NASA: New "impossible" engine works, could change space travel forever

On Friday, August 1, 2014 10:02:39 AM UTC-7, wrote:
"Until yesterday, everyone in the international community was

laughing at this engine and its inventor, Roger Sawyer. It's

called the EmDrive and everyone said it was impossible

because it went against the laws of physics. But the fact is

that the quantum vacuum plasma thruster works in the lab and

scientists can't explain why.



Sawyer's engine is extremely light and simple. It provides a

thrust by "bouncing microwaves around in a closed container."

The microwaves are generated using electricity that can be

provided by solar energy. No propellant is necessary, which

means that this thrusters can work forever unless a hardware

failure occurs. If real, this would be a major breakthrough

in space propulsion technology."



See:

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/nasa-revea...49987/+barrett

Pushing through and/or displacing aether is what we're doing anyway.

Entangled photons can produce and transfer mass, at FTL none the less.

On 6/08/2014 2:06 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Friday, August 1, 2014 10:02:39 AM UTC-7, wrote:
"Until yesterday, everyone in the international community was

laughing at this engine and its inventor, Roger Sawyer. It's

called the EmDrive and everyone said it was impossible

because it went against the laws of physics. But the fact is

that the quantum vacuum plasma thruster works in the lab and

scientists can't explain why.



Sawyer's engine is extremely light and simple. It provides a

thrust by "bouncing microwaves around in a closed container."

The microwaves are generated using electricity that can be

provided by solar energy. No propellant is necessary, which

means that this thrusters can work forever unless a hardware

failure occurs. If real, this would be a major breakthrough

in space propulsion technology."



See:

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/nasa-revea...49987/+barrett

Pushing through and/or displacing aether is what we're doing anyway.

Entangled photons can produce and transfer mass, at FTL none the less.


Where, or how, do you come up with this nonsense?

Sylvia.

On Tuesday, August 5, 2014 6:53:58 PM UTC-7, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 6/08/2014 2:06 AM, Brad Guth wrote:

On Friday, August 1, 2014 10:02:39 AM UTC-7, wrote:

"Until yesterday, everyone in the international community was



laughing at this engine and its inventor, Roger Sawyer. It's



called the EmDrive and everyone said it was impossible



because it went against the laws of physics. But the fact is



that the quantum vacuum plasma thruster works in the lab and



scientists can't explain why.







Sawyer's engine is extremely light and simple. It provides a



thrust by "bouncing microwaves around in a closed container."



The microwaves are generated using electricity that can be



provided by solar energy. No propellant is necessary, which



means that this thrusters can work forever unless a hardware



failure occurs. If real, this would be a major breakthrough



in space propulsion technology."







See:



http://sploid.gizmodo.com/nasa-revea...49987/+barrett



Pushing through and/or displacing aether is what we're doing anyway.



Entangled photons can produce and transfer mass, at FTL none the less.




Where, or how, do you come up with this nonsense?

Sylvia.

Contributor mpc755 gave us all plenty to think about, and since then there has been research published as to verifying what entangled photons can do.

I'm just deductively connecting the dots, though you and others can simply ignore everything because you folks seem to already know all there is to know.

On 02/08/14 03:39, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 2/08/2014 5:47 AM, David Spain wrote:
What looks interesting is thrust is generated in the direction away
from the wide end towards narrow, just the opposite of a rocket
nozzle!

In other words this engine doesn't spew, it sucks! ;-)

Dave

PS: Check out Roger Shawyer's paper from he
http://www.emdrive.com/IAC13paper17254.v2.pdf

There is also a claim that this "engine" when run in reverse cycle
kills momentum by generating (presumably) electrical power from
vacuum. Hence trading off kinetic energy for electricity when
operating as a brake. Oh boy....


Going backwards, presumably.

But that makes no sense at all given that in a vacuum there's no
preferred frame of reference by which "backwards" could be measured.

How about the cosmic microwave background rest frame?

Which has got to be very close indeed to to zero velocity relative to
the big bang, and zero velocity relative to the total mass of the universe?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_...ole_anisotropy



-- Peter Fairbrother

On 08/06/2014 2:42 PM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
On 02/08/14 03:39, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 2/08/2014 5:47 AM, David Spain wrote:
What looks interesting is thrust is generated in the direction away
from the wide end towards narrow, just the opposite of a rocket
nozzle!

In other words this engine doesn't spew, it sucks! ;-)

Dave

PS: Check out Roger Shawyer's paper from he
http://www.emdrive.com/IAC13paper17254.v2.pdf

There is also a claim that this "engine" when run in reverse cycle
kills momentum by generating (presumably) electrical power from
vacuum. Hence trading off kinetic energy for electricity when
operating as a brake. Oh boy....

Going backwards, presumably.

But that makes no sense at all given that in a vacuum there's no
preferred frame of reference by which "backwards" could be measured.

How about the cosmic microwave background rest frame?

Which has got to be very close indeed to to zero velocity relative to
the big bang, and zero velocity relative to the total mass of the
universe?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_...ole_anisotropy

So you build two of these devices. One of them, call it the red device,
is pointing to the red-shifted cosmic microwave background. The other
one, call it the blue device, is pointing to the blue shifted cosmic
microwave background. The red device accelerates, generating energy
while doing so, it transmits the energy to the blue device which uses
this energy to accelerate. Now attach big masses to the two devices,
after a while you can turn off the two engines and let the masses fall
towards each other. You capture the gravitational energy of the falling
masses and start over again. Voila, a perpetual motion machine
generating energy.

Of course there is also the possibility that this engine is just random
junk and that the thrust measurements made by the NASA guys was somehow
erroneous.

On 7/08/2014 4:34 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Tuesday, August 5, 2014 6:53:58 PM UTC-7, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 6/08/2014 2:06 AM, Brad Guth wrote:

On Friday, August 1, 2014 10:02:39 AM UTC-7,
wrote:

"Until yesterday, everyone in the international community was



laughing at this engine and its inventor, Roger Sawyer. It's



called the EmDrive and everyone said it was impossible



because it went against the laws of physics. But the fact is



that the quantum vacuum plasma thruster works in the lab and



scientists can't explain why.







Sawyer's engine is extremely light and simple. It provides a



thrust by "bouncing microwaves around in a closed container."



The microwaves are generated using electricity that can be



provided by solar energy. No propellant is necessary, which



means that this thrusters can work forever unless a hardware



failure occurs. If real, this would be a major breakthrough



in space propulsion technology."







See:



http://sploid.gizmodo.com/nasa-revea...49987/+barrett





Pushing through and/or displacing aether is what we're doing anyway.



Entangled photons can produce and transfer mass, at FTL none the
less.




Where, or how, do you come up with this nonsense?

Sylvia.

Contributor mpc755 gave us all plenty to think about, and since then
there has been research published as to verifying what entangled
photons can do.

I'm just deductively connecting the dots, though you and others can
simply ignore everything because you folks seem to already know all
there is to know.


The dots you think are you're joining are in your imagination, caused by
a lack of understanding of what you read. There is no evidence, either
experimental or theoretical, that photons can produce mass, and the only
way they transfer mass is by moving, at exactly the speed of light in a
vacuum.

Sylvia.

On 06/08/14 21:16, Alain Fournier wrote:
On 08/06/2014 2:42 PM, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
On 02/08/14 03:39, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 2/08/2014 5:47 AM, David Spain wrote:
[...]
There is also a claim that this "engine" when run in reverse cycle
kills momentum by generating (presumably) electrical power from
vacuum. Hence trading off kinetic energy for electricity when
operating as a brake. Oh boy....

Going backwards, presumably.

But that makes no sense at all given that in a vacuum there's no
preferred frame of reference by which "backwards" could be measured.

How about the cosmic microwave background rest frame?

Which has got to be very close indeed to to zero velocity relative to
the big bang, and zero velocity relative to the total mass of the
universe?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_...ole_anisotropy


So you build two of these devices. One of them, call it the red device,
is pointing to the red-shifted cosmic microwave background. The other
one, call it the blue device, is pointing to the blue shifted cosmic
microwave background. The red device accelerates, generating energy
while doing so, it transmits the energy to the blue device which uses
this energy to accelerate.Now attach big masses to the two devices,
after a while you can turn off the two engines and let the masses fall
towards each other. You capture the gravitational energy of the falling
masses and start over again.

Assume the change in velocity of each mass, relative to their starting
frame, is the same except one is negative. That's surely fair enough,
one accelerates by deltaV, and the other deccelerates by minus deltaV.


But oops, the drives won't do that - the drive which is slowing relative
to CMB zero frame, and producing energy, will produce less energy than
the drive which is accelerating needs.

To see that without going into the math, assume the slowing mass
actually slows to CMB zero frame - when it stops producing power
altogether. The accelerating mass however still needs power to accelerate.

So one mass has decelerated by deltaV, and one has accelerated by deltaV
minus x. [1]

That appears to violate conservation of momentum, but hey, that is what
the magic drive does, it appears to violate conservation of momentum (in
fact it does not necessarily violate it, but that is a different issue).

Now bring the masses together, under normal physics, and combine them.
Their combined velocity has changed, by x/2 - and it is less (relative
to CMBZF) than it was.

Now we do the cycle again - but we get less energy this time, as the
motion is slower. Eventually the center of mass of the masses will be at
CMBZF, and we will get no power at all.


So it ain't no perpetual motion machine.


While it will produce energy for a while, what has in fact happened is
that the center of mass of the two masses has slowed, producing the
output energy.



BTW, I do not believe in the drive. However, I do not think it
necessarily violates any known laws of physics either - just introduces
a new one or two.



[1] where x = (v^2 +2vd -d^2)^0.5 -v -d if I have the math right

or, suppose the initial velocity of the masses was 10 units. The first
mass decelerates by one unit to 9 units - energy = m/2 v^2, so initial
potential energy is m/2.10^2, final potential energy is m/2.9^2, and the
drive produces m/2.(100-81) or 19.m/2 units of energy.

To accelerate the second mass by 1 unit velocity from 10 to 11 units,
the energy required is m/2 (121-100) or 21.m/2 units. That's more than
the energy produced above.



-- Peter Fairbrother

Voila, a perpetual motion machine
generating energy.

Of course there is also the possibility that this engine is just random
junk and that the thrust measurements made by the NASA guys was somehow
erroneous.

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:55:01 PM UTC-7, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 7/08/2014 4:34 AM, Brad Guth wrote:

Contributor mpc755 gave us all plenty to think about, and since then
there has been research published as to verifying what entangled
photons can do.



I'm just deductively connecting the dots, though you and others can
simply ignore everything because you folks seem to already know all
there is to know.




The dots you think are you're joining are in your imagination, caused by

a lack of understanding of what you read. There is no evidence, either

experimental or theoretical, that photons can produce mass, and the only

way they transfer mass is by moving, at exactly the speed of light in a

vacuum.


Sylvia.

As opposed to your lack of deductively connecting anything, your point is?

Are you still suggesting that our mostly empty universe is comprised of mostly nothing?

Do you consider mpc755 as merely perpetrating a ruse because it amuses him/her?

You can't even be bothered as to interpreting a quality radar image of Venus, and otherwise you believe each and every word that our NASA has ever published as representing the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

How is that Hitler could have accomplished .1% of what he was given credit for, without the help of those like yourself?

Peter, I agree with your analysis. It doesn't appear to be perpetual motion.. However I can have a little fun with the Shawyer conjecture vis-a-vis deltaV down to the CMBRF i.e. once one has entered the inertial frame where there is no observable dipole in the CMB anisotropy.

If the power generated during "deceleration" to CMBRF can be transmitted to another EmDrive device that can accelerate, here's what I'd do instead. I'd create several decelerator devices and use them as power stations for powering my ONE accelerator device which serves as my interstellar space craft.. Hence drawing my energy straight out of the potential energy inherit between any non- CMB inertial frame. Of course I'd have to keep creating and starting decelerators cause the old ones would eventually reach the CMBRF and stop generating power. This is about as close to a free-lunch as we'd ever get in space travel.

Dave

On 08/08/2014 11:27 AM, David Spain wrote:
Peter, I agree with your analysis. It doesn't appear to be perpetual motion. However I can have a little fun with the Shawyer conjecture vis-a-vis deltaV down to the CMBRF i.e. once one has entered the inertial frame where there is no observable dipole in the CMB anisotropy.

If the power generated during "deceleration" to CMBRF can be transmitted to another EmDrive device that can accelerate, here's what I'd do instead. I'd create several decelerator devices and use them as power stations for powering my ONE accelerator device which serves as my interstellar space craft. Hence drawing my energy straight out of the potential energy inherit between any non- CMB inertial frame. Of course I'd have to keep creating and starting decelerators cause the old ones would eventually reach the CMBRF and stop generating power. This is about as close to a free-lunch as we'd ever get in space travel.


It depends on the amount of power you can get from the decelerating
magic drives, oops I meant to say EmDrives. Solar sails are quite close
to a free-lunch. There are also some nifty things that can be done with
a super-conductor and a star's magnetic field and also good old gravity
assist.


Alain Fournier