Cannae/EmDrive

[Kibble]

Time to inject some sci fi.

Inject some sci-fi? A little late for that, we're talking about EmDrive!

[SuperFastJellyfish]

Over at the Nasaspaceflight.com forums, there is much talk about this. Star-Drive(Paul March) is on one of the research teams(Lockheed, I think) testing one of these devices and is providing info.

[Commander Jebidiah]

I'm curious, what would happen if you stood in front of the nozzle? Would it have an effect on you?

Edited February 8, 2015 by Commander Jebidiah

[Commander Jebidiah]

Also gene Roddenberry predicted the future.

Star Trek communicators were very similar to mobile phones.

The hand held work pads on star trek TNG are very similar to our tablets.

The personal computer everyone had in there quarters in tng are pretty much laptops.

Phaser which are technically lasers, the USAF are experimenting with lasers on a 747 to shoot down nukes.

Antimatter, back in the late 60s we didn't even know it existed.

Fusion reactors from TNG again we didn't think it was possible then but now a company, I beleive it's Lockheed Martin have created a small one.

The shuttle, a reuseable vehicle, ok it wasn't exactly safe. This is why the test bed is called STS Enterprise.

Transporters, well now we can make stuff dematerialize thing but not rematerialize them, good luck finding much info on this I read about it a few years ago.

These are just to name a few.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Commander Jebidiah

[Bill Phil]

Carl Anderson discovered antimatter in 1932. And Dirac actually predicted their existence.

Lockheed is just making a new way to test fusion reactors quickly.

[ace.1991]

Also gene Roddenberry predicted the future.

Star Trek communicators were very similar to mobile phones.

The hand held work pads on star trek TNG are very similar to our tablets.

The personal computer everyone had in there quarters in tng are pretty much laptops.

Phaser which are technically lasers, the USAF are experimenting with lasers on a 747 to shoot down nukes.

Antimatter, back in the late 60s we didn't even know it existed.

Fusion reactors from TNG again we didn't think it was possible then but now a company, I beleive it's Lockheed Martin have created a small one.

The shuttle, a reuseable vehicle, ok it wasn't exactly safe. This is why the test bed is called STS Enterprise.

Transporters, well now we can make stuff dematerialize thing but not rematerialize them, good luck finding much info on this I read about it a few years ago.

These are just to name a few.

Actually, to be more precise, the technology used in star trek directly inpired the creation of mobile phones, touchscreen, automatic doors, etc. that said though, Roddenberry did try to base the "Treknology" in the realms of plausability.

[TheDarkStar]

Also gene Roddenberry predicted the future.

Star Trek communicators were very similar to mobile phones.

The hand held work pads on star trek TNG are very similar to our tablets.

The personal computer everyone had in there quarters in tng are pretty much laptops.

Phaser which are technically lasers, the USAF are experimenting with lasers on a 747 to shoot down nukes.

Antimatter, back in the late 60s we didn't even know it existed.

Fusion reactors from TNG again we didn't think it was possible then but now a company, I beleive it's Lockheed Martin have created a small one.

The shuttle, a reuseable vehicle, ok it wasn't exactly safe. This is why the test bed is called STS Enterprise.

Transporters, well now we can make stuff dematerialize thing but not rematerialize them, good luck finding much info on this I read about it a few years ago.

These are just to name a few.

Antimatter (first described mathematically around 1920) and fusion reactors (the Sun) shouldn't be on that list.

Edited February 8, 2015 by TheDarkStar

[Nuke]

Actually, to be more precise, the technology used in star trek directly inpired the creation of mobile phones, touchscreen, automatic doors, etc. that said though, Roddenberry did try to base the "Treknology" in the realms of plausability.

we had touchscreens prior to sttng. the hp-150 computer had one, and it was made in '83. sttng didnt come out till '87. prior treks had traditional control panels. pretty sure automatic doors were around before the 60s. portable military radios, the precursor to cell phones, were around too. i think roddenberry just kept up to date on technology. looked at devices we already had, made them smaller and cool looking and put them everywhere.

Edited February 8, 2015 by Nuke

[Technical Ben]

What do you mean?

The entire device stands on icy ground. It's about as solid as magnetic perpetual machines. Yes, in theory we can avoid some requirements on fuel and make a photon drive. Constructing a load of random devices together does not create one though.

Many many many people have thought "if I just change the shape of" or "but what if I change the angle of" etc with microwave emitters. If they did cause an unexplained for when in a certain configuration, I would have thought we would know about it by now.

Just as certain we are that different configurations of magnets will not make a "perpetual motion machine", but will allow for you to syphon off magnetic energy (reduce the magnetic force of the magnet and take out "work" from it), we are certain we can build photon drives, but not this particular breed of EM drive.

[Scotius]

Why not? In settings as close to the space as we can create on Earth, this thing works. And it produces thrust comparable to ion engines already used for space exploration. Even if it is a photon drive, it already produces orders of magnitude more force that was theorized before. So, either it is not "photon drive" - or it works on principle we hadn't discovered yet. And even if it will not work in space, nonetheless it is something new - and carefully analysing this phenomenon will expand our knowledge. Please, do not fall into "I don't believe it will work, so lets call it a hoax and ignore it." trench.

[magnemoe]

we had touchscreens prior to sttng. the hp-150 computer had one, and it was made in '83. sttng didnt come out till '87. prior treks had traditional control panels. pretty sure automatic doors were around before the 60s. portable military radios, the precursor to cell phones, were around too. i think roddenberry just kept up to date on technology. looked at devices we already had, made them smaller and cool looking and put them everywhere.

Yes, star trek might influenced the flip phones not mobile phones, the first generations was 20 kg boxes, first models was around 50 years ago. Star trek communicators also don't work like cell phones.

Tablets and laptops is obvious smart uses, stuff who fit well in an sci-fi setting,

All other technology, fusion, lasers, antimatter the theory predates ST and have been used in sci-fi since the theories was published.

- - - Updated - - -

The entire device stands on icy ground. It's about as solid as magnetic perpetual machines. Yes, in theory we can avoid some requirements on fuel and make a photon drive. Constructing a load of random devices together does not create one though.

Many many many people have thought "if I just change the shape of" or "but what if I change the angle of" etc with microwave emitters. If they did cause an unexplained for when in a certain configuration, I would have thought we would know about it by now.

Just as certain we are that different configurations of magnets will not make a "perpetual motion machine", but will allow for you to syphon off magnetic energy (reduce the magnetic force of the magnet and take out "work" from it), we are certain we can build photon drives, but not this particular breed of EM drive.

I agree, an decent chance it will not work out, NASA agree since this is an low budget project under the low chance / high payoff program.

However it give results, main error source who remain should be electromagnetic interference between the drive and surrounding, the vacuum proved the effect was not heated or moved air. This is an milestone in the testing, the first was does it look like it give results, this was does it give results in vacuum. Next is too get clearer results and hopefully improve the drive.

If that works out its to scale it up and see if result can be replicated and scaled up so far its an obvious effect.

If this two phases works out you have an working reactionless drive. It does not matter if was based on a fringe theory and did not work according to it

The unexplained effect would be worthy more studies unless it has an simple explanation even if this is not an useful reactionless drive.

[cpast]

Yes, star trek might influenced the flip phones not mobile phones, the first generations was 20 kg boxes, first models was around 50 years ago. Star trek communicators also don't work like cell phones.

Tablets and laptops is obvious smart uses, stuff who fit well in an sci-fi setting,

All other technology, fusion, lasers, antimatter the theory predates ST and have been used in sci-fi since the theories was published.

For the record, I was also skeptical of "Star Trek led to cell phones," but the guy who developed the first handheld cellular telephone (Martin Cooper) has publicly stated that he was inspired by Star Trek. It's not like the technology was unheard of (handheld radios existed in WWII, car-mounted radio telephones were invented in the late 40s, cellular networks were first described in '47), but Cooper pushed handheld cell phones as a personal communication device that anyone could have, which he has said was inspired by the show.

[Technical Ben]

Why not? In settings as close to the space as we can create on Earth, this thing works. And it produces thrust comparable to ion engines already used for space exploration. Even if it is a photon drive, it already produces orders of magnitude more force that was theorized before. So, either it is not "photon drive" - or it works on principle we hadn't discovered yet. And even if it will not work in space, nonetheless it is something new - and carefully analysing this phenomenon will expand our knowledge. Please, do not fall into "I don't believe it will work, so lets call it a hoax and ignore it." trench.

It might be an ion drive using the copper plate it's made of as fuel (think ablating it off like you can do with heavy lead etc on some ion drive designs ).

It might be a heating/gassing thrust from mistakes in the vacuum seal in testing.

It might be magnetic propulsion (can and does happen and is used in some instances).

By all means the "thrust" can be real. But it may not be an EM drive as such that it pushes off the quantum foam. Saying it is, is like saying there are rivers on mars because we can see the ravines and valleys through out hand held telescope...

[Frozen_Heart]

Rather than argue over whether it works or not, it would probably be a better idea to wait for more test results. Only then can it be validated that the works or doesn't.

If the results are consistent then more funding will be allocated (probably)

[andrew123]

Rather than argue over whether it works or not, it would probably be a better idea to wait for more test results. Only then can it be validated that the works or doesn't.

If the results are consistent then more funding will be allocated (probably)

I personally wonder what type of exoatmospheric weapons Lockheed and Northrop are dreaming of right now. Looks like we might see interplanetary conflicts in our century.

[Frozen_Heart]

I personally wonder what type of exoatmospheric weapons Lockheed and Northrop are dreaming of right now. Looks like we might see interplanetary conflicts in our century.

Not going to happen. There is nothing to fight over.

Why fight over an asteroid for mining when there are billions more to choose from. Why fighter over a Mars colony of 5 guys when you can just land a colony on any other spot on the whole planet.

Wars are fought over resources. If we have the tech to get resources from space then they aren't scarce enough to fight over.

[andrew123]

Not going to happen. There is nothing to fight over.

Why fight over an asteroid for mining when there are billions more to choose from. Why fighter over a Mars colony of 5 guys when you can just land a colony on any other spot on the whole planet.

Wars are fought over resources. If we have the tech to get resources from space then they aren't scarce enough to fight over.

Then I take that back. Maybe in a few centuries, when our population starts to overtake our technological reach in space.

We'll probably only truly free ourselves of resource wars when we make reliable FTL.

[Bill Phil]

Then I take that back. Maybe in a few centuries, when our population starts to overtake our technological reach in space.

We'll probably only truly free ourselves of resource wars when we make reliable FTL.

Until we start harvesting entire planets....

Like in Dead Space.

Planets are the largest concentration of resources in a solar system, so if you can harvest them and you have FTL, you have no reason to go mine asteroids.

[Kibble]

Planets are the largest concentration of resources in a solar system, so if you can harvest them and you have FTL, you have no reason to go mine asteroids.

The planets are generally much harder to excavate for resources than small Solar System bodies - they are big, and that bigness means the deeper you go, the hotter and more pressure you have to deal with. Asteroids are (almost) all un-evolved cold hunks of rock, in a microgravity environment - the whole mass from surface to centre is accessible.

[Bill Phil]

The planets are generally much harder to excavate for resources than small Solar System bodies - they are big, and that bigness means the deeper you go, the hotter and more pressure you have to deal with. Asteroids are (almost) all un-evolved cold hunks of rock, in a microgravity environment - the whole mass from surface to centre is accessible.

That's why I said harvest, and like dead space. In dead space they use the graviton as often as the electron, and can pull apart planets. Seems crazy, I know. But if a civilization can take apart planets and use them, then they might actually go to war OVER the planets in question.

[StrandedonEarth]

Not going to happen. There is nothing to fight over.

Why fight over an asteroid for mining when there are billions more to choose from. Why fighter over a Mars colony of 5 guys when you can just land a colony on any other spot on the whole planet.

Wars are fought over resources. If we have the tech to get resources from space then they aren't scarce enough to fight over.

The same reason pirates were around in the last half of the last millennium. Why go find it, extract it, and refine it yourself when you can just take the fruits of someone else's effort?

[Accelerando]

Not going to happen. There is nothing to fight over.

Why fight over an asteroid for mining when there are billions more to choose from. Why fighter over a Mars colony of 5 guys when you can just land a colony on any other spot on the whole planet.

Wars are fought over resources. If we have the tech to get resources from space then they aren't scarce enough to fight over.

I think there is a lot to fight over, if you have the tech to get resources from space but it's still hard to build. Earth is running out of rare earth metals, and will eventually start to run low on its normal metal reserves, but I suspect precious metals will be of greatest contention. Even with EmDrives, building the vacuum-hardened equipment to send mining infrastructure into space is going to be expensive, and you'll still need surface-orbit launchers to carry the EmDrive vessel into space, which will drive the cost up further. Space-extracted metal might be plentiful but I think it will still cost quite a bit, so you'll have at least some conflicts over who gets to control the infrastructure. Having missiles/kinetic/laser platforms in space to defend your mining platforms and threatening to destroy other countries' in order to gain access may be cheaper than building and launching an entirely new mining outfit. Granted, conflicts might be rare, and it wouldn't be war in any visceral sense, but it'd be intrigue nevertheless, although the conflicts might peter out when you have enough bases established and if/when global demand starts to level off, yeah.

Edit: Ninja'd by Stranded

Also, huzzah for more possible confirmation of the EmDrive's functionality! Here's hoping it turns out to work...

Edited February 9, 2015 by Accelerando

[Rakaydos]

Given the realities of transfer orbits, I doubt there will be many successful "pirates", as they would need to match inclination and phase with randomly sited resource operations in order to do more than blow it to Kessel.

[magnemoe]

Not going to happen. There is nothing to fight over.

Why fight over an asteroid for mining when there are billions more to choose from. Why fighter over a Mars colony of 5 guys when you can just land a colony on any other spot on the whole planet.

Wars are fought over resources. If we have the tech to get resources from space then they aren't scarce enough to fight over.

Most wars since WW2 has been ideological or ethnic, resources might be objectives but rarely the reason to start the fight.

Yes exceptions exist like gulf war one. The superpower proxy wars during the cold war was ideological and main objective was strategic positions not resources.

100 years ago resources / land was primary reason ethnic as a second.

[dbmorpher]

I may be entirely wrong but perhaps the EmDrive works by the walls of the chamber vibrating near the speed of light producing a dynamic Casimir effect, creating photons out of virtual photons and therefore thrust.