Il giorno venerdì 14 ottobre 2016 02:38:50 UTC+2, Sylvia Else ha scritto:
On 10/10/2016 7:12 AM, Non Newtonian Propulsion wrote:
Il giorno domenica 9 ottobre 2016 16:30:21 UTC+2, Jeff Findley ha scritto:
In article ,
says...

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=40170.0

https://neolegesmotus.wordpress.com/...-the-take-off/


Last post in the thread from the forum link above (emphasis mine):

EmDrive Builder
Full Member
****

Posts: 1953
On My Own Domain
Liked: 2374
Likes Given: 1073
Non Newtonian Propulsion System (PNN) - Related to Space Flight
Applications
« Reply #21 on: 05/12/2016 06:41 PM »

********** Locking for lack of interest. **********

Any detail
May 2 2016 I "..." said in such forum
"My english is very bad
more it's better if I don't write on your forum because I couldn't say anything more than what I'm doing right now (SergioZ Translate for you a my "Note about PNN for NASA spaceflight forum " for this forum)"
Such discussion was closed May 12 2016


I'll also note that the thread was locked after several people pointed
out the possible errors induced by running a power cord to the
experiment from a fixed power supply. Such errors have happened in
other experiments (as indicated by the other posters in the thread).

So, not sure why this thread has been posted here. Looking for a more
receptive audience, or pointing out that the EmDrive still looks
"fishy" at first glance?

it is necessary to construct the pnn detection system so that it is independent of the thermal deformation; many details about ballist pendulum setup are necessary to give whenever possible.
At the end, for a cross-check for use in pnn measurement of the thrust also what is used to measure the thrust of the ion engine


E.Laureti



I'm puzzled by the motivation behind this. Absent a theoretical basis
for thinking such a thing would work, why would anyone build it in the
first place?

The best I can come up with is that the "inventor" completely misapplies
physics as it's currently understood, and then, instead of seeking input
on their theory, goes to the trouble of building a device. By that time,
they're so invested in their idea being correct that they become
impervious to any argument that shows how their notion is flawed. So we
end up with yet another "working real soon now" gizmo that somehow never
delivers.

Or perhaps it's just yet another scam aimed at extracting money from
people who ought to know better.

Sylvia.

I think in America know little electrodynamics history and what Max Planck said over a century ago about the inviolability of the principle of action and reaction in “electrodynamics” . If you want to translate and read the following

http://www.cobraf.com/forum/immagini/R_123586262_1.pdf

In 2005, the ASPS (founded in 1979 to overcome the rocketry through the violation of the principle of action and reaction www.asps.it ) obtained funding to continue on the inviolability of the principle of action of Newton that in his time even knew ohms law. :-)

The funding was not obtained according to the chatter but on the basis of repeated experimental tests of ballistic pendulum of this type
www.asps.it/qct05.mpg
made by third parties with pnn in a “closed box”.

We believe we know the infringement proceedings of the third principle of Newton violation in electrodynamics. This procedure takes place both Emdrive that for PNN and our know-how and do not yield to no cost because it allows us to maintain an advantage over the Emdrive.


Sincerely

E.Laureti