NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

jlf1961 -> NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/7/2016 1:34:47 PM)

After all the tests that prove it works in defiance of the laws of physics, NASA is going to test the EM drive in space.

source


quote:

As Newton's Third Law states, "To each action there's an equal and opposite reaction," and many physicists say the EM Drive categorically violates that law.

This is because in order for a thruster to gain momentum in a certain direction, it has to expel some kind of propellent or exhaust in the opposite direction.

But the EM Drive simply goes in one direction with no propellant, and thus violates the law of conservation of momentum, which Newton derived from his Third Law.



Okay, lets address these points:

1) In high school, I built an ION drive using the experiment explained in a world book encyclopedia.

Pretty neat since it had no burning propellant, just a battery, some copper rods and a few other odds and end.

Cost, about 10 bucks.

The EM drive is said to have no propellant to burn to make exhaust gases going in one direction to push it in the opposite direction.

Which brings us to:

2) The EM drive uses ElectroMagnetic radiation to propel the drive.

The EM waves are directed toward a cone shaped end of a metal structure and reflected to provide thrust.

So where the hell is the violation of the law of physics? We know that Electromagnetic radiation will push a mass, hell it is the basis of using a solar sail to harness the solar wind (electromagnetic radiation) and will push the vessel along a straight line.

Now, my big question is "What the hell is the problem?"

I mean the Road Runner was violating the laws of physics when I was a kid and no one made a fuss, except Wile E. Coyote.



WhoreMods -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/7/2016 1:42:16 PM)

Isn't the perceived problem that the reaction that moves the EM drive works by pushing against itself, rather than something else?



jlf1961 -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/7/2016 1:44:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

Isn't the perceived problem that the reaction that moves the EM drive works by pushing against itself, rather than something else?



Actually, yes that seems to be what scientists are saying, but I dont read it that way.



MasterCaneman -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/7/2016 9:49:40 PM)

If it works, who cares? Technically, bumble bees can't fly and Harley engines aren't supposed to run either, but both do. If someone is willing to pony up the bucks to launch this thing at current prices, it probably means the numbers are good enough already.



MrRodgers -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 1:27:26 AM)

Well they are wrong. Newton's law can and does apply to radiation energy as well as heat energy as in hydrogen propulsion. That radiation energy is simply using generation 2 energy EM rather than gen. 1 or the propulsion from heat energy.



WhoreMods -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 4:46:19 AM)

The bumblebee thing is a legendary oversight, but it's been corrected since the '60s. That's the nice thing about physics: theories get revised to take new data into account. (In this case, that a flexible surface like a bee's wing has different aerodynamic properties to a rigid one, iirc.)



jlf1961 -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 5:10:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

The bumblebee thing is a legendary oversight, but it's been corrected since the '60s. That's the nice thing about physics: theories get revised to take new data into account. (In this case, that a flexible surface like a bee's wing has different aerodynamic properties to a rigid one, iirc.)



Alright, forget the damn bumble bee, lets look at something else.

There is an old saying concerning an aircraft I am all too familiar with (considering I jumped out of them enough times.)

The C130 proves that if you put enough power on it, even a brick will fly.

Now to continue, things that defy scientific principles but still work...

1) The placebo effect
2) The horizon problem
3) Ultra-energetic cosmic rays
4) Belfast homeopathy results
5) Dark matter
6) Viking’s methane
7) Tetraneutrons
8) The Pioneer anomaly
9) Dark energy
10) The Kuiper cliff
11) The Wow signal
12) Not-so-constant constants
13) Cold fusion (yes its back, and not some quack playing with it, the US Department of Energy is playing with it.)



WhoreMods -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 5:18:33 AM)

Does cold fusion defy scientific principles? I thought it was theoretically possible but nobody had managed to do it yet.



jlf1961 -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 6:01:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

Does cold fusion defy scientific principles? I thought it was theoretically possible but nobody had managed to do it yet.



Everything is possible in theory until proven impossible, however, fusion is dependent on heat (at least as far as the current laws are understood,) gravity, magnetism, and a few other variables.

Cold fusion was first mentioned in science fiction god knows how long ago.



WhoreMods -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 6:14:19 AM)

Got you.



jlf1961 -> RE: NASA to launch the physics defying engine... (9/8/2016 6:35:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

Got you.



Of course, there is one other thing.

Under the laws of physics, fusion could occur at 'cold' temperatures, however once it starts, things tend to heat up... a lot, like about 9800 degrees c in a matter of microseconds.

Now, personally, I do not think I want to be anywhere near that kind of heat, but then I like the cold (another ice age would be nice, a snowball earth event would be better.)

And there in lies the rub, because cold fusion does not generate that kind of heat, which is what is the energy released in a fusion reaction.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875