I'm no physicist, but there's been some confusing claims made about this thing.
Some are calling is it a perpetual motion/free energy machine. It's not is it?
Some are calling it a warp drive. It's not is it?
As far as I can tell, the main claim is that it produces thrust contrary to conservation of momentum, and there is no good account of how. But why hasn't it been written up yet? I'm reminded of the cold fusion blunder.
>>7645727
Ah German Weiner pump
>>7645727
>free energy
not nearly efficient enough for that.
>warp drive
some space warp has been detected but very little.
It's just a better thruster in space that can run forever.
>>7646335
Doesn't reactionless thrust imply free energy?
>>7645727
It doesn't actually work.
This things been around for over 14 years or so and it hasn't done shit.
There's probably some kind of corruption or horrible incompetence occurring at some labs that NASA use.
>>7646528
>reactionless thrust
>implying
>IT PRODUCES THRUST, THAT MEANS IT MUST BE PRODUCING IT IN JUST THE WAY THE MAKER SAYS SO
Its not reactionless.
>>7646557
"that can run forever" implies it's reactionless
>>7646555
>There's probably some kind of corruption or horrible incompetence occurring at some labs that NASA use.
this
just because NASA is a government agency does not mean that NASA is always correct
the opposite in fact, because it is a government agency it has little incentive to be efficient or correct because they won't cease to exist when they don't produce good results
>>7646558
No its producing very minor reactions. Its in the mirconewtons. This drive is nothing more than snake oil. NASA needs to stop funding science fiction.
>>7646561
Ok, but then it can't "run forever" if it's using reactions at all.
How does reactionless drive move the ship at all? I thought it was the opposite reaction that caused movement.
>>7646562
It doesn't run forever. Because it has low thrust it looks like it is. This is why ION thrusters are used on unmanned space probes. They use less fuel.
>>7646564
there is no fuel reaction process, there is particle thrust and vehicle reaction process, its semantics
>0.999999....=1
>1+2+3+4+5.....=-1/12
>0!=1
why are mathematicians so full of shit? why do we continue to fund this sham of a field?
>>7646596
Almost took the bait
>>7645727
how would it benefit from this form in any way?
all I see is interfering waves and nullified energy.
