Crook Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Forgive me if this has been covered before, but I want to make sure I have a reasonably accurate picture of the story so far.As I understand it, some random guy had a design for a reactionless drive, and was widely ignored. Then a Chinese team supposedly verified his results, though not in vacuum. This interested NASA (or a subsidiary of NASA) enough that they asked a couple of guys to check. They guessed nothing would happen, so they got no real budget (and quite right too). This team (Eagleworks lab) verified that something was causing thrust in air, although it was orders of magnitude lower than previously reported. Collective media starts running around screaming about Star Trek and warp drive.Eagleworks then reran the tests in vacuum, and found thrust persisted. However, the measurements were marginal, and the components they were using weren't rated for vacuum. Currently, they hope to scale up the experiment so that the thrust observed is large enough that other labs can be called in for independent verification (at which point, we likely find the results don't pan out). The most recent piece of news is that light was being interfered with very slightly in the test chamber, in a manner that might possibly maybe be consistent with very minor warping effects.Is that about the story so far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Forgive me if this has been covered before, but I want to make sure I have a reasonably accurate picture of the story so far.As I understand it, some random guy had a design for a reactionless drive, and was widely ignored. Then a Chinese team supposedly verified his results, though not in vacuum. This interested NASA (or a subsidiary of NASA) enough that they asked a couple of guys to check. They guessed nothing would happen, so they got no real budget (and quite right too). This team (Eagleworks lab) verified that something was causing thrust in air, although it was orders of magnitude lower than previously reported. Collective media starts running around screaming about Star Trek and warp drive.Eagleworks then reran the tests in vacuum, and found thrust persisted. However, the measurements were marginal, and the components they were using weren't rated for vacuum. Currently, they hope to scale up the experiment so that the thrust observed is large enough that other labs can be called in for independent verification (at which point, we likely find the results don't pan out). The most recent piece of news is that light was being interfered with very slightly in the test chamber, in a manner that might possibly maybe be consistent with very minor warping effects.Is that about the story so far?Pretty much the gist of it yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streetwind Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Note that the Eagleworks team in question isn't just "a couple of guys" that were available. That's actually one of NASA's highest qualified experimental technologies teams. Under Dr Harold White, NASA's advanced propulsion lead, they were already involved in quantum thruster and warp field research before the "Cannae Drive" showed up. That's why it was given to them to test.Also, the thing that the Chinese tested was unrelated to the Cannae Drive (though it's possible that it produced a similar effect) and happened years earlier. It was ignored and belittled by pretty much everyone in the west. It's only now that NASA is involved that people start believing that this is actually A Thing That Exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crook Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Note that the Eagleworks team in question isn't just "a couple of guys" that were available. That's actually one of NASA's highest qualified experimental technologies teams.That's interesting, thanks. I thought this was a case of a routine check of a crackpot theory by the peer-reviewed equivalent of a couple of interns. I had no idea NASA took it that seriously.In terms of future developments, what's the general consensus? Are most people who understand what's going on expecting the uprated tests to continue showing thrust, or are they just waiting for this to be shown to be an error so they can get on with other things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streetwind Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I think they're still busy with the "understanding what's going on" part The recent test on the interferometer only confused everyone even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazon Del Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Right now (as an observer in the forum where some of the scientists on the team post information) what seems to be going on is the following.They are still somewhat in a period of time where they are attempting to figure out possible conventional explanations for the thrust (IE: warm air flow causing thrust, interacting with magnetic fields of the Earth, etc). However, as a result of their low power tests in vacuum, they have largely come to the conclusion that while such effects might be responsible for a little bit of the thrust in the more powerful tests (done by Shawyer, the Chinese team, and the Cannae teams), in general some effect that we don't currently have a good way to explain IS occurring.So they have two split efforts going on in the path forward.The first effort is to continue working on the low power rig to achieve >100 microNewtons of force on a semi consistent basis (think 4/5 attempts) so that they can pass it over to the Glenn Research Center for them to independently verify the thrust. Glenn has less of an ability to detect the forces involved and it was judged that it wasn't worth upgrading their facility for this purpose especially since the test thruster SHOULD be able to to output at the required levels.The second effort is to produce a thruster that accepts an input power more in line with the other teams. Instead of 30-60 watts, they are looking at a max output of just over 1.2 kilowatts. What exactly happens if they DO achieve similar results is something of a matter of speculation. I believe the ETA for completion of this is sometime in the middle of the year, but I'm not 100%.Doctor White has a lot of 'unconventional' theories attempting to explain how the thruster works. If his theories turn out to be true, then things are pretty great as far as space engine techs are concerned as well as a few other interesting possibilities. I am not a physicist so my understanding of the theory and its implications could be flawed. But keeping that in mind, the TLDR is basically: All energy pokes at the local quantum vacuum plasma (think spacetime but not). Matter is a lot of condensed energy that pokes at the QV plasma 'hard'. The effects of this 'poke' on the QV plasma manifest themselves as gravity. Something about what the Q-thruster/EMdrive/Cannae Drive is doing is poking at the QV plasma 'more efficiently' than its energy levels would normally be capable of in another form.As part of attempting to provide experimental evidence for this theory, Dr White replaced the charged capacitor ring from the micro warp field interferometer with a Q-thruster and took a bunch of measurements recording what they believe to be a signature that verifies that somehow the Q-thruster is warping space within itself. Not by a whole lot, but in line with his theory. Tests concerning the interferometer are considered a separate but related field of experimentation to ongoing activities with the thruster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 (edited) That's interesting, thanks. I thought this was a case of a routine check of a crackpot theory by the peer-reviewed equivalent of a couple of interns. I had no idea NASA took it that seriously.In terms of future developments, what's the general consensus? Are most people who understand what's going on expecting the uprated tests to continue showing thrust, or are they just waiting for this to be shown to be an error so they can get on with other things?From what my physicist friends say they are being cautious.IF these results are not errors they have some big implications.But no one wants to come to any conclusions yet as they could end up looking like idiots due to there being so many avenues of errors they need to rule out, though I think they have ruled out some of the most likely errors now.They are basically being as thorough as possible. Edited April 29, 2015 by crazyewok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazon Del Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 The following is a paper written by several of the members of the forum, in conjunction with information and data provided by Paul March and others involved in the ongoing Eagleworks Research.http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/Posted 4/29/2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralathon Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 The following is a paper written by several of the members of the forum, in conjunction with information and data provided by Paul March and others involved in the ongoing Eagleworks Research.http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/Posted 4/29/2015.It's concerning that they spend about 1 alinea talking about "Hey, this needs some more work" and nearly 3 chapters on "This is what we can use it for".Just wait for peer reviewed papers, reproduction of the effect by others and other such essential steps. I'd bet this month's paycheck that it's instrument error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazon Del Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 They get back into the description of the ongoing work and the theories by Doctor White as it goes. It does admittedly ramble a little bit, but part of that is because NASA kind of needs for all research projects to reaffirm to itself and outside the boons it can provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakaydos Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 It's concerning that they spend about 1 alinea talking about "Hey, this needs some more work" and nearly 3 chapters on "This is what we can use it for".Just wait for peer reviewed papers, reproduction of the effect by others and other such essential steps. I'd bet this month's paycheck that it's instrument error.At this point in the proceedings I'll take that bet. the effect HAS been reproduced, in china and elsewhere... it's the theory that's lagging behind. We dont know why it works, so we dont know what the most powerful configuation is, but we do know it's doing SOMETHING we cant account for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Ben Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 It's concerning that they spend about 1 alinea talking about "Hey, this needs some more work" and nearly 3 chapters on "This is what we can use it for".Just wait for peer reviewed papers, reproduction of the effect by others and other such essential steps. I'd bet this month's paycheck that it's instrument error.Why does that not build any confidence for me? (rhetorical question, I know the answer ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazon Del Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 CalPoly is actually about to begin their own projects with regards to the EMDrive and attempting to validate it. An interesting bit of news we just got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Interesting indeed Looks like "reactionless drive" is leaving "Bah! Humbug!" territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shynung Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 It always has. Solar sails exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leszek Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Interesting indeed Looks like "reactionless drive" is leaving "Bah! Humbug!" territory.It hasn't left "Bah! Humbug!" until it is verified. We don't know it is doing "something we can't account for" yet. The definitive tests are starting now, after that we will know one way or another. Before that keep your enthusiasm in check. There isn't anything to get excited about until there is something to get excited about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozen_Heart Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I'm not getting excited about this until its 100% confirmed and all errors have been ruled out. I still believe they'll find its an instrument error of something.I really want it to be real though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leszek Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I really want it to be real though...That would be AWESOME. Just think if they prove it this week, we could have hover boards by xtmas.<ahem> But yea don't get excited about yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Interesting indeed Looks like "reactionless drive" is leaving "Bah! Humbug!" territory.Thats a shame it will break KSP J/k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozen_Heart Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Thats a shame it will break KSP J/kIt actually would. I doubt it would be added even if it was proved to work as game mechanics would be messed up so badly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuke Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 It actually would. I doubt it would be added even if it was proved to work as game mechanics would be messed up so badly.its a 3 minute mod job really (at least as of last version). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyewok Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 its a 3 minute mod job really (at least as of last version).Yeah but unlimited DV would make the game too easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vger Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 In nearly my entire adult-hood, I've been feeling civilization was in need of a quantum leap of some kind. Computers never really did that for me, because 90% of the reason they now exist in everyday life is because, like television, they're tools to sell more stuff to people. But like the Star Trek timeline, warp drive always felt like the "big one." This may not be that, but... PLEASE, Universe, PLEASE give us a little room to break contemporary laws of physics here. Let this be for real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotius Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 It actually would. I doubt it would be added even if it was proved to work as game mechanics would be messed up so badly.It has been done KSP Interstellar have a Quantum Thruster - it works just like something from Eagleworks lab. Thrust is kinda wimpy, and it requires enormous amounts of power - but Isp is indeed epic And no - it doesn't break the game. Even Scott Manley himself struggled with flying a probe propelled by QThruster to Moho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rakaydos Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 That would be AWESOME. Just think if they prove it this week, we could have hover boards by xtmas.Yea, not really. It will get put in the bin of "really cool things we could do if we had a low mass black box infinite powersource. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts