If the Pop-Pop boat fails then we can use Feynman's Inverse Sprinkler to power the spacecraft.

 

I haven't been through the experimental details - because I'm not qualified to judge them - but one thing I'd look for is whether the device could be detected by sensitive equipment nearby. For instance, would turning on the device deflect a compass needle? ( Or whatever relevant instruments. ). If it does, then that's a problem. It means the drive may be pushing against something nearby. There's nothing to push against in space.

 

If the Pop-Pop boat fails then we can use Feynman's Inverse Sprinkler to power the spacecraft.

Hey!... you've just caused one of my fondest memories to pop up... and that is reading Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman ... a long time ago...

 

http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume2/v2i5/howto.htm

5. Conclusions
The conclusion section is very easy to write: all you have to do is to take your abstract and change the tense from present to past. It is considered good form to mention at least one relevant theory only in the abstract and conclusion. By doing this, you don't have to say why your experiment does (or does not) agree with the theory, you merely have to state that it does (or does not).
We (meaning I) presented observations on the scientific publishing process which (meaning that) are important and timely in that unless I have more published papers soon, I will never get another job. These observations are consistent with the theory that it is difficult to do good science, write good scientific papers, and have enough publications to get future jobs.

 

Sad to think of it. But yes, this thing is showing many resemblances with the cold fusion hype of 20 years ago.

I guess that, in accordance with what happened back then, time will be the judge of things.

 

If you're pumping in RF into a closed RF resonant chamber then removing the air is a good idea to stop electrical discharges. I normally see voltages in the range of 80kV at about 3KW in a normal Ion chamber at e-7 Toor vacuum.

Any possible physics effect in a EMdrive is completely unrelated to superconductivity directly. Superconductivity could increase the Q of the RF cavity but that's a simple matter of ohms law not a quantum effect like Meissner.

If this is true Einstein's biggest blunder how would that change our current perceptions? and the Universe is not curved, but flat.

What I got out of it, that an increase of energy at the beginning before the big bang, changed the speed of light, suggesting that another energy or at least the absence of energy in the void is pushing or pulling things apart and will continue for ever.

kv

 

????

 

If this is true Einstein's biggest blunder how would that change our current perceptions? and the Universe is not curved, but flat.

What I got out of it, that an increase of energy at the beginning before the big bang, changed the speed of light, suggesting that another energy or at least the absence of energy in the void is pushing or pulling things apart and will continue for ever.

kv

How this connects to the EMdrive is a mystery to me. If there is some version of Dark Energy in the universe that varies across space to extract it we would need a device of galactic effect proportions to see a any change in background levels, then we would need to connect the distant points in space with a FTL transmission medium to utilize this potential in a spacecraft sized object. Seems unlikely that a copper can could do that.

 

????

He hits most of the points I've tried to say here in a more entertaining manner.

The reported thrust could be from many sources in a vacuum chamber with a heated object. Trapped gasses and water vapor would be heated from the internal RF and start out-gassing at asymmetrical cavity resonance node positions on the surface. They do check for some out-gassing factors but IMO not all.

One possible source of error in the vacuum test experiment:
The thrust is from surface water trapped in the pores and hardware of the outer EMdrive surface exposed to vacuum. As the vacuum chamber is pumped down to high vacuum this surface wafer would freeze and sublimate at a very low rate for ages unless heated. This limits the ultimate vacuum in chambers so the normal process is to run a chamber bake cycle to heat up all internal parts to above the freezing point of water under vacuum and slowly capture the water vapor into the pumping system. If this was not done correctly in the EMdrive test setup as RF energy is applied to the cavity it will heat the outer surface causing the water to melt at the surface of the copper and then to slowly extend this melt to the surface of the water/vacuum sublimation boundary layer. This greatly increases the release of water vapor at the points of greatest heating possibly causing jets of water vapor to move from the suspended cavity into the vacuum chamber like little thrusters. This water vapor effect has a short thermal time lag after heat is applied/removed, is somewhat nonlinear with applied power, is noisy/chaotic but directional due to the shape of the device.

https://www.lesker.com/newweb/technical_info/vacuumtech/outgas_00_basicconcept.cfm
http://water.usgs.gov/edu/watercyclesublimation.html

 

????

Excellent explanation. Thanks for posting!

 

The man in the video does not understand mass. This does not break any conservation laws. How can anyone say when a mass law is broken.........when no one knows what mass is?

This is not over unity. Over unity is NOT perpetual motion. Perpetual motion is a character of all particles.

Everything is in a state of perpetual motion. Energy is stored on and released from perpetual motion.

You can not stop perpetual motion and we have never seen nor measured a static particle or atom.

What the hell is the man in the video talking about?

 

What the hell is the man in the video talking about?

Science instead of Science Fiction from a personal theory.

 

It's not my theory. It's classical physics theory. You know........the theory that we use to build and make everything we have.

 

It's not my theory. It's classical physics theory. You know........the theory that we use to build and make everything we have.

Why do you think the proponents of the EMdrive are searching out exotic Quantum, pilot-wave and other theories for how it works? I know why, because it's completely impossible for it to work with classical physics. The EmDrive defies the laws of classical physics at such a fundamental level (reactionless drive) it's easy to see using High School physics (Newton’s third law, "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”) with simple math.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-4/Newton-s-Third-Law

Then we have conservation of momentum with another huge can of worms for the EMdrive and classical physics.

 

Why do you think the proponents of the EMdrive are searching out exotic Quantum, pilot-wave and other theories for how it works? I know why, because it's completely impossible for it to work with classical physics. The EmDrive defies the laws of classical physics at such a fundamental level (reactionless drive) it's easy to see using High School physics (Newton’s third law, "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”) with simple math.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-4/Newton-s-Third-Law

Then we have conservation of momentum and another huge can of worms for the EMdrive and classical physics.

Nsa, I've just realized how truly patient you are... your daughters are very lucky girls indeed... cheers!

 

Nsa, I've just realized how truly patient you are... your daughters are very lucky girls indeed... cheers!

Children are a blessing. You only have to say 'I have children' to be forgiven for your madness.

 

.... You only have to say 'I have children' to be forgiven for your madness.

Or congratulated for your wisdom

 

Yup... I daresay the similarities are unescapable:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ments-creating-energy-when-none-should-exist/

 

I hadn't heard of the hydrino. And I wouldn't invest in that theory. But I also believe that electrons in hydrogen are not in a ground state. And how do you define ground state? And why do you think that the lowest state we have measured, is the lowest state possible?

Can a free electron reach ground state at 0 K degrees? Is it possible for an electron to reach ground level, exterior of a nucleus?

Can a free proton (which are very hot) reach ground level? Does a proton have a ground level? It surely does. And that level is exactly the same as the electron level. Surprising isn't it?

I have no idea of what is happening with cold fusion. But evidently they are getting some heat from somewhere. They should try to explain it.

"Why do you think the proponents of the EM drive are searching out exotic Quantum, pilot-wave and other theories for how it works? I know why, because it's completely impossible for it to work with classical physics."

This of course is how most look at it. But that's only because of what they have been taught. Faraday is the last item usually taught, that could be considered classical physics. And only his experiment.....and not the equations for them. This is where physics got perverted by mathematics. Even though Maxwell is labeled as classical......he was not, and neither were his equations. So when someone proclaims the Maxwell couldn't explain it (and therefore classical physics couldn't explain it) ......and that's why we went quantum, JUST remember Maxwell couldn't explain it, not that classical physics couldn't explain it.

Weber explained the correct relationship between the electric and magnetic, not Maxwell. And Parson's Magneton explained the physical cause for particle properties. It's not magic.

Modern academia has an agenda. Classical physics is defined as Newtonian, the old electric experiments, and topped off with Maxwell. That's crap.

Classical physics hasn't been taught in decades. And they certainly won't teach the history of it.

Now that we know what mass actually is......we see were the momentum and thermodynamic laws came from.

We can properly apply them now. Some of those laws are not true after all.....only apparent.

I have no idea if the em drives can manufacture and direct thrust. I guess nasa is gonna see.

It will be great fun if it does. How will they explain it?

 

No surprise... NASA seems to be questioning the results of the experiment:

https://futurism.com/expert-in-advanced-propulsion-says-nasas-em-drive-results-are-likely-not-valid/

And this is more or less what my own opinion has been all along:

According to NASA:

“Despite considerable effort within the NASASpaceflight.com forum to dismiss the reported thrust as an artifact, the EM Drive results have yet to be falsified. After consistent reports of thrust measurements from EM Drive experiments in the US, UK, and China – at thrust levels several thousand times in excess of a photon rocket, and now under hard vacuum conditions – the question of where the thrust is coming from deserves serious inquiry.”