Nasa validates 'impossible' space drive

As long as the same thing doesn't happen to Skylon

It makes sense to me, like its not exactly rocket science:D
Blast enough energy into a chamber, one side reflects the energy, the other absorbs it, maybe converts it into heat or recycles it back into electricty. In the absence of gravity, it has to move, the side that reflects the energy works similar to a solar sail.
But considering that the likely energy source would be solar energy. Can it be any more efficient than a solar sail

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The force being exerted on the ship on the reflective side of the container should exactly cancel against the force exerted on the ship when the microwave was first emitted. Hence, both forces should cancel out and the ship shouldn't go anywhere.

Consider a hollow dice, Microwaves are blasted against side 6 from side one, all surfaces are reflective except side 2, which absorbs the microwaves. As you say, the force excerted on side six is cancels the force exerted by the emmiter. However the microwaves will bounce around inside until they are absorbed by side 2. The efect would be similar to air leaving through the neck of a baloon The dice should try to move in the direction of side 5. Now, if I was making one of these, I think I'd use a spherical rather than a cube shape, reflective all around the inside, with a moveable one sided absorber mounted at a focus point.

I have sincere doubts that all of this will hold true.

I also cannot workout why its being reported that the introduction of superconducting materials could make this potential engine up to 1,000 more powerful