Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
UM-Bot

Has China managed to crack NASA's EmDrive ?

35 posts in this topic

They have achieved this in the new TV show Salvation ! 

 

So it looks like this has been in the works for a while and i wish them all the success in the universe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't work... because Kim and his DPRK will nuke us and spark global nuclear strikes until we're all ashes and no one will be around to build this thing. Duhhhhh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one welcome our new Chinese space overlords 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we sure Snowden isn't involved?  Wikileaks?

An EM pulse would be and interesting experiment to see if the drive can be easily disabled while running.

If Kim does anything that really threatens China's economy, I'm sure the choker chain on the leash will be tightened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will wait for the proof....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, UFOwatcher said:

I will wait for the proof....

I want it to succeed but I'll wait for proof, too, before I get excited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The possible uses of this drive, if it can really work, and be made practical, are interesting in itself, of course,  The apparent violation of the action/ reaction law of motion is truly intriguing. Is this thing creating its own warp in space that allows a unidirectional force? If not, how could it be doing what they claim? Any good ideas, out there?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that mean I get to move to another planet soon? Please tell me this means I get to move to another planet soon...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sceptical. From time to time I've seen articles about this during a number of years. However, they always seem to show the same picture and talk about the same extremely small force, so also in this article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, paperdyer said:

Are we sure Snowden isn't involved?  Wikileaks?

An EM pulse would be and interesting experiment to see if the drive can be easily disabled while running.

If Kim does anything that really threatens China's economy, I'm sure the choker chain on the leash will be tightened.

How Snowden should be involved? 

It's not that peer reviews were secret. 

 

Well, first we should ascertain that the engine actually works, before thinking of a way to disable it. 

And why should we?

Being an electric engine, I would assume an em pulse would shut it down for good. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow 

Edited by ziomek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remain sceptical...but if it is viable...remember..BRITISH...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Parsec said:

How Snowden should be involved? 

It's not that peer reviews were secret. 

 

Well, first we should ascertain that the engine actually works, before thinking of a way to disable it. 

And why should we?

Being an electric engine, I would assume an em pulse would shut it down for good. 

Just trying to inject a bit of humor.

 

Yes we need to find out if it works or not.  Then there's the question I've never seen answered.  If a piece of electronics isn't on when an EM pulse is released, is that piece toast as well?  That's the reasoning used in why Michael Weatherly's computers worked in Dark Angel when other people's didn't.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not NASA's Emdrive, it's the UK's emdrive. The UK invented this. NASA just tested it to see if it would work, and when it did work they tested how it worked.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, seanjo said:

I remain sceptical...but if it is viable...remember..BRITISH...

vSHtcN8.gif

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The output of this device, if it can indeed be verified, is absolutely miniscule and within the error range limits of the testing setups.  While NASA did find a similar force, *again* within their testbed's error range, they most certainly did not endorse it.

 It is, imnsho, almost certainly going to be eventually explained by an error in the methodology or the measurement.  The device works in tiny pulses, and my bet is (as it has been for a long time) that there is some sort of directional resonance effect going on, rather like a battery toothbrush vibrating itself off a table..

 

But I'll keep listening....  If it does truly work, then a few of the basic physics laws will have to be reworked, rather like Einstein's stuff meant Newton's Laws were not quite up to scratch when you start going very, very fast.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do hope this is true. It could allow for faster travel of exploratory missions in the future.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/9/2017 at 9:32 PM, paperdyer said:

Just trying to inject a bit of humor.

 

Yes we need to find out if it works or not.  Then there's the question I've never seen answered.  If a piece of electronics isn't on when an EM pulse is released, is that piece toast as well?  That's the reasoning used in why Michael Weatherly's computers worked in Dark Angel when other people's didn't.

My bad, I didn't detect the humorous mode. 

 

I will give you my two uneducated cents and say that theoretically, unless shielded, a piece of electronics should be fried by an EM pulse regardless if it's on or off.

 

Dark Angel had definitely other virtues than scientific accuracy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The physical objection to this device was aptly explained by comparing it to pulling oneself up into the air by tugging on one's shoelaces. It can't be done because the puller and the shoes are in the same inertial domain.There must be an action with respect to the the outside universe, for their to be any reaction, any movement.

Suppose this EM drive really works. Given the fact that an effect appears to have been found by different, wholly independent, scientifically reputable investigators, this may be the case. There would have to be something escaping that sealed container. Nothing of the sort, sufficient to explain the effect, has been found.

Perhaps they've stumbled upon a way to affect space directly. Instead of thrusting through space, could they be bending space itself, pulling and/or pushing it past the experimental apparatus? If this is what's happening, they appear to be doing so in a very inefficient manner, at present. That doesn't necessarily mean that the process can't be greatly improved upon, with further work.      

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bison said:

The physical objection to this device was aptly explained by comparing it to pulling oneself up into the air by tugging on one's shoelaces. It can't be done because the puller and the shoes are in the same inertial domain.There must be an action with respect to the the outside universe, for their to be any reaction, any movement.

Suppose this EM drive really works. Given the fact that an effect appears to have been found by different, wholly independent, scientifically reputable investigators, this may be the case. There would have to be something escaping that sealed container. Nothing of the sort, sufficient to explain the effect, has been found.

Perhaps they've stumbled upon a way to affect space directly. Instead of thrusting through space, could they be bending space itself, pulling and/or pushing it past the experimental apparatus? If this is what's happening, they appear to be doing so in a very inefficient manner, at present. That doesn't necessarily mean that the process can't be greatly improved upon, with further work.      

 

Well, I remember reading that changing "engine's" position (flipping sideways), thrust vector remained the same: basically, you flip your "craft" upside down, but your "craft" still "going" up. Not quite useful, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you, please, connect the account you give, of the same thrust vector, regardless of the device orientation, with a specific researcher, named device, or organization? I would like to look into this further. Thank you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bison said:

Could you, please, connect the account you give, of the same thrust vector, regardless of the device orientation, with a specific researcher, named device, or organization? I would like to look into this further. Thank you. 

As far as I remember that wasn't from research paper, just from some German (Dutch?) scientists group. I'll post link ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought what I read was that the thrust was generated by effectively invisible photon pairs escaping from the device more in one direction then any other, due to the cone shape of the chamber. But this hasn't been shown to be true yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.