User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 12:49:14 AM EDT
[#1]
So, not another test, rather they checked the math and the way NASA set up their experiment for possible interfering forces and agree with NASA's result. Oops, misread that, the Germans did build their own device and observed the same thrust as NASA.
Good, but the observed thrust was barely beyond the margin of error of the measuring devices, I am still a bit cautious about rushing out and putting down a deposit on a starship, still seems possible that there is an unrecognized variable. And it's awful early to deem practical a future version 1,000 times more powerful than the lab prototype. I seriously hope it pans out though, and that goes times ten for the "huh, we may have generated a warp bubble" announcement they made awhile back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 12:55:01 AM EDT
[#2]
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum.
And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 12:57:45 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 12:59:42 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:01:08 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol You know what quote I want to put up in response to this....right? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:01:48 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know what quote I want to put up in response to this....right? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol You know what quote I want to put up in response to this....right? "Sufficiently advanced technology..." of course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:02:41 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol We can't explain gravity but we can sufficiently measure and predict it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:08:34 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Yeah, you need that 'explain it' stuff so you can do mundane things like 'make it stop.' |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:09:28 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, you need that 'explain it' stuff so you can do mundane things like 'make it stop.' Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Yeah, you need that 'explain it' stuff so you can do mundane things like 'make it stop.' I think cutting the power off does that. We seem to have that technique down pat since before Edison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:26:24 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
The EMDrive has yet again been proven to work by an independent study in Germany.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/11769030/Impossible-rocket-drive-works-and-could-get-to-Moon-in-four-hours.html For those not in the know, the EM Drive is a reactionless drive that produces a force from resonating microwaves in a chamber. Increasing the Q factor could yield anti-gravity like properties. Using superconducting material, this is not outside the realm of possibility. The same device that NASA accidentally discovered warp drive testing, fucking sweet. http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/5966/20150430/nasa-accidentally-discovered-faster-light-travel.htm |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:28:29 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think cutting the power off does that. We seem to have that technique down pat since before Edison. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Yeah, you need that 'explain it' stuff so you can do mundane things like 'make it stop.' I think cutting the power off does that. We seem to have that technique down pat since before Edison. Acknowledging that I'm an idiot regarding these types of things, I would think it would take more than cutting the power to stop when you're going "4-hours-to-the-moon" speed in space. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:54:49 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol They can't explain gravity or black holes but they are real. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 1:55:58 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm fascinated by the experimental results. I really do want to see an explanation of how this works in defiance of the conservation of momentum. And will it work scaled up to a usable drive? Nevertheless.. http://i.imgur.com/jsXkNLP.gif I don't care if they can explain it as long as it works. They better be able to explain it. And I'm sure they will eventually. Getting on a ship that runs on "magic" would give me the creeps.. lol Runs on magic? What could go wrong? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:03:03 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Acknowledging that I'm an idiot regarding these types of things, I would think it would take more than cutting the power to stop when you're going "4-hours-to-the-moon" speed in space. It's simple, flip a 180 and turn the power back on. Thrust then slows. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:05:53 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, you need that 'explain it' stuff so you can do mundane things like 'make it stop.' Turn around and thrust in the opposite direction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:06:27 AM EDT
[#16]
Tl/Dr will this allow faster reloads...useless otherwise, unless we strap all politicians to the rocket
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:10:25 AM EDT
[#17]
Get your ass to Mars
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:12:55 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's simple, flip a 180 and turn the power back on. Thrust then slows. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Acknowledging that I'm an idiot regarding these types of things, I would think it would take more than cutting the power to stop when you're going "4-hours-to-the-moon" speed in space. It's simple, flip a 180 and turn the power back on. Thrust then slows. So the thing runs in violation of the law of conservation of momentum, but counts on the law of conservation of momentum to stop, then. If that's the case, then you'd have to spend the first half of every trip accelerating, and the second half decelerating. No more 4-hours-to-the-moon speed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:21:28 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So the thing runs in violation of the law of conservation of momentum, but counts on the law of conservation of momentum to stop, then. If that's the case, then you'd have to spend the first half of every trip accelerating, and the second half decelerating. No more 4-hours-to-the-moon speed. There is no stopping in orbital mechanics... But really, that's the case for any form of propulsion, including the chemical rockets we use now. We can't afford the gas to accelerate half way there, but the principle is the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:24:46 AM EDT
[#20]
The technology is so simple that this could have been discovered 60 years ago back when they really first started experimenting with radar.
Would explain all the ufo sightings since the 50s... Flying saucers (resonating chambers) 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:37:52 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The technology is so simple that this could have been discovered 60 years ago back when they really first started experimenting with radar. Would explain all the ufo sightings since the 50s... Flying saucers (resonating chambers) I had a grandfather 99th a t died when I was really young that was in project Bluebook. My dad would apparently pester him for answers and Ray would get really angry and just say there's something out there. Fast forward my dad and I are on a camping trip when after a large storm a huge delta winged aircraft flew over extremely low with no lights or noise. Full moon that night out at camp Don Harrington in Amarillo. It was amazing, but I instantly knew it was ours. We used to also frequently see the donuts on a rope contrails up there, too. If the F22 is pretty much 80s tech that could be "mass produced" imagine what kind of one off shot is flying around. Daniel |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 2:55:30 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So the thing runs in violation of the law of conservation of momentum, but counts on the law of conservation of momentum to stop, then. If that's the case, then you'd have to spend the first half of every trip accelerating, and the second half decelerating. No more 4-hours-to-the-moon speed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Acknowledging that I'm an idiot regarding these types of things, I would think it would take more than cutting the power to stop when you're going "4-hours-to-the-moon" speed in space. It's simple, flip a 180 and turn the power back on. Thrust then slows. So the thing runs in violation of the law of conservation of momentum, but counts on the law of conservation of momentum to stop, then. If that's the case, then you'd have to spend the first half of every trip accelerating, and the second half decelerating. No more 4-hours-to-the-moon speed. Your understanding of the conservation of momentum is flawed. Further, your understanding of this device is obviously lacking. I'll give you a hint: This device does not violate the conservation of momentum. Your assumption of the nature of the system is flawed. The smart kids in the class should be able to pick up what that means. 
I could be cool a let people struggle to figure it out from that hint... Fuck it here it is: The error with assuming this device violates the conservation of momentum, is the assumption that the device is a closed system. The device is not a closed system. Saying this device violates conservation of momentum is as fallacious as claiming a sail violates conservation of momentum. They do not, because they are not, within the perspective of solely the material device in question, a closed system. I could say more... But I think I'll do the cool thing and just leave cryptic hint: Cosmic expansion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 3:02:41 AM EDT
[#23]
Interesting read, but anytime I see or hear anything relating to the science behind gravity I think of one thing:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 3:03:42 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
For those not in the know, the EM Drive is a reactionless drive that produces a force from resonating microwaves in a chamber. Increasing the Q factor could yield anti-gravity like properties. Using superconducting material, this is not outside the realm of possibility. WTF did you just say ??? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 3:14:19 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WTF did you just say ??? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
For those not in the know, the EM Drive is a reactionless drive that produces a force from resonating microwaves in a chamber. Increasing the Q factor could yield anti-gravity like properties. Using superconducting material, this is not outside the realm of possibility. WTF did you just say ??? EM Drive = The device in question. Reactionless = A bullshit term which refuses to die. EM Drive is not reactionless. If it generates thrust, there is some sort of reaction going on (though the nature of the reaction is indeed unusual). The term people are looking for is Propellantless. Q-Factor = The efficiency of this device. The rest is fairly elementary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 3:32:42 AM EDT
[#26]
It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber. This means that until something fails or wears down, theoretically the engine could keep running forever Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever... 
The drive is capable of producing thrust several thousand times greater than a standard photon rocket We have photon rockets? And one of them is a "standard"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:10:40 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We have photon rockets? And one of them is a "standard"? Quote HistoryQuoted:
The drive is capable of producing thrust several thousand times greater than a standard photon rocket We have photon rockets? And one of them is a "standard"? Well ya ain't gonna splurge on a photon rocket and then stick an automatic in it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:19:58 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever...
http://www.skibane.com/Flathead_Ford_v8.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber. This means that until something fails or wears down, theoretically the engine could keep running forever Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever...
http://www.skibane.com/Flathead_Ford_v8.jpg Allow me translate what he said into what he is trying to say: Normal rocket engines (of any type, even efficient ion engines) expend mass (fuel) in order to generate thrust. This process is rather inefficient, and thus limits the potential total change in velocity of a given spaceship to a tiny amount. Further, since adding more mass to expend results in more mass to accelerate, returns start to diminish and eventually you have to add absurd amounts of mass for rather unimpressive gains in performance. This device generates thrust with no mass expended. It can simply accelerate the ship until something breaks or you get bored. This allows for an absolutely massive total change in velocity in a tiny ship. Total change in velocity is not limited by how much fuel mass you have, but rather how much time and electricity you can throw at the problem. The difference is unspeakably important. From rowboats to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump in capability. If we can get this to work, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, at the very least, become easily reached by man. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:25:23 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Allow me translate what he said into what he is trying to say: Normal rocket engines (of any type, even efficient ion engines) expend mass (fuel) in order to generate thrust. This process is rather inefficient, and thus limits the potential total change in velocity of a given spaceship to a tiny amount. Further, since adding more mass to expend results in more mass to accelerate, returns start to diminish and eventually you have to add absurd amounts of mass for rather unimpressive gains in performance. This device generates thrust with no mass expended. It can simply accelerate the ship until something breaks or you get bored. This allows for an absolutely massive total change in velocity in a tiny ship. Total change in velocity is not limited by how much fuel mass you have, but rather how much time and electricity you can throw at the problem. The difference is unspeakably important. From rowboats to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump in capability. If we can get this to work, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, at the very least, become easily reached by man. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber. This means that until something fails or wears down, theoretically the engine could keep running forever Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever...
http://www.skibane.com/Flathead_Ford_v8.jpg Allow me translate what he said into what he is trying to say: Normal rocket engines (of any type, even efficient ion engines) expend mass (fuel) in order to generate thrust. This process is rather inefficient, and thus limits the potential total change in velocity of a given spaceship to a tiny amount. Further, since adding more mass to expend results in more mass to accelerate, returns start to diminish and eventually you have to add absurd amounts of mass for rather unimpressive gains in performance. This device generates thrust with no mass expended. It can simply accelerate the ship until something breaks or you get bored. This allows for an absolutely massive total change in velocity in a tiny ship. Total change in velocity is not limited by how much fuel mass you have, but rather how much time and electricity you can throw at the problem. The difference is unspeakably important. From rowboats to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump in capability. If we can get this to work, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, at the very least, become easily reached by man. WUT!!!! WOW!!!! I mean........................... 
FUCK...........me swimming to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:33:11 AM EDT
[#30]
This is exciting!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:33:15 AM EDT
[#31]
Can I put one of these in my Tundra? That thing gets terrible gas mileage.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:36:24 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can I put one of these in my Tundra? That thing gets terrible gas mileage. I'll shove one up my ass if it can get me to Jack in The Box and back in under a minute. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:37:02 AM EDT
[#33]
So, they claim to have generated ~0.36 ounces of thrust with only 300 watts (2/3 horsepower) of power.
Um . . .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:37:50 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WUT!!!! WOW!!!! I mean...........................
FUCK...........me swimming to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber. This means that until something fails or wears down, theoretically the engine could keep running forever Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever...
http://www.skibane.com/Flathead_Ford_v8.jpg Allow me translate what he said into what he is trying to say: Normal rocket engines (of any type, even efficient ion engines) expend mass (fuel) in order to generate thrust. This process is rather inefficient, and thus limits the potential total change in velocity of a given spaceship to a tiny amount. Further, since adding more mass to expend results in more mass to accelerate, returns start to diminish and eventually you have to add absurd amounts of mass for rather unimpressive gains in performance. This device generates thrust with no mass expended. It can simply accelerate the ship until something breaks or you get bored. This allows for an absolutely massive total change in velocity in a tiny ship. Total change in velocity is not limited by how much fuel mass you have, but rather how much time and electricity you can throw at the problem. The difference is unspeakably important. From rowboats to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump in capability. If we can get this to work, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, at the very least, become easily reached by man. WUT!!!! WOW!!!! I mean...........................
FUCK...........me swimming to nuclear submarines is a smaller jump!! The really damned important question is if additional tests of this device by other teams using White-Juday warp field interferometers continue to show positive results... Either way, this is important... But if that happens... Mankind will leave footprints in another solar system someday. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:40:54 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
..................... The really damned important question is if additional tests of this device by other teams using White-Juday warp field interferometers continue to show positive results... Either way, this is important... But if that happens... Mankind will leave footprints in another solar system someday. WITHOUT QUESTION!!
ETA: This came up a number of years ago but it really does seem like they made a device/test that proved it can really happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:42:59 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, they claim to have generated ~0.36 ounces of thrust with only 300 watts (2/3 horsepower) of power. Um . . . "Um" what? Constant thrust, even tiny, allows for massive changes in velocity in space. And as this device uses only electrical power, expenditure of mass is not required. If you don't follow me thus far, just take my word for it: It's good magic, it's Earth-shattering, and it will open up the solar system to us at least*. *Assuming we can replicate these results in a solar orbit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:44:26 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Um" what? Constant thrust, even tiny, allows for massive changes in velocity in space. And as this device uses only electrical power, expenditure of mass is not required. If you don't follow me thus far, just take my word for it: It's good magic, it's Earth-shattering, and it will open up the solar system to us at least*. *Assuming we can replicate these results in a solar orbit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So, they claim to have generated ~0.36 ounces of thrust with only 300 watts (2/3 horsepower) of power. Um . . . "Um" what? Constant thrust, even tiny, allows for massive changes in velocity in space. And as this device uses only electrical power, expenditure of mass is not required. If you don't follow me thus far, just take my word for it: It's good magic, it's Earth-shattering, and it will open up the solar system to us at least*. *Assuming we can replicate these results in a solar orbit. Yeah, but it almost seems to act like an anti gravity machine for god's sake!!?? I am amazed by this...........in case you couldn't tell.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:51:57 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, but it almost seems to act like an anti gravity machine for god's sake!!?? I am amazed by this...........in case you couldn't tell. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, they claim to have generated ~0.36 ounces of thrust with only 300 watts (2/3 horsepower) of power. Um . . . "Um" what? Constant thrust, even tiny, allows for massive changes in velocity in space. And as this device uses only electrical power, expenditure of mass is not required. If you don't follow me thus far, just take my word for it: It's good magic, it's Earth-shattering, and it will open up the solar system to us at least*. *Assuming we can replicate these results in a solar orbit. Yeah, but it almost seems to act like an anti gravity machine for god's sake!!?? I am amazed by this...........in case you couldn't tell. I wouldn't put much in the "anti-gravity" terminology just yet. Journalists are retarded and keep trying to use that, but it doesn't apply here... Other than the notion that if efficiency can be significantly improved, a positive thrust to weight ratio for small ships is plausible, allowing ground-to-orbit in a tiny ship without expending mass/fuel... Which sounds cool and all, but I'll be happy with much lower efficiencies and chemical rockets to reach orbit as long as the damn thing works.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:54:49 AM EDT
[#39]
I hear of all this wondrous shit but it never seems to come to fruition.
Also I've noticed that nothing good happens any more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:55:31 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
................ I wouldn't put much in the "anti-gravity" terminology just yet. Journalists are retarded and keep trying to use that, but it doesn't apply here... Other than the notion that if efficiency can be significantly improved, a positive thrust to weight ratio for small ships is plausible, allowing ground-to-orbit in a tiny ship without expending mass/fuel... Which sounds cool and all, but I'll be happy with much lower efficiencies and chemical rockets to reach orbit as long as the damn thing works. Either way this has the potential of being a REAL GAME CHANGER!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 4:58:28 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hear of all this wondrous shit but it never seems to come to fruition. Also I've noticed that nothing good happens any more. Repeated testing by seperate scientific teams in four nations all showing positive results is a bit more than "hearing"... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 5:03:07 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Either way this has the potential of being a REAL GAME CHANGER!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
................ I wouldn't put much in the "anti-gravity" terminology just yet. Journalists are retarded and keep trying to use that, but it doesn't apply here... Other than the notion that if efficiency can be significantly improved, a positive thrust to weight ratio for small ships is plausible, allowing ground-to-orbit in a tiny ship without expending mass/fuel... Which sounds cool and all, but I'll be happy with much lower efficiencies and chemical rockets to reach orbit as long as the damn thing works. Either way this has the potential of being a REAL GAME CHANGER!! Indeed. If it works for realz (in space), every significant researcher on it should get a Nobel Prize... Then the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences should be just close up shop... No need anymore... All the scientific awesome humanity will every need has already been accomplished. Go home people, our work here is done, pack your bags to move off-world... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 5:11:37 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Acknowledging that I'm an idiot regarding these types of things, I would think it would take more than cutting the power to stop when you're going "4-hours-to-the-moon" speed in space. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Acknowledging that I'm an idiot regarding these types of things, I would think it would take more than cutting the power to stop when you're going "4-hours-to-the-moon" speed in space. In a space craft there is nothing to make you stop or slow down. A space craft behaves quite differently to e.g. an automobile. If you consider a vehicle that can do 0-60 in 4 seconds, that's acceleration of +15 MPH every second. But you can't just keep accelerating - friction with the road, the air, the bearings, etc. all conspire to make going faster harder. That's why your 60-120 time isn't the same as your 0-60 time. This is not the case with a spacecraft. If it kept on accelerating at that rate in two hours it'd be doing 108,000 MPH. The downside to that is that there's nothing to help a spacecraft slow down except that same motor so slowing down takes the exact same time as speeding up. At the moment we coast most of the way. Our spacecraft just can't carry enough fuel to boost for a long time. More fuel means more weight which means you need more fuel, etc. When we get close we turn around and do a reverse thrust to fall into orbit. Quoted:
If that's the case, then you'd have to spend the first half of every trip accelerating, and the second half decelerating. Yes. Exactly right! Once we get a spaceship drive that lets us boost continuously (essential for big speeds) then that's exactly what you would have to do on every trip and it's way faster than coasting most of the way. Think of it as being like doing a quarter mile where you have to stop right on the finish line. At the moment we goose the throttle to get started, put it neutral and coast most of the way and then dab the brakes to stop. What we'd prefer to do is be on the throttle till we're half way there and then stand on the brakes. Much faster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 5:12:28 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hear of all this wondrous shit but it never seems to come to fruition. Also I've noticed that nothing good happens any more. Step back and take a little wider view. We've come an awful long way in the last 200 years... hell, we went from horse and buggies to landing a man on the moon in basically a single lifetime. Unfortunately, while innovation is still there, it certainly doesn't take center stage like it once did. People seem to be losing the urge to know things just for the sake of knowing them, which is really the driver of innovation and discovery. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 5:13:46 AM EDT
[#45]
Am I the only one who is worried by what is happening here? NASA's job is to make terrorists feel good about their contributions to science, right? So at some point we can expect this newfangled technology to be crashed into a building or somehow turned into a bomb and detonated in a populated area. Aloha snackbar and all that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 5:14:11 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Turn around and thrust in the opposite direction. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yeah, you need that 'explain it' stuff so you can do mundane things like 'make it stop.' Turn around and thrust in the opposite direction. Giggity! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 6:00:57 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever... http://www.skibane.com/Flathead_Ford_v8.jpg We have photon rockets? And one of them is a "standard"? Quote HistoryQuoted: It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber. This means that until something fails or wears down, theoretically the engine could keep running forever Yeh, and theoretically, if nothing fails or wears down, this engine could also keep running forever... http://www.skibane.com/Flathead_Ford_v8.jpg The drive is capable of producing thrust several thousand times greater than a standard photon rocket We have photon rockets? And one of them is a "standard"? aka a flashlight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 6:13:29 AM EDT
[#48]
Fascinating.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 6:17:57 AM EDT
[#49]
"It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber."
but what will we do at night?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/29/2015 6:47:24 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "It produces thrust by using solar power to generate multiple microwaves that move back and forth in an enclosed chamber." but what will we do at night? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
