em drive

[Betruger]

Thanks Birchoff.

[GIThruster]

One of the annoying things for me, and why I haven't invested myself in following this more closely; is that everyone understands Shawyer's explanation for how this produces thrust cannot be correct. Sonny got involved because he claims his QVF model explains the thrust here (though he claims this about EVERYONE's work!) The obvious trouble is, that Sonny's QVF model requires that virtual partials transfer momentum, but do not gravitate (or they would collapse the universe) and this is a direct violation of Einstein's Equivalence Principle (EEP). If Sonny is right, all of GR is wrong.

Sorry but I'm betting on Einstein, especially given Sonny's proclivity to misreport, exaggerate, perversely censor important details and otherwise violate standard scientific reporting through his colorful narratives and outright bullshit.

[birchoff]

One of the annoying things for me, and why I haven't invested myself in following this more closely; is that everyone understands Shawyer's explanation for how this produces thrust cannot be correct.

Ok since when was it ok to ignore something just because you believe the theory postulated by the creator may be wrong. This type of reasoning is honestly what rubs me the wrong way. Its one thing to say you have higher priorities and will come back to it later if neccessary. But if an attempt to replicate an experiment doesn't require much in the way of resources then someone should do it. Otherwise we live in this vicious cycle of Someone comes up with a good idea, that disagree's with conventional wisdom, and can never ever hope to get anyone to look at it or attempt to replicate it. How can our understanding of the universe evolve if we don't take chances.

Now dont get me wrong I am not a died in the wool true believer of these devices. I very much aware of the fact that without the capability these devices display humanity expanding into the universe is pretty much a pipe dream. We could and will expand into our solar system but with how very very dangerous space is. The last thing I want to worry about jumping between solar systems is where to find a propellant station.

[williatw]

On a seperate note it would seem the Warp Interferrometer tests could now be officially considered dead in the water

http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.7772

From your link:

This paper contends that the spacetime distortions resulting from the experimentally obtainable electric field of a parallel plate capacitor configuration cannot be detected by the White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer [1]. Any post-processing results indicating a vanishing, non-zero difference between the charged and uncharged states of the capacitor are due to local effects rather than spacetime perturbations.

However, the spacetime distortions produced by such an electric field, or even the comparatively much greater distortions caused by a 1 kg mass, are exceptionally below the detection threshold of all present-day interferometry techniques

&

The White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer has been demonstrated to be incapable of resolving the minute distortions of spacetime created by both 106 V·m-1 electric fields and a 1 kg mass.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1407/1407.7772.pdf

So the paper doesn't seem to be saying that his (White's) concept of a modified Alcubierre warp drive would or wouldn't work, only that the experimental test method devised by White would be incapable of discerning the spacial distortion even if it happened?

So then the jury is still out on whether his modified Warp Field would or would not work; more/better experimental design needed?

[birchoff]

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1407/1407.7772.pdf

So the paper doesn't seem to be saying that his (White's) concept of a modified Alcubierre warp drive would or wouldn't work, only that the experimental test method devised by White would be incapable of discerning the spacial distortion even if it happened?

So then the jury is still out on whether his modified Warp Field would or would not work; more/better experimental design needed?

Thats what I was trying to say. was hoping my lack of specificity in this instance would not be interpreted to mean that Warp drives are impossible.

[qraal]

Glad someone has read Gerry and Jeff's preprint. I sent the link to Sonny White & Paul March, but haven't yet read it myself. It seems either Gerry & Jeff have misinterpreted what White's testing with his test articles or they've provided a useful analysis of the "null hypothesis" - that a given test article only produces a warp compatible with normal GR effects, rather than the abnormal effects Sonny is hoping to see. One of the test articles was a Mach-Effect Thruster, which *might* produce a larger warp effect than plain vanilla GR predicts.

[Aero]

Glad someone has read Gerry and Jeff's preprint. I sent the link to Sonny White & Paul March, but haven't yet read it myself. It seems either Gerry & Jeff have misinterpreted what White's testing with his test articles or they've provided a useful analysis of the "null hypothesis" - that a given test article only produces a warp compatible with normal GR effects, rather than the abnormal effects Sonny is hoping to see. One of the test articles was a Mach-Effect Thruster, which *might* produce a larger warp effect than plain vanilla GR predicts.

Glad someone has read Gerry and Jeff's preprint. I ... haven't yet read it myself. It seems either Gerry & Jeff have

wow - I am in awe of your perceptive ability. But the paper could be about bunny rabbits.

[GIThruster]

Ok since when was it ok to ignore something just because you believe the theory postulated by the creator may be wrong. This type of reasoning is honestly what rubs me the wrong way. Its one thing to say you have higher priorities and will come back to it later if neccessary. But if an attempt to replicate an experiment doesn't require much in the way of resources then someone should do it.

Okay, so you tell me, when is enough, enough? The Brits funded this work for a decade despite it is based upon an engineer's faulty misunderstanding concerning GR and what "group velocity" entails. They got nothing. Paul March and Sonny White built this thing again with Gary Hudson's money, and again, they got nothing. The pawned this tuff off on the Chinese as part of an counter-intel scam, same as the Baker gravity wave nonsense, as a distraction to lead them stray, and the Chinese got nothing. Sonny White says this supports his QVF theory (which is not a scientific theory. It does not even rise to the status of a scientific model.) so he got DARPA to pay for him to do this experiment yet again. I have to say I find it VERY long odds that Sonny is reporting truthfully here because his theory is broken as is Shawyer's explanation for why this ought to produce thrust.

I'm sorry, but you have some serious naivete as regards how we ought to fund research. There are many hundreds of ridiculous scheme out there like this that have no scientific theory in support. Paying to chase them all down is NOT what science is all about. And do remember, that for each of these scams that we pay to pursue, we are not pursuing something else as result. There is NEVER a case such as you describe that we can investigate these things when there is nothing better to do. There is ALWAYS something better to do--we can do real science. This is not real science. This is pathological science that we know cannot work and the explanation for which we KNOW is wrong. If it works, it is by accident after a decade of full expenses paid research in Britain that showed NOTHING. Regardless of the claims, odds are 99% this is just another case of Sonny's fraudulent reporting.

[Carl White]

Okay, so you tell me, when is enough, enough? The Brits funded this work for a decade despite it is based upon an engineer's faulty misunderstanding concerning GR and what "group velocity" entails. They got nothing. Paul March and Sonny White built this thing again with Gary Hudson's money, and again, they got nothing. The pawned this tuff off on the Chinese as part of an counter-intel scam, same as the Baker gravity wave nonsense, as a distraction to lead them stray, and the Chinese got nothing. Sonny White says this supports his QVF theory (which is not a scientific theory. It does not even rise to the status of a scientific model.) so he got DARPA to pay for him to do this experiment yet again. I have to say I find it VERY long odds that Sonny is reporting truthfully here because his theory is broken as is Shawyer's explanation for why this ought to produce thrust.

I'm not sure how you conclude that the Brits "got nothing". Shawyer built (supposedly) working models for them and tested them. Then, so far as I understand it, once he started making his results known, the scientific community started protesting his drive is impossible and his results must be flawed, especially given that he tried to provide a theoretical explanation which was found to be highly unsatisfactory. Apparently opinion trumped the (supposed) results, and, rather than encouraging independent replication, funding was discontinued. Their decision was based on pressure from the scientific community. Their choice to throw it away.

I don't understand how you conclude that the Chinese "got nothing", after three publications and an apparatus that (supposedly) confirmed the results. Do you dismiss them as being charlatans, or just incompetent? Despite Prof. Yang having plenty of experience with microwave plasma thrusters, which use a resonant cavity to accelerate a plasma jet for propulsion?

The pawned this stuff off on the Chinese as part of an counter-intel scam

Do you have any evidence for this at all?

I have to say I find it VERY long odds that Sonny is reporting truthfully here because his theory is broken as is Shawyer's explanation for why this ought to produce thrust.

There are four other names on the paper, with reputations on the line. Would you put your name on a paper you knew to be false?

[AcesHigh]

I doubt the chinese spent enough money and human resources researching the EM Drive compared to their huge economy. If anything, I would say the counter-intel scam operation would have cost more money than the chinese spend, and that´s a ridiculous small drop in the ocean for both US and China's economies.

[birchoff]

Okay, so you tell me, when is enough, enough? The Brits funded this work for a decade despite it is based upon an engineer's faulty misunderstanding concerning GR and what "group velocity" entails. They got nothing. Paul March and Sonny White built this thing again with Gary Hudson's money, and again, they got nothing. The pawned this tuff off on the Chinese as part of an counter-intel scam, same as the Baker gravity wave nonsense, as a distraction to lead them stray, and the Chinese got nothing. Sonny White says this supports his QVF theory (which is not a scientific theory. It does not even rise to the status of a scientific model.) so he got DARPA to pay for him to do this experiment yet again. I have to say I find it VERY long odds that Sonny is reporting truthfully here because his theory is broken as is Shawyer's explanation for why this ought to produce thrust.

I'm sorry, but you have some serious naivete as regards how we ought to fund research. There are many hundreds of ridiculous scheme out there like this that have no scientific theory in support. Paying to chase them all down is NOT what science is all about. And do remember, that for each of these scams that we pay to pursue, we are not pursuing something else as result. There is NEVER a case such as you describe that we can investigate these things when there is nothing better to do. There is ALWAYS something better to do--we can do real science. This is not real science. This is pathological science that we know cannot work and the explanation for which we KNOW is wrong. If it works, it is by accident after a decade of full expenses paid research in Britain that showed NOTHING. Regardless of the claims, odds are 99% this is just another case of Sonny's fraudulent reporting.

First off where did you get the information to say that the Brits got nothing? Seems like that information should be available somewhere if it were true. Secondly, where is the proof that Paul March and Sonny White built this thing again (I am assuming you meant before the Aug 2013 campaign that was recently reported on, since that report showed thrust but requires additional testing) and got nothing. Thirdly, how do you know the Chinese were given this stuff to work on as a part of a counter-intel scam. Event if that were true from the three papers published by Yang it would look like they did get positive test results up to their last published paper that I can find in 2012.

Assuming your working from rumors and here-say. It is this kinda thing that burns my bacon. If someone is a lover of the scientific method as I assume you are, rumors and here-say should never be enough evidence to convince you. And assuming you have more than that, then if your going to publish such comments anywhere you should post your sources. Otherwise there will always be reasonable room for someone to not believe your comments.

That said I am not proposing some unending circle of testing the same ideas over and over again, irrespective of what past experiments have shown. I am however arguing that if a new experiment is devised that shows something interesting, it should be added to the list of things scientists should investigate. The way that list gets prioritized should be left mostly up to the organizations funding the scientists. An organization should not be able to perpetually mothball a replication just because they feel like it. This should prevent the worst case scenario of bad ideas gumming up the system.

[GIThruster]

Excuse you, but don't lecture me about my assumptions while you're busy making assumptions. You sound ridiculous.

I don't have any need to present arguments nor evidence that comes to what you are proposing is the proper standard. When I say for example, that Sonny and Paul built a Shawyer resonator and hung it from a 2 meter penduluum in the garage, I am speaking from experience. I have known these two for almost a decade, and was appraised of their work when it was in progress, from the time before they approached Gary for funds until the day he cut them off for lack of results. There is no intellectual duty to the truth that forces me to pander to your ignorance on these issues, and I am not going to spend ANY time researching for evidence for you. Do it yourself.

The Shawyer work was paid for by the Brits for many years without reasonable results. In fact, the work was not even provided proper scientific controls. After years of serious support, the Brits had had enough and dropped the program. WHILE ALL THIS WAS GOING ON, from a time BEFORE THE FUNDS FOR THAT PROGRAM ARRIVED, all sensible people argued that Shawyer was an engineer, not a physicist, and that he did not understand what the concept of "group velocity" entails, and that what he was proposing was based upon his faulty understanding and which led to an obvious violation of conservation. All this is true, but those arguments are NOT why the Shawyer work was defunded in Britain. It was defunded because it failed to produce results, just as the replication done by Sonny and Paul (my mentor) failed to produce results.

Although I have not wasted my time on the recent stuff from China, I would note to you that they have had funding for this for several years now, and until lately, their reports were not of positive test results. Why they should suddenly have positive test results is beyond me, but I do know its not because Shawyer is right, because we know he is not, and it is not because Sonny is right, because we know he is not. If they're getting significant results in China, and at JSC, it is not the result of good science, because good science does not violate conservation (Shawyer's explanation) nor Einstein's Equivalence Principle (Sonny's explanation).

My belief is, this is all just another continuing counter-intel con game. It's noteworthy that it arrived exactly at the point where Sonny was scrambling for funding. Sonny was funded until September and until very recently, the story was that unless they could both get additional funding for Eagle, and produce the 0.4N/kWe thrust to power efficiency they had promised, they would close shop by October 1. Now suddenly despite they have not made their thrust efficiency goals, they have funding through June 2015. And this magically appearing funding is likely in no small portion the result of these supposed "findings" in China.

Just use a little common sense. The Chinese don't release test results without a purpose. In this instance, it seems to me completely likely, their purpose is to throw one of the CIA's barbs back in their faces, and it seems it worked! And seriously, if you don't know how these things happen and go on year after year, don't post some childish note telling me you're upset for my assumptions. My judgements are based on as much an insider's knowledge as is possible without being an insider. One thing you can count on--none of this is what it seems. This is how the CIA and places like China do their daily duty to their countries--through misinformation counterintelligence scams. The outcome is, that Eagle has funding for another year, and it looks like NASA Glenn is going to replicate their work. So we'll see what we see, after a few million more dollars. Trouble is, we ought to be spending those dollars on something that has a chance to work like M-E physics, rather than on this.

[birchoff]

Excuse you, but don't lecture me about my assumptions while you're busy making assumptions. You sound ridiculous.

I don't have any need to present arguments nor evidence that comes to what you are proposing is the proper standard. When I say for example, that Sonny and Paul built a Shawyer resonator and hung it from a 2 meter penduluum in the garage, I am speaking from experience. I have known these two for almost a decade, and was appraised of their work when it was in progress, from the time before they approached Gary for funds until the day he cut them off for lack of results. There is no intellectual duty to the truth that forces me to pander to your ignorance on these issues, and I am not going to spend ANY time researching for evidence for you. Do it yourself.

The Shawyer work was paid for by the Brits for many years without reasonable results. In fact, the work was not even provided proper scientific controls. After years of serious support, the Brits had had enough and dropped the program. WHILE ALL THIS WAS GOING ON, from a time BEFORE THE FUNDS FOR THAT PROGRAM ARRIVED, all sensible people argued that Shawyer was an engineer, not a physicist, and that he did not understand what the concept of "group velocity" entails, and that what he was proposing was based upon his faulty understanding and which led to an obvious violation of conservation. All this is true, but those arguments are NOT why the Shawyer work was defunded in Britain. It was defunded because it failed to produce results, just as the replication done by Sonny and Paul (my mentor) failed to produce results.

Although I have not wasted my time on the recent stuff from China, I would note to you that they have had funding for this for several years now, and until lately, their reports were not of positive test results. Why they should suddenly have positive test results is beyond me, but I do know its not because Shawyer is right, because we know he is not, and it is not because Sonny is right, because we know he is not. If they're getting significant results in China, and at JSC, it is not the result of good science, because good science does not violate conservation (Shawyer's explanation) nor Einstein's Equivalence Principle (Sonny's explanation).

My belief is, this is all just another continuing counter-intel con game. It's noteworthy that it arrived exactly at the point where Sonny was scrambling for funding. Sonny was funded until September and until very recently, the story was that unless they could both get additional funding for Eagle, and produce the 0.4N/kWe thrust to power efficiency they had promised, they would close shop by October 1. Now suddenly despite they have not made their thrust efficiency goals, they have funding through June 2015. And this magically appearing funding is likely in no small portion the result of these supposed "findings" in China.

Just use a little common sense. The Chinese don't release test results without a purpose. In this instance, it seems to me completely likely, their purpose is to throw one of the CIA's barbs back in their faces, and it seems it worked! And seriously, if you don't know how these things happen and go on year after year, don't post some childish note telling me you're upset for my assumptions. My judgements are based on as much an insider's knowledge as is possible without being an insider. One thing you can count on--none of this is what it seems. This is how the CIA and places like China do their daily duty to their countries--through misinformation counterintelligence scams. The outcome is, that Eagle has funding for another year, and it looks like NASA Glenn is going to replicate their work. So we'll see what we see, after a few million more dollars. Trouble is, we ought to be spending those dollars on something that has a chance to work like M-E physics, rather than on this.

I apologize if you interpreted what I wrote as attempting to lecture you. All I wanted was some additional information from you to corroborate the statements your making. It doesn't matter to me if your right or wrong but if I or anyone else is expected to be swayed in some way shape or form by your absolute statements then some documentation is required. That is not an unreasonable or childish request to make. If you don't don't desire to provide that information fine; but I ,and I am sure others not in the know as you claim to be, will simply stick to a Moon sized grain of salt beside your comment.

However, let me assume that what you say is correct. The basic implication of your statements is that NASA as an entity cannot be trusted when it comes to reporting scientific results? Personally I see no other way to slice it if what your saying is completely accurate. Now I don't have a problem with american scientists being used in this manner by american intelligence agencies after putting themselves out on a limb. But the institution that is NASA should be livid about this, assuming they are aware. The only way your particular store line ends up not causing any credibility backlash at NASA is if the paper eagle just published didn't blow up like it did and the work just died a slow hidden death. No one is out their saying EagleWorks Lab is doing the research its NASA's name that's being reported in the rags. I know I wouldn't trust them anymore if what you said is accurate. This is why I have a hard time swallowing your side of the story. I cannot claim it isnt true, I would just need a lot more than your word. Since the most I know about you is that you are a regular commentor on this board. If I ascribed any sort of credibility to your statements just because you said they are true I would be a fool. So I do not think it unreasonable to ask for some corroboration.


Finally, I am also interested in seeing more research go into Mach Effect thrusters. If Woodward decides to do a crowd funding effort to get some money to do something where that is concerned I will be first in line to toss in some change to support and post the link and presentation in the places I frequent. I am generally interested in the concept of a propulsion system that doesnt require the ship it is mounted on to carry around all the mass it needs to use for propellant. Which means I am interested in the Cannae devices, EmDrive, and ME Thrusters. If the results of this line of inquiry continue to hold up I would think it would be easier for Woodward to get interest in his implementation and theory.

[Skipjack]

NASA is not an entity.

[GIThruster]

The basic implication of your statements is that NASA as an entity cannot be trusted when it comes to reporting scientific results?

Skippy has this right. It's not fair to the most often excellent workers at NASA to paint them all with the same brush. Dr. Sonny White is an aberration at NASA. He has always been full of shit. For details of this you can read back in the Mach Effect thread here. I was correcting this PhD's math with my 30 year old algebra back in 2007 and he hasn't gotten more careful, more serious or more honest in the years since. He's pretty pathetic and many of the people at NASA know this. However, the people at DARPA where he gets his money from do not know this and he's an very skillful bullshit artist. Eventually though, the truth will win out and Sonny's lack of honor and integrity will catch up with him. The fact he is so untrustworthy does not however reflect in any way on those he has hired, including Paul March. Paul is not responsible for the outlandish lies and exaggeration Sonny is so often guilty of.

Want another example of the lies? You said you read his arxiv paper and he's bagging the warp field experiment? Well that's good since he had a null result. So why did he stand up in front of a classroom of aero students in Arizona and tell everyone he had a "non-null" result? You can search for and find that video online I believe at Youtube.

Anyone interested in supporting Jim's work through Kickstarter, look forward to news in September or October.