• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

EM Drive In the News

aramis

Administrator
Administrator
Baronet
Two good articles this week...

1) Sciencealert.com: EmDrive to be tested in space. - on a 6u cubsat.

So... it looks like we'll know whether it works or not soon.

And I'm of the school of thought that if physics says something is impossible, but engineers manage to do it anyway, physics is wrong.
 
That would still be "physics is wrong"...

There's a big difference between "physics is wrong" (which is incredibly unlikely) and "the physical explanation that the EMdrive people came up with for this was wrong" (which is vastly more likely). If it does work then it's most likely not violating any laws of momentum and is actually doing something different but still allowable.

Though it has yet to be demonstrated that there is actually anything to this EMdrive at all. If there is, I strongly suspect that it would be down to a process that is already known to physics but not well understood, which is absolutely not the same as "physics is wrong".

Personally I don't think a space test would demonstrate anything, because I doubt it'd work (either because there's nothing to demonstrate, or the equipment won't work up there anyway because it can't handle launch stresses).
 
Physicists are frequently wrong, every new discovery in Physics that's worth anything is correcting something or closing off alternative lines of thought that were previously considered plausible. That's the defining strength of science - it's constantly re-examining itself on the basic assumption that every proposition or theory is wrong in at least some way unless demonstrated or proven otherwise. The same goes for experimental results too though.

That's why when CERN physicists measured Neutrinos beamed between CERN and a lab in Italy as travelling faster than light, they operated on the working assumption that they were wrong. They assumed experimental error, engaged the help and advice of engineers from around the world and eventually tracked down the source of the error. Every result is exposed to just as much scrutiny as any theory. Both ends of the system, theory and practice, need to be examined with rigour.

The initially reported EM drive tests were hardly rigorous and now are pretty comprehensively discredited. The only vacuum test by the Dresden team has produced a null result - no thrust was detected within their sensitivity range. The latest Chinese test measured 0 +/-0.7mN, so nothing there either. They did detect thrust when the device was run on external power just as they did last time, but when they switched to internal battery power the thrust disappeared. As many observers had previously suggested, the 'thrust' turned out to be due to magnetic fields generated by the external power lines. The Chinese team have subsequently withdrawn their original paper on this basis, but of course it still gets raised as 'proof' the drive works on internet forums the world over. All this is on the Wikipedia page.

Honestly, whoever is launching the microsat is wasting their money and time, but I welcome the effort. The sooner this fiasco is put to bed the better and only thorough investigation is going to reach a definitive close. Except of course it won't. I still occasionally come across Cold Fusion true believers who think it was either covered up by the government or was 'never tested properly' to prove it worked. Presumably we'll get conspiracy theories about the Chinese faking a null result to conceal their secret military EM Drive program.

Simon Hibbs
 
Well it seems China is interested in this and claims to have already started testing it in space. If this means we get our maneuver drive sooner, good.
 
Well it seems China is interested in this and claims to have already started testing it in space. If this means we get our maneuver drive sooner, good.

I read the chinese news article (using Google Translate)... it's already tested positive on Tiangong... But they haven't said whether they tested inside out outside. They did quote the minister of space as having stated that it's going into the next batch of sats...
 
Physicists are frequently wrong, every new discovery in Physics that's worth anything is correcting something or closing off alternative lines of thought that were previously considered plausible.
[ . . . ]
Quantum mechanics is a great example of this. Apocryphally, it first started when someone tried to calculate the orbital velocity of an electron and came up with a number that would have been unsustainable - the atom would have had to give off radiation and the electron lose energy, ultimately merging with the nucleus according to Newtonian physics.

While Quantum Mechanics is famous for its weirdness and incomprehensible mathematics (mine starts to fizzle out around fourier transforms), it has demonstrable predictive power as a theory. We have many technologies and observable physical phenomena dependent on quantum effects - transistors, lasers, LEDs, flourescence, photovoltaic cells and magnetic resonance imaging to name just a few. You are reading this message on a technology stack that's dependent on several quantum effects to function.
 
That was based on an incorrect assumption about their wings being rigid. If you model the aerodynamics based on the actual flexing of the wings the maths works just fine.

Only if you use the modern values for viscosity of air; at the scale of the bumblebee, the default viscosity doesn't generate enough lift.

Our understanding of vortices on that scale is FAR better than in the 1970's. Specifically from analyzing the vortices on bees.
 
Back
Top