Not into the greedy hands of the fraudster Elon Musk, but into the hands of real innovators, for instance into the EM Drive?
Also, with the Em Drive being launched into space by the Chinese, are we just a few steps away from a real Mars mission and a mission to Europa and Io and a landing on Titan?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
google.co.uk
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
god how irresponsible. the people in power don't care about beauty. space travel should be about beauty not quickest to destroy the next step towards greater space travel
>EM Drive
The EM drive is so weak it couldn't push away a fly.
>Thundef00t
Opinion instantly disregarded.
literally breaks laws of physics
no. cause dark matter doesn't exists.
you realize that doesn't matter, right?
This is the first computer [terms of size] all over again, and you are the idiot who fails to understand that.
cant stand the fucking guy
Depends on the electricity you put into it and its shape and optimizations. At 1.2mN per kW, you can actually push a fly away already.
>we don't even understand why it works
>"why isn't this thing efficient yet"
Q. Does the theory of the EmDrive contravene the accepted laws of physics or electromagnetic theory?
A. The EmDrive does not violate any known law of physics. The basic laws that are applied in the theory of the EmDrive operation are as follows:
Newton’s laws are applied in the derivation of the basic static thrust equation (Equation 11 in the theory paper) and have also been demonstrated to apply to the EmDrive experimentally.
The law of conservation of momentum is the basis of Newtons laws and therefore applies to the EmDrive. It is satisfied both theoretically and experimentally.
The law of conservation of energy is the basis of the dynamic thrust equation which applies to the EmDrive under acceleration,(see Equation 16 in the theory paper).
The principles of electromagnetic theory are used to derive the basic design equations.
5.
Q. Why does the EmDrive not contravene the conservation of momentum when it operates in free space?
A. The EmDrive cannot violate the conservation of momentum. The electromagnetic wave momentum is built up in the resonating cavity, and is transferred to the end walls upon reflection. The momentum gained by the EmDrive plus the momentum lost by the electromagnetic wave equals zero. The direction and acceleration that is measured, when the EmDrive is tested on a dynamic test rig, comply with Newtons laws and confirm that the law of conservation of momentum is satisfied.
6.
Q. Is the EmDrive a form of perpetual motion machine?
A. The EmDrive obeys the law of conservation of energy and is therefore not a perpetual motion machine. Energy must be expended to accelerate the EmDrive (see Equation 16 of the theory paper). Once the EmDrive is switched off, Newton’s laws ensure that motion is constant unless it is acted upon by another force.
What's wrong with the guys voice? He sounds like someone doing really bad impression of a british accent. He also compares experimental space drive to a fucking helicopter.
and you fail to understand that the EM drive isnt scaleable. The technology can only produce very small amounts of push because it works by using light to push itself away
It's not a photon drive, optimization is under way and rumors tell that the chinese are already testing it on the Tiangong space station (idk about details)
>the Em Drive being launched into space by the Chinese
If only that was true.
This bucket does not work. All we see are ever more outragous claims without any documentaion, photos, videos ore anything to back it up.
The "thrust" measuered by NASA EW is just a thermal artifact.
Sure, it might be cold fusion, n-rays or polywater all over again. But it doesn't hurt to wait a little bit longer with the judgment.
See pic for clarification.
Form follows Function; this is engineering, not art.
>Will Trump put money into high tech space?
Let's hope so, we need to start colonizing space.
Soon there won't be any whites or east asians left and Earth won't have the intellectual power to actually do it and we'll be stuck on Earth forever.
>fail to understand that the EM drive isnt scaleable.
Explain. The head of NASA's Eagleworks group says it is scalable, as he showed a 2MW Em Drive for a Mars mission design. If it is not scalable, why? And why does a top engineer at NASA say you are wrong?
Daily reminder that Trump inherited Teslas patents and works
Reckon he's used the time machine
With the drive, it's a matter of power. A fission reactor might suffice for early travel with solar sails, but the next step is sustainable, profitable fusion before real space travel is likely.
>view from left
>shows right+behind angle
>view from right
>shows right angle
People are fucking retarded, aren't they?
There will be no space mission.
Just more bullshit claims.
What did I read last by Shawyer?
He now claimed 50N/kw. That magnitude of forece could easily lift a whole experimental assembly into the air.
It would be so easy to post a video of his experiment to silence all critics forever.
But instead we get bullshit and excuses.
This very fishy and a bahavior you typicaly would see from scammers - when quesioned about the validity of their claims they double down on it.
That's the quirky thing about space, with its lack of friction; That tiny amount of force would accumulate over time.
I don't think anyone is saying "take off from the ground" with one.
>Mars
even if the drive works, it will not be useful for going to mars.
if the drive works the thrust is so small it can not be used for transportation purposes.
interesting applications would be deep space probes and keeping satellites in orbit
>even if the drive works, it will not be useful for going to mars.
And yet, the people working on Q thrusters / Hall thrusters say they are ideally placed for quick Mars missions.
see:
Then let's do scientific method and experiment, you dumb fucking kraut.
dark matter is just used as a synonym for particles that annihilate with "normal" matter. positron-electron etc. yes it exists, yes we have practical evidence. yes your claim is bullshit
>memedrive
fucking wew, keep drinking that pseudointellectual kool aid
photon rockets are SHIT and there's literally nothing that can be done to improve their efficiency
NASA Eagleworks is literally the meme department. They are also the one who published some clickbaity results about muh warp drives a few years ago.
No. Who writes this shit.
Dark Matter is just a result of an unfinished equation. Its not real it just represents an unknown in physics
That's anti matter you moron.
Dark matter is not antimatter hans.
It doesn't need to.
As long as it can generate any delta-v with out propellant it's does what it needs to. You can run satellites on nuclear power and have them be able to thrust into forever.
But it doesn't, shit doesn't work under hard vacuum.
Wrong. Otherwise we'd be using photon rockets already.
Efficiency does matter.
That's just typical goverment employees with only a hammer trying to make every problem look like a nail.
I never suggest this be used for rockets.
>photon rockets
You watch too much star trek you stupid frog.
>he doesn't understand what a photon rocket is
american engineering education
We already have the technology to generate a delta-V without mass loss, it's called a photon rocket, also known as a fucking flashlight. But surprise surprise, we don't use them because their efficiency is fucking awful and nothing can improve it.
>en.wikipedia.org
Apparently, the Chinese claim they have one in low-Earth orbit.
>At a press conference in Beijing on 10 December 2016 held by the China Academy of Space Technology (CAST) Dr Chen Yue, head of the communication satellite division at CAST, confirmed the agency is already testing an EmDrive in low-Earth orbit onboard an "experimental verification platform". It stated it has successfully measured a thrust onboard laboratory conditions and plans to add the technology to Chinese satellites as soon as possible.
Honestly? I'm not entirely sure it's not propaganda. Can someone confirm/deny Dr. Chen Yue has any other work to his name?
>But surprise surprise, we don't use them because their efficiency is fucking awful and nothing can improve it.
So, basically, you justified his ridicule of you?
Okay. Your still a stupid frog.
EM drives still are a good candidate for deep space probes, something like the voyager missions.
>Could this thing we have no idea what is be powering this thing we have no idea how it works
Physics 2016.
They should dump all the science budget into genetics.
Dark matter is matter that does not react on the elctro-magnetic spectrum. We detect something affecting the other forces (like gravity) but not light. We're not even sure there's matter even THERE but... well, like other anons have said in the thread Dark Matter/Energy is just a placeholder for now.
>So, basically, you justified his ridicule of you?
Not even remotely my challenged friend. He said efficiency doesn't matter because all you need is a delta-V without mass loss. Photon rockets already fit that bill and we still don't use them, proving that efficiency does matter.
slapping a nuclear reactor in there isn't worth the weight
But you claimed a loss of energy and matter isn't a loss of mass. It 100% is. Why are you calling others stupid/challenged when you say stupid shit like this?
>dark matter
bullshit
>optimization is under way
you can say the same about every other scam invention out there
That's one of the most autistic headlines I've seen in a while..
Nigger you don't understand what is being talked about here. We are comparing jet propulsion based drives to EM drives and photon rockets.
The relativistic loss of mass in a reactor is wholly irrelevant and it applies to EM drives equally anyway.
>No, see, don't count it!
Except em drives violate the laws of physics as they are currently reported (conservation of energy/mass). Photon rockets do not.
Why are you so fucking retarded?
>slapping a nuclear reactor in there isn't worth the weight
The voyager probes are currently running off of nuclear power.
It's the main reason they have been so successful.
The SNAP-10A is also in orbit around Earth.
Why are you talking about something you know nothing about?
You should go and watch your adult baby cartoons and leave science to educated professionals with a formal education and a job.
Why do you worry about potato.
Let the first world countries discuss things while you go riverdance.
>No, see, don't count it!
Nigger it's gonna happen in the reactor you use to power your EM drive equally.
Read again.
>generate any delta-v with out propellant
This is exactly what a photon rocket does. Of course that popsci faggot never heard the term before and thought it was a science fiction concept.
EM drives do not violate conservation of energy either.
>EM drives do not violate conservation of energy either.
And yet they are reported to. Several theories are sent forth to explain why... yet no one can narrow it down. All that stands are hypothesis.
>Read again.
>he types as if rereading his retarded post will bring any new insight
Which is entirely used for onboard systems, not propulsion.
meant read
Well... I wouldn't bother pointing out the idiocy of citing one's own posts to him. He got all of his information about the em-drive specifically from this thread.
What's wrong, Ireland. Did one of your 13yr old daughters get knocked up again?
an RTG is not a nuclear reactor. An RTG generates power from the heat generated by the decay of a radioisotope.
There is no fission taking place just natural decay
Why are you giving your opinion on the topic when you didn't know what a photon rocket was 15 minutes ago?
Because they were launched in the 1970s and EMdrive technology didn't exist.
Technically, your correct. But for purpose of talking to normies, it's easier to just call it nuclear.
We already landed a probe on Titan. It looks like rocks.
>implying
>"I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I?!"
I see. I'm talking to a child.
Nice argument you have there germany...
>DUDE WE COULDN'T MAKE THRUST WITHOUT PROPELLANT BEFORE MEME DRIVES
>DUDE PHOTON ROCKETS ARE A STAR TREK THING
I don't need to assume anything.
except it did
>but m...muh thermal effect
So it still needs to be ruled out? Not a problem if they keep testing, right?
>We couldn't do it before...
>So we NEVER WILL!
Okay. Sure. We never do anything we were told we couldn't do before.
that's not at all the argument you stupid fat popsci cunt
the original argument was that all that is needed is to produce thrust without propellant, which I proved wrong since we can already do that
I mean what the fuck don't you understand? I guess that why America needs to import its engineers.
>Say empty things to insult others.
>Get them back.
>THAT'S NOT AN ARGUMENT!
Oh, we moved beyond that. You're just a piece of shit and I'm calling you out. You couldn't recognize that, though, since you're up to your neck in it.
Furthermore... PHOTONS ARE THE PROPELLANT. YOU STUPID FUCKING FROG.
Fusion Power, EM drive, Real Waifus™ are going to make us great again.
Humans have a lot of problems with being in prolonged non-earth level gravity. Long distance/long duration space travel at this point is fucking stupid.
Wish people who are all about space travel would fucking kill themselves so that the other productive members of society can get back to work.
I just want to harvest asteroids for their minerals effectively
>>>Could this thing we have no idea what is be powering this thing we have no idea how it works
>>Physics 2016.
>>They should dump all the science budget into genetics.
Are u nuts? U want these mental midgets fucking around with our DNA?
>no thanks
Total scientific revision is needed. The 40% = 97% meme needs to die as well
>we don't even understand why it works
Yes we do, it will never be efficient because it's principle is retarded.
>PHOTONS ARE THE PROPELLANT
oh my god that was the most retarded thing you said so far
yeah before save up on those photons man you might run out of them
Wasn't the EMdrive a meme device thats only recorded operation turned out to be the result of improper testing?
just because it is a large amount doesn't mean its not finite you frog
Or hurl them with comets at Venus to try terraform it
>hurr durr i lost the argument i troll now
>en.wikipedia.org
>A photon rocket is a hypothetical rocket that uses thrust from emitted photons (radiation pressure by emission) for its propulsion.
>light
>not a propellent
And it doesn't even violate any known laws of physics. What do you have on your side of the argument? Oh, that's right... Nothing.
I can't wait for it to be launched into space and work as intended, and all nay-sayers crying rivers of blood like pathetic libtards.
Trump should literally send a briefcase of cash, subsidy, government contracts, Ivanka, etc to Mars.
The first lon lon musk to get the briefcase wins.
Trump has just invented the age of Ivanka-scarcity exploration
don't you mean mars? venus is already uber fucking hot, only way to colonize venus as of now would be sky cities which are already very iffy
holy shit they are banding together to say more stupid shit
He sounds like Jeremy Clarkson who is from Oxfordshire. It's a BBC accent or RP.
>tfw trump and putin combine to form the eternal emperor of mankind.
>doesn't realize he's been talking to multiple people all thread
>actually got those anons confused several times
>they've all called him retarded
But how does post-IDs work?
>tfw no britslag gf
9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 photons for example is still a finite number despite being such a large number.
what was wrong with what I said?
>maybe if I hide behind an reaction image no one will call me out.
This.
>Meme matter
>Meme Drive
Keep your babble on /Sci/. Pol is a place of real ideas and genuine intellectual discussion.
China claims to have one in space already. Being China I take it with a grain of salt but it's interesting to look into.
> when you make an absolutely abhorrent post
Keep your babble on /Sci/. Pol is a place of real ideas and genuine intellectual discussion.
>intellectual discussion.
i'm going to aggressively finger you.
>using semantic to try and get out of the hole you dug for yourself
wew fucking hew lad
the whole point is to avail oneself of the need of using a massive propellant to not be limited by the rocket equation. Being pedantic and calling photons a propellant doesn't change the fact that photon rockets already do exactly what this guy was asking
I'm very aware I'm talking to a couple of dumb amerilards
en.wikipedia.org
>Testing and replication
>NASA Eagleworks
>In 2014, the group began testing resonant cavity thrusters of their own design and sharing some of their results. In November 2016, they published their first peer-reviewed paper on this work, in the Journal of Propulsion and Power.