NASA successfully tests engine that uses no fuel, violates the laws of physics (http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/7b/c5/7bc543c50986bd9c478c12b01dc23a70.jpg?itok=f58VJt05)
Another Star Trek technology may be coming to reality
Photo by Mario Tama/Getty ImagesQuoteVery quietly, NASA has tested a space drive that does not use propellant and according to the laws of physics should not work, according to a Thursday story in Wired.UK. The problem is that the drive, called the "Cannae Drive" by its inventor Guiddo Fetta, did work in the NASA directed test. If the efficacy of the drive is confirmed, the implications for space travel are profound. It seems that another technology from Star Trek may be about to become reality,.
The Cannae Drive is apparently based on the work of a British scientist named Roger Shawyer called the EMDrive. It is said to work by bouncing microwaves in an enclosed chamber and thus creating thrust. Despite having built a number of demonstration models, Shawyer has not been able to get anyone interested in his device. Critics reject his relativity explanation for how it works and point out that it violates the conservation of motion.
However it appears that the Chinese quietly tested their own version of the EMDrive up to about 72 grams of thrust, enough to be a satellite thruster. The test was not widely reported in the West, possibly because few if any people believed it was possible. That seems to have changed thanks of the test of the Cannae Drive.
The Cannae Drive seems to have been developed independently of the EmDrive, though it seems to have a similar mechanism. The NASA test, which was presented at the 50th Joint Propulsion Conference in Cleveland, Ohio, showed that the Cannae drive was able to produce a thrust of less than one thousandth of the Chinese model. Nevertheless it constitutes a third test of a working propellant-less engine.
What are the physics behind these devices? NASA's explanation follows:
"Test results indicate that the RF resonant cavity thruster design, which is unique as an electric propulsion device, is producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon and therefore is potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma."
In other words, no one knows for sure. Wired speculates that the process involves "pushing against the ghostly cloud of particles and anti-particles that are constantly popping into being and disappearing again in empty space." But finding out for sure and determining whether this kind of drive can be scaled up to something that can propel a spacecraft will be the work of some years.
But what if it does work and can be scaled up? Much of the weight of a spacecraft, whether it is propelled by a chemical rocket, an ion thruster, or nuclear thermal engines consists of fuel. If something like the EMDrive or the Cannae Drive becomes practical, larger spacecraft can be launched into space without the added weight of fuel and because the thrust is low but constant, like an ion rocket, trip times throughout the Solar System suddenly become weeks instead of months.
This is not the warp drive from Star Trek (a different project at NASA.) It does look a lot like impulse power that propelled the USS Enterprise when the warp engines were down. It would be enough to open the solar system for exploration and eventual colonization.
Mark R. Whittington is the author of The Man from Mars: The Asteroid Mining Caper, The Last Moonwalker and Other Stories and the Children of Apollo trilogy .
http://www.examiner.com/article/nasa-successfully-tests-engine-that-uses-no-fuel-violates-the-laws-of-physics
Why NASA's Physics-Defying Space Engine Is Probably Bogus(http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/MAVEN-Illustration-6.20.13-660x401.jpg)
An artist's render of the MAVEN mission, upon arrival to Mars. NASAQuoteLast month, NASA researchers dropped news with potentially huge consequences for space travel and science as a whole: They ran an experiment whose results seem to defy the very laws of physics, and could change how we travel through outer space. Problem is, experts say that it's incredibly unlikely that Isaac Newton is wrong. Instead, the most likely explanation is the team simply made a mistake somewhere along the way
The team was testing a theory that there's a new way to propel satellites, instead of using rockets powered by a limited supply of fuel. So they put a radio antenna in a specially designed, sealed container. Turned on, the antenna bounced 935MHz radio waves (similar to those used by some cell phones) around, and the container apparently moved a tiny, tiny bit. This violates Newton's third law of motion, one of the basic tenets of physics.
Loosely put, Newton taught us that no action can occur without an equal and
opposite reaction. Because there is nothing pushing against the container, propelling it along—no hot gases exploding out the back, for example—it shouldn't be able to move. It's like moving a broken-down car by pushing it from the inside.
If the results hold up, that means there's a way to power vehicles through space without combusting fuel. Today, a satellite's lifetime supply of propellant is limited to how much it can carry. It doesn't need to burn fuel once in orbit, but if a team on the ground wants to tweak its course to avoid space debris or take on a new task, they need to fire it up.
But if radio waves can control the vehicle, that all changes. An antenna could be powered by electricity generated with solar panels. Beyond satellites, this could help humans get to Mars. A consistent source of thrust could accelerate a ship to much higher speeds than traditional propellant-based engines, cutting the time it takes to get from Earth to the red planet.
(http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Screen-Shot-2014-08-07-at-4.26.52-PM-660x288.png)
The slotted pillbox cavity (left, top-down view) and the test article. NASAQuoteThe NASA team isn't the first to find this result. This is actually the fifth time an independent research lab has tested this kind of device successfully. Not surprisingly, the NASA work, done by researchers David Brady, Harold White, and three other scientists, sparked breathless media coverage claiming the laws of physics has been broken.
Here's the tricky part: The laws of physics are called laws for a reason. It's exceedingly unlikely that shooting off radio waves inside a carefully constructed can is enough to break one of them. It's much more likely there's some error in the experiment, something extremely subtle that no one has noticed yet. It's happened before. In 2011, Italian physicists thought they had discovered neutrinos that could travel faster than light, contradicting Einstein's theory of relativity. After extensive testing, the team realized it had flawed data thanks to a loose fiber optic cable. It's likely that the results of the NASA experiment have a similar explanation.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," says Professor Federico Capasso, the Robert L. Wallace Professor of Applied Physics at Harvard University, quoting Carl Sagan's famous line. "It does no good to science and technology, in fact it hurts its credibility, to go public with such preliminary results that would have to be confirmed by many more experiments designed to convincingly rule out uncontrollable effects or interferences," Capasso says.
John C. Baez, a mathematical physicist at the University of California at Riverside, calls the experiment "graduate-level baloney." He scoffs at the idea that microwaves in a "fancy-shaped can" could violate the law of conservation of momentum.
The legendary physicist Richard Feynman once wrote "for a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." A less-forward thinking PR department might say "release the news!" because it makes for great press, but this needs to be carefully proven before it can change the world.
Other labs, including NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in California and at the Glenn Research Center in Ohio, plan to test the system.
It's possible that there is a way to move an object through space using radio waves, and that there's something wrong with Newton's thinking. But it's an extreme long shot, and until we have piles and piles of proof to support it, we can safely assume that something else—maybe a loose cable somewhere—is at work.
http://www.wired.com/2014/08/why-nasas-physics-defying-space-engine-is-probably-bogus/
But the chinese one works apparently.
My only thoughts are laws are laws only as we understand them. With new understanding... perhaps they change. Or working around the law, not violating it, but manipulating around it, perhaps it works.
Quote from: WarToad on January 15, 2015, 01:50:50 PM
My only thoughts are laws are laws only as we understand them. With new understanding... perhaps they change. Or working around the law, not violating it, but manipulating around it, perhaps it works.
I agree. They use to think the earth was flat also.