NASA: New "impossible" engine works, could change space travel forever

[Darston]

It would not be of much use for a manned mission but it's enough thrust for maneuvering a small satellite. Just imagine what research into this could produce though.

http://tinyurl.com/mu6lfjp

[Renegrade]

It would not be of much use for a manned mission but it's enough thrust for maneuvering a small satellite. Just imagine what research into this could produce though.

http://tinyurl.com/mu6lfjp

That's actually a bug. Reality actually uses the 0.22 version of KSP as it's engine, and that's just the unbalanced/phantom forces bug. Updating reality 0.24 would not fix that issue either.

[xXIndestructibleEVAXx]

That's actually a bug. Reality actually uses the 0.22 version of KSP as it's engine, and that's just the unbalanced/phantom forces bug. Updating reality 0.24 would not fix that issue either.

hahahahaha

[Spades_Neil]

"It works and we have no idea why."

Are you sure this isn't a Kerbal part?

[Darston]

That's actually a bug. Reality actually uses the 0.22 version of KSP as it's engine, and that's just the unbalanced/phantom forces bug. Updating reality 0.24 would not fix that issue either.

I thought something along those lines when reading the article lol.

[merendel]

Even for a manned mission it could be useful depending on where you were going. If it can be scaled up and if we can get something with sufficent energy density to power it it may be slower off the block from LEO but could thrust the whole way to the target (towards it at first then turnover halfway to slow down) and get there faster than a conventional chemical rocket with any sane quantity of fuel. once in orbit even tiny amounts of thrust can pile up over time to get something moveing really fast.

[ZedNova]

This is a joke right?

[Odielthen]

I found this article to be much more informative and gives some idea why it works. http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/fuel-less-space-drive-may-actually-work-says-nasa?dom=PSC&loc=recent&lnk=4&con=fuelless-space-drive-may-actually-work-says-nasa

[Sky_walker]

We already have a topic about that: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79291-EmDrive

Including quite a nice analysis on a page 4 proving that there's nothing to be excited about.

[Solivagant]

Well, now we can petition Squad to add a fuel-less engine that can provide near-constant acceleration and they can't say it's unrealistic!

I kid, of course. You guys are awesome.

[Scotius]

OK, i know it's most probably only an error - but...Not too long ago idea of Quantum Vacuum Thruster would be laughed at as preposterous. And yet today we know it does work (regardless of its practicality). So, maybe there is more than meets the eye hiding inside EmDrive, or whatever it's called?

[Moar Boosters]

I was hoping it'd be m-drive's crazy gyro machine.

[vger]

It'll be practical for manned space travel. They just need to install it on a ship that's bigger on the inside.

In all seriousness, I hope this isn't another fluke, like the "FTL neutrino" incident.

[Godot]

Impossible Engine?

Is it related with the infinite improbability drive?

[xenomorph555]

America's view of engines:

closed cycle engines:it can't be done

Air breathing engines:it can't be done

Emdrive engines: it can't be done

Maybe they should believe in the possiblitys a little more.

[Arsonik]

America's view of engines:

closed cycle engines:it can't be done

Air breathing engines:it can't be done

Emdrive engines: it can't be done

Maybe they should believe in the possiblitys a little more.

That's because the aliens told us it is impossible. Don't be mad that your country doesn't have alien advisers.

[CleverWalrus]

Sincerely, if we end up making reactionless engines able to pull off a decent thrust most of what we know about our life will change and not only on space travel... it all depends on how much thrust/weight ratio and energy requirements we will talk about.

I hope this will be confirmed since even a "decent" thrust would allow fast exploration of our solar system for a fraction of the current cost.

[Sky_walker]

OK, i know it's most probably only an error - but...Not too long ago idea of Quantum Vacuum Thruster would be laughed at as preposterous. And yet today we know it does work

We actually don't. Results described are not conclusive and it's still uncertain if it actually works or is it an error in measurements.

In all seriousness, I hope this isn't another fluke, like the "FTL neutrino" incident.

Well, it'll take a while to get some reliable data justifying any attempts for practical use.

And even then - it looks like a Solar Sail will be much more promising and practical technology....

[M Drive]

I was hoping it'd be m-drive's crazy gyro machine.

Mine would actually produce a lot more thrust in comparison. I'm currently using a pendulum test, which is a much harder (but cheap) method of detecting thrust. Not everyone has access to expensive supersensitive NASA equipment. This is good for me though. If I get 'impossible' results maybe it'll be easier to get someone to take it seriously (if this thing pans out that is).

Edited August 2, 2014 by M Drive

[CaptainArchmage]

I’ve just suggested this on the KSP Cubesat project, which I happened to hear of about the same time as this hit.

Few points about how the Quantum Vacuum Thruster works:

1) The drive isn’t reactionless. The drive doesn’t require any propellant to function, however, just energy. “Impossible†was really part of the sensationalisation.

2) The quantum vacuum plasma thruster (or EM drives?) work by pushing on virtual particle pairs, which are theorised to exist, and I believe are how anti-particles are produced in particle accelerators. These engines, however, don’t need anywhere close to the energy of particle accelerators. The virtual particle pairs consist of a particle and an anti-particle, and both have positive mass (this has been proven). If you can “push†these virtual particle pairs, it will produce a reaction in the other direction.

3) The thrust to weight ratio is supposed to be about that of ion engines.

4) Power requirements I have seen cap out at about 3kW. Usually you’d expect in the tens to hundreds of watts, unless you have a large spacecraft. In terms of ground testing, this should work from a normal power supply.

5) More testing is required, the question to the rest of us is: just how much equipment does it require to build? Thanks to the low thrust, you need to have sensitive tools to detect that. What else is needed?

The Q-thruster and the EM-drive have different designs, but for the Q-thruster, unlike the neutrino faster-than-light discovery (error), this seems to be more grounded in existing theory.

DISCLAIMER: I say the device should run from a normal power socket. This is not to say you should plug the machine directly into a power socket. Safety first, folks.

Edited August 2, 2014 by CaptainArchmage

[Starwaster]

America's view of engines:

closed cycle engines:it can't be done

Air breathing engines:it can't be done

Emdrive engines: it can't be done

Maybe they should believe in the possiblitys a little more.

Firstly, not all Americans are like that.

Secondly, not all non-Americans are NOT like that.

Let's drop the stereotypes because if you look at any nation, they've all got their share of inventions or new ideas that were scoffed at by those in power at the time. (government, military, other institutions)

Did you know that it took decades after James Lindt linked scurvy to citrus deficiencies before the British started mandating the use of limes on long term voyages?

[vger]

Firstly, not all Americans are like that.

Secondly, not all non-Americans are NOT like that.

Let's drop the stereotypes because if you look at any nation, they've all got their share of inventions or new ideas that were scoffed at by those in power at the time. (government, military, other institutions)

Skepticism in humanity is likely at an all-time high. It's probably that simple. Hope is now often viewed as an emotion that only idiots have, especially when it flies in the face of logic. The change in attitude towards space travel over the decades is a perfect example. Star Trek was once accepted as a believable future for humanity. These days it's looked at no differently than magic.

Perhaps another way of looking at it is, the definition of "too good to be true" has shifted from "news that seems ridiculously good" to "news that doesn't seem to be bad."

Edited August 2, 2014 by vger

[RuBisCO]

Called it! : http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/86010-KSP-Community-CubeSat?p=1270596#post1270596

[DerpenWolf]

I defiantly think we can make an engine that just runs on electricity (we can probably get a tiny bit of thrust from launching electrons!) however an engine that requires no power input to run is likely bs. A reaction-less engine might be possible but I'm 95% sure this is just a hoax considering how little we know of how things work...

Edited August 2, 2014 by DerpenWolf

[vger]

I defiantly think we can make an engine that just runs on electricity (we can probably get a tiny bit of thrust from launching electrons!) however an engine that requires no power input to run is likely bs. A reaction-less engine might be possible but I'm 95% sure this is just a hoax considering how little we know of how things work...

Who said the Em requires no power?

It's a screwed up concept but knowing that a solar sail can be powered either by solar winds, or by a laser, I see no obvious reason this isn't actually possible.

In conventional terms, what this is, is the classic cartoon image of a boat with no wind. The solution? Pull out an electric fan, point it at the sail, and watch it go. Of course, in that case, newton's laws kick in, and any wind the fan is blowing, cancels out what hits the sail, and the boat goes nowhere.

But in space? Were you to aim a laser on the ship at the solar sail, you could conceivably make it move if the heat generated by the emitter was less than the radiation pressure on the sail. The laser itself won't produce thrust at all (if it did, we'd be using lasers instead of ion drives). The concept should work. It's mostly a question of how efficient it can work. My laser example would require a ridiculous amount of power (which is why we'd fire it from Earth if we ever wanted to use it).