I don't recall the device's inventor claiming that new physics were involved. But rather his interpretation of relativistic phenomena is the one being questioned.

 

I don't recall the device's inventor claiming that new physics were involved. But rather his interpretation of relativistic phenomena is the one being questioned.

You're right, he claimed some obviously wrong hypothesis that a person with a high school understanding of relativity could see was wrong, it's a joke.
https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2006/09/a_plea_to_save_new_scientist.html#c004816

The new physics explanations are currently popular with the emdrive because no possible current physics explain the violations of conservation of energy/momentum without it being a easily exploited perpetual motion machine that could be used to destroy entire planets.

There just is no possible alternative theory of physics that's also compatible with every experiment conducted since Newton dropped apples up to the LHC at full energy that explains any possible thrust greater than a photon rocket from a tin can filled with RF.
http://www.askamathematician.com/2017/12/q-is-reactionless-propulsion-possible/

Science is all about learning things we don’t know and trying to prove our own theories wrong. While scientific discovery is certainly awe inspiring, it is also the exact opposite of wishful thinking. That said, good science means keeping an open mind much longer than any reasonable person would be willing to. In the ultimate battle between theoretical and experimental physics, the experimentalists always win. If someone ever manages to create a self-moving, reactionless drive, then all the theories about why that’s impossible go out the window. But as of now, those theories (standard physics) are holding firm. We can expect that for the rest of forever, all space craft will have a tail of exhaust behind them.

Conservation of momentum must remain true for the universe to exist. Maxwell's equations of electromagnetics, Relativity, quantum mechanics and every proper physical theory ever written is completely and absolutely compatible with that statement.

 

Pons and Fleischman observe something unexpected and the world goes crazy trying to replicate and/or explain the observation..

Perfect analogy. I was skeptical from the beginning because anyone in their right mind would know Utah isn't high on the list for such phenomenon. But, people from Utah are willing to jump onboard if there's a remote chance of cashing in, it's why we're the capital of Multilevel schemes. Funny thing is they haven't learned anything.

kv

 

@cmartinez, you might find this interesting or not. But, I recently watched it and found much in it interesting.

What I didn't put together until I seen Hitlers bell experiment, or anti-gravity and or other device seemed to me to fit the overall shape of the Emdirve.

kv

Edit: Forgot to post the url https://www.netflix.com/title/80171742

 

@cmartinez, you might find this interesting or not. But, I recently watched it and found much in it interesting.

What I didn't put together until I seen Hitlers bell experiment, or anti-gravity and or other device seemed to me to fit the overall shape of the Emdirve.

kv

Edit: Forgot to post the url https://www.netflix.com/title/80171742

Very interesting, but maybe you should've posted it in this thread instead.

 

Very interesting, but maybe you should've posted it in this thread instead.

I know, I'll ask for it to be moved.

kv

Edit: Just realized it and came back to say that.

Edit: Just so you know it splits the difference in terms that I want to bring some shape analogy to the picture. Which was more important to this Thread.

 

I know, I'll ask for it to be moved.

kv

Edit: Just realized it and came back to say that.

Edit: Just so you know it splits the difference in terms that I want to bring some shape analogy to the picture. Which was more important to this Thread.

Dr. Steven Greer is a Nut, Fraud, Liar and Psychopath.

 

Dr. Steven Greer is a Nut, Fraud, Liar and Psychopath.

so ... I take it he's not your cup of tea? ...

 

so ... I take it he's not your cup of tea? ...

I can be entertained by people who are sincere but If you ever listened to the old Art Bell show years ago even Art knew he was full of crap. Yes, a seasoned BS artist be he.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/weir...Steven-Greer-UFO-disclosure-conspiracy-theory

The "free energy" conspiracy theory centres around claims scientists have invented viable technologies to create free energy, including perpetual motion machines and cold fusion generators.

 

I can be entertained by people who are sincere but If you ever listened to the old Art Bell show years ago even Art knew he was full of crap. Yes, a seasoned BS artist be he.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/weir...Steven-Greer-UFO-disclosure-conspiracy-theory

I didn't buy into the free energy thing either, what was interesting is how they string together the notion of Dark Projects, and peoples deaths. Then I seen Hitlers bell shape device, thinking how odd this representation of the now supposed Emdrive. Plus, if he's been discredited why bring this subject up in 2017, his so called research is long since dead, the connection to Marilynn Monroe's death 2 days after she announced she would contact news agency's to tell the world about UFO's if the Kennedy's didn't contact her.

Of course it's most likely a women scorned willing to disclose their relationship and this guy takes hold to exploit it.

He, claims to have these memo's and statements that couldn't be disclosed until the now then 2017 movie Documentary. It's like taking Curse of Oak Island and Ancient Aliens and smashing them together, entertaining to say the least. Even my wife who hates this stuff, was interested and makes me wonder with this airing on netflix how many free energy nut jobs will be coming to AAC to make their device.

kv

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/nasas-em-drive-is-a-magnetic-wtf-thruster/

And the winner is… Physics, without much doubt. Even with a power of just a couple of Watts, the EM-drive generates thrust in the expected direction (e.g., the torsion bar twists in the right direction). If you reverse the direction of the thruster, the balance swings back the other way: the thrust is reversed. Unfortunately, the EM drive also generates the thrust when the thruster is directed so that it cannot produce a torque on the balance (e.g., the null test also produces thrust). And likewise, that “thrust” reverses when you reverse the direction of the thruster.

The best part is that the results are the same when the attenuator is put into the circuit. In this case, there is basically no radiation in the microwave cavity, yet the WTF-thruster thrusts on.

So, where does the force come from? The Earth’s magnetic field, most likely. The cables that carry the current to the microwave amplifier run along the arm of the torsion bar. Although the cable is shielded, it is not perfect (because the researchers did not have enough mu metal). The current in the cable experiences a force due to the Earth’s magnetic field that is precisely perpendicular to the torsion bar. And, depending on the orientation of the thruster, the direction of the current will reverse and the force will reverse. The researchers made some calculations, based on the location of the experiment and the amplifier current, and got a torque that agreed quite well with the measured torque.

https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Results_on_EMDrive_and_Mach-Effect_Thrusters

 

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/nasas-em-drive-is-a-magnetic-wtf-thruster/


https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Results_on_EMDrive_and_Mach-Effect_Thrusters

Now you've brought new material into this discussion... I hadn't heard of the Mach-Effect thruster before! ... so the EM Drive has all but been completely discarded as bogus by the Nasa team, but the Mach-Effect device has shown pretty inconsistent readings and further testing is needed ...

The king is dead, long live the king! ...

 

Now you've brought new material into this discussion... I hadn't heard of the Mach-Effect thruster before! ... so the EM Drive has all but been completely discarded as bogus by the Nasa team, but the Mach-Effect device has shown pretty inconsistent readings and further testing is needed ...

The king is dead, long live the king! ...

More crack pottery. Mach's principle is simply wrong and it hasn't become a part of modern physics after Einstein abandoned (not compatible with SR and causality) it in his search for SR/GR. First, if it supposedly supports Propellantless propulsion then defacto it's a scheme for a free energy machine.

Although the momentum and energy exchange with distant matter guarantees global conservation of energy and momentum, this field exchange is supplied at no material cost, unlike the case with conventional fuels. For this reason, when the field exchange is ignored, a propellantless thruster behaves locally like a free energy device. This is immediately apparent from basic Newtonian analysis: if constant power produces constant thrust, then input energy is linear with time and output (kinetic) energy is quadratic with time. Thus there exists a break-even time (or distance or velocity) of operation, above which more energy is output than is input. The longer it is allowed to accelerate, the more pronounced will this effect become, as simple Newtonian physics predicts.

from the wiki...

 

Here's another source of the same piece of news:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2169809-impossible-em-drive-doesnt-seem-to-work-after-all/

“This propellant-less propulsion business is regarded by those in the mainstream as speculative at best, and at worst it’s just serious nonsense and people are wasting their time,” says Woodward. But he adds, “I don’t think this group is wasting their time. If there is a real effect, they’ll find it.”

 

Here's Scott Manley's video presentation of the new research findings:

I consider the emdrive dead. It was a worthwhile scientific pursuit which at the very least led to new understanding of the difficulty of isolating test apparatus from environmental and instumentation effects.

Maybe if they hadn't watched so closely, the pot would have boiled. (Weak force of quantum humor.)

 

I wouldn't give up on propellant-less propulsion. At least for stored and carried propellant context. In space area is not a propulsion problem. And there is a particle charge flux within the solar system. With sufficient area/mass/charge ratio.....we should be able to accelerate against it. If the particle streams can be detected and mapped.....one might ride up and down the stream with a magnetic field. With thin light weight materials......we might be able to interact with enough area of this particle charge flux.

Who knows.....even very high velocities might be possible. Magnetic sailing on flux.

 

https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/how-to-fool-the-world-with-bad-science-7a9318dd1ae6

It is not a space engine; it is an apparatus that does nothing different from an empty container.

It was not validated by NASA; it was shown by NASA to be indistinguishable from a ‘null’ device.

It does not break the laws of physics; it obeys them.

So what are we left with? Every legitimate scientist’s nightmare: false information posing as science, eroding the public trust in science itself. Don’t let it! If there’s bad science going around, the only cure for it is more and better science, just as was the case for N-rays.

2014: https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/the-emdrive.104359/#post-791084

It really was almost entirely bad science. Bogus claims backed by bogus experiments, poor experiments being confirmed by other poor experiments and biased observation.

 

poor experiments being confirmed by other poor experiments

Yes... but had scientists taken the public opinion more seriously at first, they would've debunked it with formal experimentation a lot sooner.

Now it's just a matter of time before fringe groups start propagating conspiracy theories about this thing, and that's gonna make the fire a bit harder to put out.

 

Yes... but had scientists taken the public opinion more seriously at first, they would've debunked it with formal experimentation a lot sooner.

Now it's just a matter of time before fringe groups start propagating conspiracy theories about this thing, and that's gonna make the fire a bit harder to put out.

Most scientists laughed when they first heard about it and then put it in the same slot as flat earth theories instead of wasting one brain-cell on it. Public opinion is meaningless in this context.

 

Public opinion is meaningless in this context.

In the educational context, it's not. I see it as a missed chance to show the public how science is supposed to work.