Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Nasa validates 'impossible' space drive

  • 01-08-2014 2:06am
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭


    Propellant-less Microwave Thruster

    More breakthrough stuff here if it pans out.

    English dude builds drive that converts electric power into thrust, without the need for any propellant by bouncing microwaves around in a closed container. :confused:

    No one passes any remarks.

    Chinese replicate it, IT WORKS,
    Chinese team built its own EmDrive and confirmed that it produced 720 mN (about 72 grams) of thrust, enough for a practical satellite thruster
    yea yawn whatever.

    US Dude builds one, gets NASA to test it, IT WORKS, OMG:eek:

    ^:rolleyes:


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,816 ✭✭✭Calibos


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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,029 ✭✭✭shedweller


    Calibos wrote: »
    As long as the same thing doesn't happen to Skylon :D
    Well, that would suck for its inventors alright. But for the rest of us? Party on!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭Rucking_Fetard


    dh9m3ggkmzmikoza66dk.gif


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,029 ✭✭✭shedweller


    Hehe, they called it the Cannae Drive.

    Hehehe! Much chuckles!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭2 stroke


    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


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,564 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    2 stroke wrote: »
    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

    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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭2 stroke


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,260 ✭✭✭Rucking_Fetard




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,564 ✭✭✭AugustusMinimus


    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 :confused:


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 93,563 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    quantum_vacuum_virtual_plasma.png


  • Advertisement
Advertisement