EM Drive

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

happyjack27
Posts: 1435
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: EM Drive

Postby happyjack27 » Wed Aug 31, 2016 4:44 pm

JoeP wrote:I seriously doubt this is a real effect. It contradicts established theory.


It's debatable whether or not this contradicts established theory.

Classical mechanics, yes. But so does quantum mechanics. Classical mechanics is just an approximation of quantum mechanics at scales much larger than the planck length.

Quantum mechanics, not so much.

Besides, the real test is whether it contradicts established experiment.

I'm not aware of any experiment that rules it out.

Which makes this an interesting experiment, even if it turns out not to have direct applications to propulsion.

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

Re: EM Drive

Postby Diogenes » Wed Aug 31, 2016 8:19 pm

Old News, but maybe someone wants to look at it.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... weeks.html
‘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: 1829
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: EM Drive

Postby williatw » Thu Sep 01, 2016 12:08 am

Diogenes wrote:Old News, but maybe someone wants to look at it.



From your link:

Is the mystery of the 'impossible' fuel free EmDrive thruster about to be solved? Claims secretive Nasa lab to publish paper on 'warp drive' that could take humans to Mars in 10 weeks


Maybe Sonny White is deliberately conflating the EmDrive results (or encouraging subtly the confusion) between his inconclusive "warp drive" experiments and the apparently more successful Emdrive results. If the later pan out in a published peer reviewed paper the resulting favorable publicity might cause the Eagleworks lab's budget to increase conservatively by an order of magnitude. He (White) would then have the resources to pursue both the emdrive and his warp drive experiments. He seems to be enough of a political animal to understand something like that.

Skipjack
Posts: 6034
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Re: EM Drive

Postby Skipjack » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:59 am

williatw wrote:
Diogenes wrote:Old News, but maybe someone wants to look at it.



From your link:

Is the mystery of the 'impossible' fuel free EmDrive thruster about to be solved? Claims secretive Nasa lab to publish paper on 'warp drive' that could take humans to Mars in 10 weeks


Maybe Sonny White is deliberately conflating the EmDrive results (or encouraging subtly the confusion) between his inconclusive "warp drive" experiments and the apparently more successful Emdrive results. If the later pan out in a published peer reviewed paper the resulting favorable publicity might cause the Eagleworks lab's budget to increase conservatively by an order of magnitude. He (White) would then have the resources to pursue both the emdrive and his warp drive experiments. He seems to be enough of a political animal to understand something like that.

No, from what I understand the newspaper just mixed things up. All this is based on a quote by Dr Rodal on the NASA Spaceflight Forums about Eagleworks having their latest paper peer reviewed and about to be published. No details have been given on the contents. It might just as well be that they found that it does not work after all.
Last edited by Skipjack on Fri Sep 02, 2016 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Giorgio
Posts: 2706
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Re: EM Drive

Postby Giorgio » Thu Sep 01, 2016 8:13 am

Skipjack wrote: It might just as well be that they found that it does not work after all.

That was exactly my first thought once i read his post.
A society of dogmas is a dead society.

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

Re: EM Drive

Postby Diogenes » Thu Sep 01, 2016 1:55 pm

williatw wrote:
Diogenes wrote:Old News, but maybe someone wants to look at it.



From your link:

Is the mystery of the 'impossible' fuel free EmDrive thruster about to be solved? Claims secretive Nasa lab to publish paper on 'warp drive' that could take humans to Mars in 10 weeks


Maybe Sonny White is deliberately conflating the EmDrive results (or encouraging subtly the confusion) between his inconclusive "warp drive" experiments and the apparently more successful Emdrive results. If the later pan out in a published peer reviewed paper the resulting favorable publicity might cause the Eagleworks lab's budget to increase conservatively by an order of magnitude. He (White) would then have the resources to pursue both the emdrive and his warp drive experiments. He seems to be enough of a political animal to understand something like that.




I think a lot of people in the paid research community are very familiar with tactics for getting their projects funded, extended, or expanded. :)


Not saying it's a bad thing in this case, but I am really wanting to hear about the results of the space 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

Postby ScottL » Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:05 pm

In my opinion, given the data that has come out thus far, there is nothing to this EM Drive. My primary issues are that Shawyer has never shared the full specifications of his build, EagleWorks failed to replicate thrust, and Yang altered her experiment, moving the power source onto the pendulum with the device and got a null result. As we all know a non-published, non-peer-reviewed claim does not equate to a confirmation and that is what we have from Shawyer. As a matter of fact, Shawyer's theories have been ripped apart on both sides of the debate, so even believers don't buy into his justification of thrust. Without specfics of which he could have provided repeatedly over the 20+ years he's had a patent on this device, it looks more akin to a Rossi venture with less charisma. That being said, you have EagleWorks enter the picture with a poorly designed experiment where their control also produced a thrust. These things happen, and I appreciate their effort and openness in that respect. They followed up, however; with a vacuum test with non-vacuum rated equipment (which blew) and obviously those results are useless. In the past few months, Yang updated her experiment to account for Lorenz Forces, grounding issues, etc. She moved the power source onto the pendulum with the device and miraculously all thrust like measurements zeroed. Add to that the endless amount of DYIers who have also had null results (yes, I get their experiments aren't really admissable) and only one clear conclusion emerges.

I'd love to be wrong in my conclusion, but I just don't see it.

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

Re: EM Drive

Postby birchoff » Fri Sep 02, 2016 3:21 am

ScottL wrote:In my opinion, given the data that has come out thus far, there is nothing to this EM Drive. My primary issues are that Shawyer has never shared the full specifications of his build, EagleWorks failed to replicate thrust, and Yang altered her experiment, moving the power source onto the pendulum with the device and got a null result. As we all know a non-published, non-peer-reviewed claim does not equate to a confirmation and that is what we have from Shawyer. As a matter of fact, Shawyer's theories have been ripped apart on both sides of the debate, so even believers don't buy into his justification of thrust. Without specfics of which he could have provided repeatedly over the 20+ years he's had a patent on this device, it looks more akin to a Rossi venture with less charisma. That being said, you have EagleWorks enter the picture with a poorly designed experiment where their control also produced a thrust. These things happen, and I appreciate their effort and openness in that respect. They followed up, however; with a vacuum test with non-vacuum rated equipment (which blew) and obviously those results are useless. In the past few months, Yang updated her experiment to account for Lorenz Forces, grounding issues, etc. She moved the power source onto the pendulum with the device and miraculously all thrust like measurements zeroed. Add to that the endless amount of DYIers who have also had null results (yes, I get their experiments aren't really admissable) and only one clear conclusion emerges.

I'd love to be wrong in my conclusion, but I just don't see it.


I think the part that your missing in your analysis is that the EagleWorks setup is different. Shawyer/Yang and quite a few of the DIY are all running frustums with no die electric in them. While the EagleWorks and Cannae versions have die electrics in them. While I have no clue what effect the die electrics would have. I am 100% certain that the paper that is being talkd about includes positive results after doing work to remove additional sources of error. I suspect there wont be any discussion of theory in the paper as that sounded like it was the reason this paper took so long to come out. But if it did include some theory that would be even more interesting. Personally I am on the side of their being something there. The only question is can it be used for propulsion. That said if real the most interesting thing isnt the propulsion but using it as a way to learn more about how nature works.

williatw
Posts: 1829
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:15 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: EM Drive

Postby williatw » Fri Sep 02, 2016 4:14 am

birchoff wrote: That said if real the most interesting thing isnt the propulsion but using it as a way to learn more about how nature works.


You sound like more the pure scientist....more power to you, we need folks like that. Doubt if Einstein cared much about rather his theory of relativity allowed "warping" of space to permit fast interstellar flight; though you never know maybe he did. However for myself if this Emdrive (to say nothing of Sony White's warp drive) experiments pans out, I would have to say I care more about the practical applications (being able to go places in space really fast). Though I admit to curiosity as to what it does say about the reality we all live in, especially in the case of the warp drive. I would for instance love to know what dark matter & dark energy are regardless if there is any practical spin-offs to knowing such; so I guess we aren't too far removed in outlook.

djolds1
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:03 am

Re: EM Drive

Postby djolds1 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 12:38 pm

williatw wrote:
birchoff wrote: That said if real the most interesting thing isnt the propulsion but using it as a way to learn more about how nature works.


You sound like more the pure scientist....more power to you, we need folks like that. Doubt if Einstein cared much about rather his theory of relativity allowed "warping" of space to permit fast interstellar flight; though you never know maybe he did. However for myself if this Emdrive (to say nothing of Sony White's warp drive) experiments pans out, I would have to say I care more about the practical applications (being able to go places in space really fast). Though I admit to curiosity as to what it does say about the reality we all live in, especially in the case of the warp drive. I would for instance love to know what dark matter & dark energy are regardless if there is any practical spin-offs to knowing such; so I guess we aren't too far removed in outlook.
If McCulloch's MiHsC is correct, dark matter and dark energy are epicycles, placeholders in the style of the aether for what is really going on.

Which has been obvious for quite awhile, actually - the "darks" have always been "invisible substances" with less reality than Platonic Forms. Regardless of whether McCulloch's interpretation is correct or not, there are far too many kludged fixes bolted onto standard theory these days for standard theory to stand on anything more than the lazy inertia of the human mind and the human mind's present inability to imagine something different. The Standard Model of particle physics is a glorified exercise in curve-fitting with minimal predictive value, Relativity and Quantum theories remain ununified, and higher-level cosmological theory has been an exercise in metaphysical navel-gazing for going on fifty years now.

At the very least, McCulloch's MiHsC fits the requirement that a new theory be simple, elegant and parsimonious.
Vae Victis

PNeilson10
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:42 pm
Location: Denver, CO

Re: EM Drive

Postby PNeilson10 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 3:23 pm

Lets put all the theory bickering aside. Move to commercial reality.

Ask a simple question - how much thrust is needed for a cube sat station keeping use?

Here is a highly touted commercial company's product spec sheet

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5 ... ySheet.pdf

http://www.accion-systems.com/max-1-sma ... product-1/

30 uN thrust

Enough fuel for 10 N s total thrust

75 grams weight

25 cc Volume

Once the fuel is used up - game over

There is your motivation.

A 30 uN EM drive thruster in the 75 grams (low voltage power from the satellite) 25 cc volume class - drawing a few watts has a ready market with reasonable TAM and VC financing available.

Now to revive the theory bickering,

No matter how you look at this - an EM drive is a photon thruster. It generates photons to derive thrust. The bickering is in how the generated photons couple to the quantum vacuum. Since there is very little known about the quantum vacuum how do you couple a generated photon to it? Kind of pointless to bicker - either the EM drive couples to the vacuum more efficiently by bouncing photons than a photon shot off into space does - or not. There is so little known about the vacuum that this experiment is a far better guide to reality than any theory.

If the EM drive couples even a tiny bit more efficiently - this experiment at least yields some information about what the quantum vacuum is and may provide a valuable product with only tens of micro-newtons of thrust.

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

Re: EM Drive

Postby ScottL » Fri Sep 02, 2016 4:45 pm

birchoff wrote:I think the part that your missing in your analysis is that the EagleWorks setup is different. Shawyer/Yang and quite a few of the DIY are all running frustums with no die electric in them. While the EagleWorks and Cannae versions have die electrics in them. While I have no clue what effect the die electrics would have. I am 100% certain that the paper that is being talkd about includes positive results after doing work to remove additional sources of error. I suspect there wont be any discussion of theory in the paper as that sounded like it was the reason this paper took so long to come out. But if it did include some theory that would be even more interesting. Personally I am on the side of their being something there. The only question is can it be used for propulsion. That said if real the most interesting thing isnt the propulsion but using it as a way to learn more about how nature works.



I think you may be mistaken or behind on the happenings. EW's original work consisted of a frustum similar to Cannae's, however; their control appeared to have the same measurement (the null result) as the live test. If memory serves, EW later removed the dielectric since it had no appreciable effect and proceeded with the vacuum test with a design more similar to Shawyer's. Of course when you put electronics that aren't rated for vacuum in a vacuum, you can get odd results and they ended up blowing their RF amp if I'm not mistaken.

Until we see a design, it's hard to make a call, but given the lack of theory and the nullification of many other previous results, it's not looking good.

zapkitty
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:13 pm

Re: EM Drive

Postby zapkitty » Fri Sep 02, 2016 7:02 pm

Hoookay... IFLScience says they've received confirmation from the AIAA that the paper has indeed been accepted for the Journal of Propulsion and Power, but that AIAA policy is to not discuss details of a paper until it's actually out.

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/ru ... lly-works/
Last edited by zapkitty on Fri Sep 02, 2016 11:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Carl White
Posts: 315
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: EM Drive

Postby Carl White » Fri Sep 02, 2016 9:16 pm

Good to hear. My predictions, for what they're worth:

1. The paper won't settle the controversy.

2. Just possibly they'll be able to report reproduction by another group in NASA.

3. Skeptics will continue to attack the experimental apparatus and the signal to noise.

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

Re: EM Drive

Postby ScottL » Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm

Carl White wrote:Good to hear. My predictions, for what they're worth:

1. The paper won't settle the controversy.

2. Just possibly they'll be able to report reproduction by another group in NASA.

3. Skeptics will continue to attack the experimental apparatus and the signal to noise.


I agree with #1.

I disagree with #2. I don't think any other lab at NASA has any interest in this work.

I agree with #3. A lot of the issues could be resolved by mounting the power source onto the device instead of feeding it over wire attached to the pendulum.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests