PB666

This video is an utter embarrassment. The power output into strict electromagnetic propulsion is 300MW/N To power a commerical jet aircraft requires typically 30,000 to 200,000 lbs of thrust. That is roughly 150,000 to 1,000,000 newtons at 300 MW/N you have terawatts of power needed. Liquid hydrogen cooling wont help you. He is obviously ignoring the fact the calculated propulsion is 10 more efficient that photon drive and requires a reaction mass, he is proposion liquid hydrogen plus atmospheric oxygen as a fuel cell on earth. So what fuel cell can produce 30 terawatts of power? The utter lack of eye contact while he's talking flipped on my fraud detector.

So far as I have seen they are talking about less than 3 dimensions at quantum gravity resolution into space-time (long-long time ago in the murky inflation onset), and the possibility of other dimensions at the quantum scale, which we are pretty feckless in measuring. If you look at the feyman lectures, he basically combines all three dimensions of space into 1, a reference point at which c flows out. It produces 2 dimensional plots. Read K2s post. The critical problem is gravity quantum/gravity distinction, I keep making the point that gravity is a faux force, its actually space-times effect on intertia. So lets go through the problem in laymans eyes. To start let me just premise the argument with a piece of dogma that resolution relies on multiple perspectives. Our perspective is on a particular comoving space-time that has a visibility (composite of many time components of space-time) of less than 10% of the comoving units of the universe. The boundaries of the visible unit our defined by the CMBR radiation which is Doppler shift tells us was about 13.8 billion years ago, it is uniform in all directions (pretty much) and denotes that our current largely (ignoring dark energy) expanding universe. Its' uniformity defines an inflationary state and this is the singular visible (inferred) perspective on that state. Because we cannot see an edge to the universe in any direction, and because of the dating there is a secondary inference that comoving spatial frames (the relative average position and velocity vectors of averageing of four reasonably close galaxies in which there spatial positions are roughly tetrahedral) can be moving away from each other faster than the speed of light (c), and the best way of explaining this superluminal relative motion is via inflation (again excluding dark energies effect). Now for some perspective, lets take a black hole, black holes communicate information via the Hawking radiation, and external energy communicates with it via absorbtion on its surface. It behaves as a singularity but we see a frequency (hv) being released. It sees incoming energy (again objects inside may still have structure, we simply cannot see the structure, we see the properties of the singularity). Note that gravity acts through the ability for energy to warp space-time. Mass energy equivilance allows this, so we can denote the energy of a black-hole by its gravitational attractions and via the radiation it releases. Us and black hole have two very different perspectives of each other, its as if the black hole lives in its own dimensions, but its simply a distortion of our dimensions by immense amount of energy. The energy is acting through something called gravitons which we have the poorest understanding of. So now lets look at something perilously bigger. Imagine our universe's expansion 1. convert all mass to energy (its still maintains its gravitational attractions) 2. confine all the energy to one geometric point with no dimensions 3. Without dimension there is no space, and without space gravity become unitary, its quantum gravity - ta-da the only force in the universe. 4. since there is no space - ta-da- energy density is infinite. That was easy, right [cough]. Well not exactly, because the universe as a singularity it may move around in other dimensions, for example virtual particles can move around in space and time and speeds greater than c, you can have all kinds of bizarre behaviors at the quantum scale. So what about our universe? Yeah, well we don't actually know. Then only thing is that its contents remain unidimensional, as a consequence the universe is timeless and spaceless in its origin from looking into the CMBR crystal-ball. This has consequences. Ok so what happens next, well, errr, not so easy, layman computer malfuntion. S__t happens . . . . . . .inflation which really should be called hyperinflation because: 4. Space expands to faster than the speed of light in all directions (inferred above). Surprisingly the c-violation is not much of a problem, since quantum particles and disappear and reappear at places faster than c. As one quantum resolves into many, a probabilistic outcome is to spread energy according with the probability of where these sprites should be. Not too much of a problem. 5. There is no mass to confine anything (there is energy of the most exotic form), there cannot be mass because there is no space-time, mass relies on inertia and inertia has space-time as a premise. (i.e gravity is the warping of space-time). But an issue here is if there is no rest mass for the universe and quantum resolve into quanta how then is energy divided up, and the answer may be in phases. There is actually a context here, since I can envision inflation as the end of this quantum/quanta resolution process, then the wave/particle nature of the energy exists pretty much as wave(s) until resolution thus can be divided evenly. Here is where there is a problem, space and time supposedly don't exist, so how can the singularity be flirting about in either. One possibility is extra-universal dimensions. Remember the black hole analogy, the black holes dimensions are a warped representation of ours from our perspective and vice versa. We cannot see the extra universal stuff (except maybe dark energy pouring in) and they cannot see whats going on in our universe (except our total energy - the faux pas here is what is the gravitational interaction - and hv- relies on space-time), it might need extra dimensions to inflate. 6. The inflation stops and space-time [poof] exists. We havent a clue as to what gravitational constant was, I surmise that very shortly afterward that constant began equilibrating into something like our current constant. One of the reasons we don't know is that quantum gravity is still is the most dominant force in the universe. There are some who argue that warping of space time is a direct consequence to the resolution of the quantum universe, thats its a reflection of the process. This is important because did energy resolve uniformly across all comoving space, or did energy pour into the inflation and afterwards as some have suggested? If either are the case then we can pretty much infer that the gravitational constant was not. If energy was pouring into the universe, then where was it pouring from? if energy poured from a central point what retained it? If super-universal dimensions are the origin of 3D space then during inflation you could have something like hybrid dimensions of space to finally what we see. The alternative is that there are a set of dimensions that resolve at the quantum scale. But if the layman asks the question of evidence, he would be pointed at a fairly uniform CMBR and told inflation has occurred, and thats is a very messy circular argument. What is needed here is a better understand of quantum gravity, what produces it, how does it warp space-time, etc. However the exotic birth of our universe is clothed in the CMBR, and from that point onward there is flat euclidian geometry of comoving space is all directions to the CMBR, there is no 'fish-tailing' of the universe as it might be expected with a 4th spacial dimension. So that if other dimensions exist they are acting on scales much much greater than the CMBR boundary. This can be happening, as I pointed out above our visible universe is a small fraction of the total universe, we cannot see the point of inflations center (either in time or space) nor the edge, if it exists.

Uhhhhh, you mean space-time, as in the 4th dimension is time? In our universe it exhibit euclidian geometry in all directions, there is not evidence of hypergeometry beyond space time.

Both gravity and centripetal forces are faux forces. But they are useful in defining omega and indirectly velocity. They radius has to be quite large because at 1g limit or 3g in this case v2/r = 30 therefore v = sqrt(30*r) so if you want to achieve a velocity are necessarily talikng about circum solar orbits, fairly large ones. Interms of wormholes, its quantum gravitational wormholes the effect of these interactions is to warp spacetime only around the plates, where as everything else reflects normal spacetime. Its like a warp drive but the field is only warped in one direction inside the ship. The controller determines what propprtion of the gravitons warpnspace around the othe plate and vice versa, versus random interactions. Of course getting quantum variation to stack in favor of an improbable event violates entropy,

On a car they have the collapsable bumper that shifts energy to the frame, they are fairly cheap structures but the protect basically everything in back of the radiator. They are cheap, for a good size rocket they could be 1000$ each, 4 would suffice, and you can send them to the scap yard when done. you don't even need to have extensions just outmount them and put a heat shield on one side. So here is the basic problem with parachutes Lets say terminal velocity if 60m/s when drag is x. You add a parachute that creates drag of 2X, terminal velocity is not 30 m/s but 43 m/s You add another parachutes (total = 2) and bring drag to 4x, terminal velocity drops, however to 30 m/s You add two more parachutes (total = 4) terminal velocity drops to 22 m/s you add 4 more parachutes (total = 8) terminal velocity drops to 15 m/s You now have to quadruple the size of each parachute (total (Mega) = 2) you add 6 more parachutes and the terminal velocity drops to 7.5 m/s (~17 miles per hour). you now have to quadrupel the size of each parachute again (total (superMega) = 2) you add 6 more parachutes and the terminal velocity drops to 3.75 m/s (~8 miles per hour) you now have to quadrupel the size of each parachute again (total (UltraMega) = 2) you add 6 more parachutes and the terminal velocity drops to 1.8 m/s (~4 miles per hour) So the deal is that if you have a strut that can reduce the highest moment of acceleration by 80%, what you can do is reduce the size of the parachute by 16 fold. The second thing is that if you land with a parachute only, your vehicle will tip over unless you increase the radius of at least 3 points in contact with the ground (4 is better because with 3 points the smallest radius is the 0.5 whereas with 4 legs the smalles radius is 0.707 the largest). The reason for this is that the parachute equilibrates the ship to the horizontal velocity of the airstream which is never zero and when you have a very hot device in that airstream it will create its own local (usually chaotic) winds, as a result you have horizontal vectors when the vessel touches the ground. Its a good idea to have both struts and manuevering thrusters for landing back on earth. Dont the russians use mouth guards for protecting the teeth? I thought each astronaut was molded into a special cocoon seat for lift-off and landing, in order to protect him in case of a hard landing.

Its not clipping is the way the sheeting is applied. The OMS pods sheeth run into the body clearly visible in this image.

http://blogs.plos.org/biologue/2016/03/16/is-the-p-value-pointless/ I agree with most of what is said in this article. However having worked a long time with statistics and criticized the statistical works of others, I have to say this: Finding sources of variation takes alot more work than one appreciates. That overscrutinizing P-values (creating stringent thresholds) can cause overcorrection if there are hidden dependencies in the data.

http://www.nature.com/news/nasa-mars-woes-could-delay-other-planetary-missions-1.19549?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20160317&spMailingID=50933004&spUserID=Njk3NjE5NzEwMzgS1&spJobID=882060414&spReportId=ODgyMDYwNDE0S0 Nature editorial on InSight, suggest the delay and cracks could cost other missions 150 million dollars.

Right, therefore the solar panels have to be incredibly light. There is energy in hv from the sun, but the problem is to get to 0.1c in means that the power conversion rate of a kg of solar panel has to be great or the riders are willing to wait a very very long time. 0.1c = 3E7 m/s KE = 3E14 joules/kg mass (we actually need several times this because ejection energy is going to be magnitudes more than this), so lets say it takes a year or 3.2E7 seconds. So then each kg of solar panel needs to make 3E7 = 30000 kw. So at Mercuries orbit its about 10 times as much sun as the surface of the earth or 13kw per meter, so that a kilogram of solar panel needs to spread over 2307 meters. So for example the solar panels that I made for demo here were 10x100 meters, each of those would way about 0.4 kg AND resist 3 g of force AND stay facing the sun. At the current idealized efficiency and disregarding g-forces on the panels it would take 2307 years to accelerate assuming we could maintain mercurial insolance. The reality of course is that to use reaction mass to reach 0.1c one needs a tremdous ejection mass energy relative to ship energy, 100:1 so it would take 230,000 and solar efficiencies are not ideal, and you have structural and electrical mass so a million years.

Well that is quantum entanglement of photons or electrons, this is quantum entanglement of gravitons. Yes and I know this is pushing what is known well off the edge of fantasy, but its no more fantastic than some of the crap that has been presented here lately. Basic idea is that every quantum of energy in the universe is entangled with other quanta of energy and the graviton is the force mediating particle our device then mediates that force, it basically tells the particles they can only exchange force with other particles on the other plate (sometimes). According to what I have read (ignoring what I have said because I believe we know absolutely nothing about gravitons) that at the quantum level gravity is spontaneously communicated via spontaneous quantum wormholes (comparable to quantum entanglement of photons and electrons). This means that the communication events are all but random, but over scale they appear uniform (law of mass action applied to physics) they are close to quantum scale episodic. So the idea of the device is that we can control the when and the with whom. Obvlously we cannot, as this violates uncertainty principle, but even with uncertainty you can manipulate, for example I can broaden a reflect incident beam to get a more uniform wavelength of light. Or I can allow the frequency to broaden and get a slight more focused beam of light. So the assumption of the device is that we cannot control all the gravitons, but we can steer the gravitons toward interacting with certain other particles. So how might our fantasy device do this. Suppose you could create matter, now suppose we can create matter antimater pairs, we create matter proton and anti-proton, and also electron and positron. For each event we feed the anti-electron to anti-proton and vice versa. These hydrogen and anti-hydrogen are used in a fusion reacton, a reactor and anti-reactor to build lithium, which is used finally to build iron and anti-iron. So now all the original products are paired and have a single common origin. The iron in both plates is heavily magnetized so that the plates are held within a magnetic device that is completely evacuated. So the assumption here is that the gravitons are tuned to the original source of energy, so when pairs are created they share and interesting graviton force, and what we are doing in keeping their memory of that common origin. So the bugs in this system, if such an interesting attraction can be created, then we have the ability to control that interaction, if the interaction exists between the plates then it always exists, which means that if it can pull the two devices together at 30 m/s2 then we have to repel that force all the time while omega^2 r is less than 30 m/s^2. When your in solar orbit thats a hell of alot of dV. But what you could do is to keep the plates at say 100 meters and begin spinning them until they are have a centripetal accelaration of 3g, then add energy to their rotational velocities (such as using a wire) until they are very far apart still pulling 3g * mass, this position would be normal relative to earths orbit about the sun and the orbits would be changed so they are pushed anti-normal into a orbit within mercuries orbit, as energy is added the plates separate, the force declines and more energy can be added. The second bug in the system, the energy of the big bang may be partial, energy may have come from alternative sources such as dark energy and each photon that is created to create a pair, the unitized gravaton may represent very tiny fractional energies, so that each gravitationally entangled pair is a complex arrangment of gravitons with have attractions with energy elsewhere in this case the specific pair in the plate/antiplates may be very tiny. The third bug that comes out of the first, when the interstellar ships are released there is no way to stop the plates from spiralling into each other, since the mass they were holding together is now gone, the plates will immediately pull to a fraction of the final radius, in doing so they will accelerate close to the speed of light, any attempt to slow them down would result in gravitational collapse. This shows a problem because gravitons acting in this way would violate conservation of energy. Because their force stays constant no matter how far you pull them apart or push them together. When I stretch the plates apart and the cohesion is still 3g I am basically stealing energy from the vacuum. That's not the big bang, that's the big cool, that is the energy of deionization and ionization energy comes from pair production. Which is way, way after the big bang. The big bang is the moment of inflation, you can extend that to the point in which electromagnetism and weak nuclear force separate.

I have noticed lately that this group has sort of given way to alot of brain flatulance, so I thinks it time that I contributed. The universe appears to be derived from a indescribable quantum singularity, at its origin is infinite energy density in spatial dimensions that are beyond definition. At the moment that this state begins to not be singular the overiding force in the universe is quantum gravity. While it is essentially impossible to see quantum gravity now, at that point in time particles (all non-massive) interacted with through massive waves that literally blew everything to itsy bitsy tiny non-massive pieces. Quantum gravity has been described as an entangled particle that interact via quantum interactions, the way I imagine this now is that the entangled particles interact randomly and so we are not able to control them; two far off particles interact creating an imaginary force between them. So lets say that in 100 years from now we discovered the graviton and how to manipulate it. We can create 2 particles split them and force all the gravitational attractions, essentially accelerating the particles at the speed of light toward each other where they annihilate into perfect energy. So we build a ship, two ships actually, and in the two ships are two plates, one fore each ship. To do this we attenuate quantum gravity so that it behaves 'normally' (the mechanism for doing this resides in some new fundemental boson we discover in 20 years). Each ship then has a solar array, a cannae drive with overly optimistic power conversions efficiency (1N/KW) and it is using the particles in space to accelerate. On the back of the array is an electromagnet that attaches to an interstellar probe, possibly manned. This new breed of minature humans can survive long term acceleration at 3g. So we place these two ships in a opposed positions in orbit around the sun. at 4.5E10 meters 3g = 30 m/sec^2 30 = omega^2*r = velocity^2/r if 30 = v^2/4.5E10 1.35E12 = v2 V^2 = 10E6 or a million meters per second. As the ships accelerate they generate centripetal force which causes ships to want to increase the semimajor axis of the orbit; however to counter then the engineers begin manipulating the quantum gravity between the two plates. The force is transmitted 'through' the sun with no perturbation, these are entangled interactions. Once the maximum tolerable force is generated the distance between the plates is allowed to expand, so the ship moves beyond earths orbit and increases speed to 2E106 and just beyond mars to achieve 0.01c. Using a system of solar lenses placed through out the solar system on ships using the same device the suns output is focused on the accelerating ship. It then moves out to a distance beyond pluto (200AU) where it is moving at 0.1c. At a point where the two ships have relativistic inertia in the direction of two opposed system the electromagnet releases the two ships and the head off to their two target worlds (assuming they have a massive stellar wind parachute that the deploy at some point to stop them). Once deployed the platform decelerates and recoils back to its initial orbit inside of mercury awaiting its next delivery. This is an evolution of an old idea in which ships are chained together in an orbital circle, the problem with this idea is that the mass of the chains eventually results in an explosion of the centripetal restraining ring. The idea assumes we can create structures of solar panels that are on the order of a gram per kilowatt and that can resist inertial forces several magnitudes better than structural materials now available. There is a variant of this idea that uses captured solar gases to accelerate to relativistic velocities, but it takes 1000 time as long.

its not real space either, its a figment of one poster(s) imagination.

Well thats kind of my point, if you really want to do science the humans need to stay, at least 6 mos, a couple of years would be good. Otherwise the money put out is a waste. This way you could have alot of impromptu experimentation going on. The problem is this . . . . no-one in this group is even talking about the conditions that need to be met for such an outpost on mars, critical here is how do you design the living site. We can think about it like this, Mars gravity is better than ISS gravity, and they could wear endurance weights. If the mission lasted 2 years we could land a separate return vehicle, and over time bring the fuel for the vehicle to the landing site so that you could potentially have a full blown launch vehicle. In addition the station could grow and you could rotate crew in build a power station, build a green house (underground I propose using LEDs) and all that stuff, but again we are talking here solely about vanity trips for the sake of dibs on Mars.

Yeah, but if you work off of public funds, publishing is everything. The way it works is you publish, you gather preliminary data, you write an NSF, NASA (since Bush II the DOD is basically not funding) grant, you get an award, you implement the award on some platform, and get results - return to step 1. That is your top tier scientist. Below that person(s) you generally have post-doctoral fellows who do major bench implementation or struggle through complexities; and he will have technicians and grad students working various aspects of the project. Below that level you have lab assistents, interns, etc doing perfunctory work. BTW, since I work in academia for the so called 'real' world (big pharm), there are high level demands for the real world also, the only difference is that once your manuscript is ready to go, the real world may to decide to withhold it for a couple of years while they explore its potential. At every journal there is editorial staff . . . . .

I not degrading mission specialist; however, the point about science is process and communication, and for that first part there is process design and for the second part there is a necessity of publication in the peer-reviewed literature. In the second case you generally have a primary author and that is generally the person who does 80 to 90 percent of the writing. I have seen a publication I believe with astronauts as the first author, but the overwhelming majority of papers that I have seen published are by land-lubbers. As an observer and also a writer I can tell you that about 90% of the people who I have seen work at the bench cannot write beyond a protocol (many when coached) and a perfunctory results section. The reason is that its difficult to publish is because of people like me, you send a journal something that does not achieve a certain level of organization and technical English either several things are going to happen . . . .the editor rejects the paper, no referees will referee it or some idiot like me throws your paper back at you and tells you to rewrite it (sometimes after not ably drafting referees). But this gets to the point, if you are a land-lubbing 'geo'logist or biologist are you actually going to design experiments for a manned mission risky at best that takes 15 to 20 years to execute or an automated system that gets you there in 10 to 15 years, you go for the 10 to 15 years. Careers don't last forever, and a scientist wants to publish, and ultimately the faster the data the better off they are. When you are getting mission specialist to do impromptu experiments on the ISS many may not be published, their flower garden for example suffered for a time without proper care, or the experiment may be for the sake of engineers on the ground. These things are part of the ISS process, which as a whole is a good process, but at some point whatever experiments that are done need to have reproducibility, a bonafida protocol, and a decent write-up. And you can have several shots to the ISS to complete an evolving process, not so on a manned Mars mission, its got to work and given the current scheme, work quickly and completely - thus you need someone there who actually knows the whole process (everything but the final writeup) has tools to refit that process if necessary or it might as well be automated. Writeup can be done on the way back.

I think, I may be wrong but electron density is key. Copper for instance face center cube. 1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p6 3d10 4s1 * ss ss pp pp pp ss pp pp pp dd dd dd dd dd s http://winter.group.shef.ac.uk/orbitron/AOs/4s/wave-fn.html The wave density function for 4s is shown here, the wave function extends much further than maximal electron density. Then we get into assumption, the surface electrons on the appartus would be radicals of a sort, particularly in oxygen, and more than likely the surface layer would be sulfate, oxide, hydroxide. So basically the surface shell is going to be the distance from the copper + whatever atoms are bound on the surface layer and their electrons. On top of this then we have the low probability density functions of these ionic components and potentially radicals that might exist. So we actually can, in considering electron dynamics get pretty far away from copper atoms on the surface, I would say maybe 5 Angstrom (500 picometer).

To be precise, a hydrogen atom is hypothetically 40 picometers in diameter. Planks length is 1.616199(97)×10−35. However, the paper demostrates that virtual particles can act over distances about 10 times the size of a hydrogen atom. So planck's length is not really a constraint. In fact I suspect is has alot to do with how gravity is manifest (inertia) in the our current universe, there has been yet to be found a useful meaning of planck's length other than it is the smallest length that might ever be seen. Double special relativity holds that the length is constant. Again given the difference were quantum momentum transfers can occur and the universal lengthstick I suspect that the virtual transfers have multiparametric components. We shall have to see. Are you yet ready to see this drive in space?

Jack of all trades and master of none.

1. Nope this has already been ruled out in the latest set of experiments 2. regarding 2 posts above, its not likely that the power efficiency is 0.1 N/kW and 0.4 N/kW, in fact, whoever said this don't believe anything he/she says.

You could roll out and push the lead across the material, the only problem is the lead becomes part of the ISP, lowering it, meh, if that really matters.

ISS is a multidisciplinary platform. For a science example, to automate a study takes excessive amount of time, but would prolly be more precise than human doing the same study. But if you need a quick and dirty answer you can get the humans to do a preliminary study which then allows you to design a better automated study. This is not completely black and white. Lets say we had humans on Mars. Now lets say we have machines around that human doing Martian tests. Now lets further say that humans have some fabrication capacity. If tests X, Y, and Z suggest that tests XA, YA, and ZA be run. With the automated machine you have to design (5 years), fabricate (5 more years) and Send (2 more years) to get a result. You may still have to do that with a human on Mars, but that human may also do a few quick and dirty experiments which means you can be writing papers (keeping your science going) while designing a better apparatus to send to Mars. The problem is this, at least the way I look at it. We don't send scientist per say, we send astronauts, which are more or less lab technician II to IV grade. A well educated engineer would be great and this would be good for many things up until you actually start doing biology and organic chemistry. The second problem, the way I see it, you have got at least 12 years of infrastructure building just to get humans to Mars, once there you might have a pay-off, but the infrastructure pipeline to keep humans alive is very complicated and not amenable to the Russian/Private sector-style supply failures. There is another problem I don't see anyone talking about. I think we can find a way in space to deal with radiation, I think if we tweek the science we can extend human longevity in space, but on Mars, so far as yet I don't see anyone talking about excavating martia to build domiciles underground where it is radiation safe. So in essence we are talking about land and return missions, and really other than gathering Martian rocks (which can be done robotically) there is no advantage. As I said before on occasion, you are not designing a manned mission with some sort of experimental design that would be difficult to do robotically, there is no sense other than watching the way humans deteriorate after being stranded (or killed on impact) on Mars.

Vacuum energy is basically virtual particles, read the link I provided a few days back to the thread, virtual particles can act, but there is a limitation upon the distance.

Well the orbital he details for hydrogen is actually only stable for transition metals, lol. (Also 4n+2 orbital is missing). For hydrogen that electron in a d orbital would be in an extremely excited state and quickly decay to the orbital in the first panel. Hydrogen atoms when given a chance like to place two electrons and share on 1s-1s orbital. This is because each orbital can hold 2 electrons of opposing spin, which he did not mention. So in nature hydrogen generally looks like a proton and an electron whizzing disassociatively in space, or you have this ed = electron density, * = proton ed * ED * ed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_orbital#Molecular_orbital_examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_orbital_diagram#Diatomic_MO_diagrams Its one thing to tell people its wrong, its another to tell them why. In addition to these errors, he left out a whole lot of critical material that has to do with quantum mechanics of the nucleus, also wave functions of, well, everything. etc.

One thing that I have to add, there is a possibility that it causes a twist of quantum length. How this would work is that as a vehicle travels through its media it has an axial crosssectional area. This limits all momentum shifts to all atoms that lie in areas and 10-8 meters on either side, the way we currently view quantum mechanics they should not be able to push-off of atoms outside of this moment of crosssectional area. So one minor violation of current physics is that if the devices 'warps' the outerbounds of quantum length then it could push off things further away, so lets say it increases the interaction range by 100 meters, if the device has a profile of 0.1 meter then it could increase force 1000000 fold over. In this sense if the device could be made very compact, it could be very useful for nanosatellites, its cheap it only requires hv. But here again we run into the same problem with solar electric thrust based craft (including ION drive), you can put mass in a three dimensional volume but this drive needs to be spread across an area so its relative effectiveness drops by K*mass^1.5. It would not be useful from transporting anything heavy. A couple of uses - a small device could be placed on every space craft to move them to a graveyard, moon intercept or decay orbit. - it could be set to pick up space junk. The primary drawback I have to repeat though what I said in previous threads. There are two basic types of fuels - chemical/nuclear which are capable of creating their own work that applies to thrust, and detached energy - reaction mass systems (and we can add a true EM drive). The second generates very high ISP but with a disproportionately large input and loss of power. The more you accelerate the reaction mass, the higher proportion of energetic power is lost to that reaction mass. This is not a problem if you have a really great source of power, but our current solar panel (structural and area per KW as 1 au) is not there, and nuclear requires alot of cooling. Again with really small craft this is not to much of a problem. We can think of the Cannae drive as an Ion drive (using either ablated or external ions) that has a ISPv of 3 x 10^7 m/s (ISPg = 3000000). It takes a whopping amount of hv to create any useful amount of thrust. Therefore if we argue that its twisting quantum length over [arms stretched wide range] then - ok- but then were is the power supply? acceleration = 2 * efficiency * power / ISPv * mass IMHO we should not even concern ourselves with whether Cannae works the way some think it does, the primary concern in deep space travel is power/mass generation. Even if it works they way they say it does, and I believe it approximates that which has been detailed, its not a perpetual motion machine, and it cannot generate any additional power for thrust. Therefore if we add a stringent power requirement Cannae is all but useless.

You know there are already micro ion systems you can buy, right? http://busek.com/index_htm_files/70008514E.pdf ISP 2150. I think this one weighs 53 grams. If you carry 100 grams of fuel you can easily justify the added weight, power utilization 10w. You could have 6 of these on your spacecraft use then as directional thrusters. 300 grams + 200 grams of fuel. All you need is a 2 @ 0.1 meter solar panel and a reasonable battery.