So does mean we have to reformulate the standard model?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3177449/Nasa-s-impossible-fuel-free-thrusters-work-German-scientists-confirm-viability-super-fast-space-travel-slash-journey-moon-4-HOURS.html
>>7643986
>Daily mail
Also, there is already a thread
>>7643986
>daily mail
Stopped reading there.
> space travel that could slash a journey to the moon down to 4 HOURS
sounds too good to be true. But if it's real, I truly believe that we were born in the perfect time to witness the golden age of technological revolution of humanity.
Published: 28 July 2015
*yawn*
I have seen this news everywhere except for NASAs offical websight
>golden age of technological revolution
were there not an elephant in the way
>websight
*web site
I understand that the mechanism behind the EMdrive is pretty simple. Why can't someone just replicate the machine and produce the goddamn results ?
>>7644003
Yea religious conservatives am I right guise? We'd probably all be immortal space faring super humans (not gods because they don't exist XD) by now if christains weren't holding us back! Hahaha *tips*
>>7644011
Do you think saying the truth in a retarded fashion somehow makes it untrue ?
>>7644010
They have done. The problems is the thrust is only on the order of micro newtons, so its hard to rule out all sources of error. There's also the case of some "suspect" results, such as it producing thrust when it shouldn't. But beyond all of that, given current understanding of physics , it just shouldn't work. So we have the following options:
>Some guy builds a funnily shaped microwave oven and discovers some novel physical effect
>Its just some confounding variable that hasn't been controlled for.
I'm in the second camp, and I'm liking the idea of it being ablated copper ions or something like that. That said no one can really say since the groups doing these experiments has only published one paper, and that was out of vacuum. I've heard that in vacuum the thrust all but disappeared.
>>7644010
Because
1. The results are very, very small, and so very difficult to measure.
and
2. Because the EmDrive is such an incredibly unlikely hypothesis, you need extraordinarily good evidence in order to actually prove that what you've found is real. That means you need an exceptionally rigorous experiment eliminating everything that could possibly cause the thrust measurement to be wrong - which makes things much more difficult. For instance, to be any degree of convincing, you have to test in a hard vacuum - which means you need both a high-quality vacuum chamber and vacuum-safe RF electronics.
Basically, literally anybody can build a microwave resonator cavity bigger on one end than the other, hook up a microwave oven magnetron, and say they've built an EmDrive.
Proving that what you've built is actually an EmDrive, instead of an extremely overhyped way of wasting power to heat a copper frustum, is the sort of thing you need serious funding and very expensive equipment for.
And because almost nobody who seriously believes the EmDrive might work has money to give out, and almost nobody with money to give out seriously believes that EmDrive research is likely enough to pan out to be worth funding, the resources needed to finally experimentally prove or disprove the EmDrive are just not there.
>>7644023
lol wat ? aside from all the possible error, doesn't obtaining only a few micro newtons make this device totally useless ? How is it supposed to travel to the goddamn moon in 4 hours ?
If the energy input is the problem I'm sure they can try with more electricity.
>>7644018
The laws of nature are holding us back from doing that stuff dumb ass not religion or republicans.
>>7644018
Its not true, its retarded.
>>7643986
>dailymail
yeah, I'm not even clicking that.
disregarded
>>7644059
So you think scientific discoveries just randomly occur on their own without people putting in effort to make them?
OH MY GOD THE DAILY MAIL
>>7645302
In what way did I suggest that?
>>7645428
You don't think the prevalence of anti-science people influences how much effort goes into scientific research?
>>7645433
Dude the EM drive not working has nothing to do with religion or lack of research. We could do millions of hours of research in a perfect atheist utopia and it still wouldn't work.
>>7645526
No but with regards to plenty of other things it does apply.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI
>>7644029
>doesn't obtaining only a few micro newtons make this device totally useless ?
yes, just as useless as ion thrusters, after all they only produce around 100 milli Newtonts
completely useless for space applications
>>7646379
Ion propulsion does have its uses in unmanned interplanetary travel (i.e. if the distance is great enough to accelerate up to speed). But the EM drive seems to work like a photon rocket, which has truly pathetic thrust even compared to ion propulsion. You'd literally need several nuclear reactors to provide the power needed to propel a few pounds at anything close to 1G. Unless the EMdrive is more efficient than a photon rocket, it's essentially useless.
>>7646519
>unmanned interplanetary travel (i.e. if the distance is great enough to accelerate up to speed).
Is the solar system large enough for that, or do we have to aim an exo-planet?
