director's Colloquium Summer Series was presented by the Office of the Chief Scientist as part of the Center's 75th anniversary celebration.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wokn7crjBbA

williatw
Posts: 1873
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: EM Drive

Post by williatw »

NASA confirms that the ‘impossible’ EmDrive thruster really works, after new tests

Image

Engineer Roger Shawyer’s controversial EmDrive thruster jets back into relevancy this week, as a team of researchers at NASA’s Eagleworks Laboratories recently completed yet another round of testing on the seemingly impossible tech. Though no official peer-reviewed lab paper has been published yet, and NASA institutes strict press release restrictions on the Eagleworks lab these days, engineer Paul March took to the NASA Spaceflight forum to explain the group’s findings. In essence, by utilizing an improved experimental procedure, the team managed to mitigate some of the errors from prior tests — yet still found signals of unexplained thrust.

On the NASA spaceflight forums, March revealed as much as he could about the advancements that have been made with EmDrive and its relative technology. After apologizing for not having the ability to share pictures or the supporting data from a peer-reviewed lab paper, he starts by explaining (as straightforward as rocket science can get) that the Eagleworks lab successfully built and installed a 2nd generation magnetic damper which helps reduce stray magnetic fields in a vacuum chamber. The addition reduced magnetic fields by an order of magnitude inside the chamber, and also decreased Lorentz force interactions.

However, despite ruling out Lorentz forces almost entirely, March still reported a contamination caused by thermal expansion. Unfortunately, this reported contamination proves even worse in a vacuum (i.e. outer space) due in large part to its inherently high level of insulation. To combat this, March acknowledged the team is now developing an advanced analytics tool to assist in the separation of the contamination, as well as an integrated test which aims to alleviate thermally induced errors altogether.

While these advancements and additions are no doubt a boon for continued research of the EmDrive, the fact that the machine still produced what March calls “anomalous thrust signals” is by far the test’s single biggest discovery. The reason why this thrust exists still confounds even the brightest rocket scientists in the world, but the recurring phenomenon of direction-based momentum does make the EmDrive appear less a combination of errors and more like a legitimate answer to interstellar travel.

At this time, it’s unknown when Eagleworks Laboratories intends to officially publish its peer-reviewed paper, however, hearing of the EmDrive’s advancements from one of its top engineers bodes well for the future of this fascinating tech.





http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/ ... f-emdrive/

Diogenes
Posts: 6958
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by Diogenes »

I think it's about time someone cobbled together a test package to send into orbit for the acid test.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

ScottL
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by ScottL »

Looks like history is repeating itself. Didn't we just go through this the last time Paul spoke up. The backlash this time if it doesn't pan out could be devastating to an already small NASA research budget. I don't see this ending well for any of the parties involved.

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Re: EM Drive

Post by Axil »

ScottL wrote:Looks like history is repeating itself. Didn't we just go through this the last time Paul spoke up. The backlash this time if it doesn't pan out could be devastating to an already small NASA research budget. I don't see this ending well for any of the parties involved.
"If I had one wish. If one desire could come true". This is what ScottL hopes will impose discipline of those unruly thinkers at NASA. The backlash is what protects science from itself. That and the heavy hand of budgetary imposed heresy controls. If the backlash does not happen of its own accord, ScottL will do his best to get that process going.

JoeStrout
Site Admin
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Contact:

Re: EM Drive

Post by JoeStrout »

There seems to be a lot of irresponsible journalism on this topic. "NASA confirms that the ‘impossible’ EmDrive thruster really works" is just plain false. An accurate headline would be "NASA eliminates some sources of error, hasn't yet falsified EmDrive thruster." It's not a confirmation that it works; it's merely a failure to confirm that it doesn't.

This is basic logic, and in the original nasaspaceflight thread, most of the posters seem to have a grasp of that. But in much of the media, not so much.

I applaud the work the EagleWorks team is doing, and look forward to the actual paper when it comes out. There are more sources of error that they've already pointed out, and possibly still others they haven't thought of yet. My guess is that the anomalous effect observed will go away when all sources of error are eliminated. But my hope is that it doesn't, and that it leads to some new insight into how the universe works (and how we can make it do stuff we want to do).
Joe Strout
Talk-Polywell.org site administrator

ScottL
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by ScottL »

Axil wrote:"If I had one wish. If one desire could come true". This is what ScottL hopes will impose discipline of those unruly thinkers at NASA. The backlash is what protects science from itself. That and the heavy hand of budgetary imposed heresy controls. If the backlash does not happen of its own accord, ScottL will do his best to get that process going.
Axil, what are you even on about? What you've written makes no sense. What Paul has done, much like he did before, borders on negligence. He is once again feeding the media hype train instead of completing his work and getting published. By feeding the media all this sensationalist BS, he's risking future NASA budgeting towards similar research. What that means is that if the emDrive doesn't pan out, there will be no money for any other research related to advanced propulsion through NASA. What Paul should do is complete his work, remove all doubt, publish, peer-review, and then release. Instead he keeps putting the cart before the horse.

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by Skipjack »

JoeStrout wrote:There seems to be a lot of irresponsible journalism on this topic. "NASA confirms that the ‘impossible’ EmDrive thruster really works" is just plain false. An accurate headline would be "NASA eliminates some sources of error, hasn't yet falsified EmDrive thruster." It's not a confirmation that it works; it's merely a failure to confirm that it doesn't.

This is basic logic, and in the original nasaspaceflight thread, most of the posters seem to have a grasp of that. But in much of the media, not so much.

I applaud the work the EagleWorks team is doing, and look forward to the actual paper when it comes out. There are more sources of error that they've already pointed out, and possibly still others they haven't thought of yet. My guess is that the anomalous effect observed will go away when all sources of error are eliminated. But my hope is that it doesn't, and that it leads to some new insight into how the universe works (and how we can make it do stuff we want to do).
I agree with everything you said here, Joe.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: EM Drive

Post by ladajo »

Me too.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

birchoff
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 7:11 pm

Re: EM Drive

Post by birchoff »

ScottL wrote:
Axil wrote:"If I had one wish. If one desire could come true". This is what ScottL hopes will impose discipline of those unruly thinkers at NASA. The backlash is what protects science from itself. That and the heavy hand of budgetary imposed heresy controls. If the backlash does not happen of its own accord, ScottL will do his best to get that process going.
Axil, what are you even on about? What you've written makes no sense. What Paul has done, much like he did before, borders on negligence. He is once again feeding the media hype train instead of completing his work and getting published. By feeding the media all this sensationalist BS, he's risking future NASA budgeting towards similar research. What that means is that if the emDrive doesn't pan out, there will be no money for any other research related to advanced propulsion through NASA. What Paul should do is complete his work, remove all doubt, publish, peer-review, and then release. Instead he keeps putting the cart before the horse.
Have you read Paul's comments on NSF? There is no sensationalism intent on Paul's part. There is a thriving community of users on NSF that are attempting to do their own replications and propose sources of error and theories of operation. From my perspective Paul is engaging that community and has at most provided them a paraphrased version of the abstract of a paper that is currently under peer review.

Though given a re reading of his postings I am definitely left with the impression that peer review is either complete or almost complete and there are no issues preventing the paper from being published. As he has said that the peer-reviewed paper will be out middle of next year.

There isn't anything you can do to reign in another persons imagination. The only thing that would have lead to different articles being written (none of which would have been any less sensationalist) is if he reported that all anomalous thrust signals disappeared after accounting for all the sources of error suggested by the NASA Panel. Sure it would be nice for all of us to wait for the paper to come out. But honestly if the lab tests have already been done, and the paper has already been written, and peer review has been completed to the point where you have a set release date for the paper. Talking about the results of said paper is not an issue. Actually what really caused the EW information spigot to get snapped shut was Paul's premature discussion of the interferometer test they had tried that seemed to show a space warp signature. Its what lead to every mainstream reporter talking about NASA discovering Warp Drives. Comparing Paul's comments then to his guarded comments now; I would argue its impossible to argue his current comments are inappropriate.

Post Reply