EM Drive Passed Peer Review

>putting something into orbit with 1.2 mN of thrust per kW

laughable

Wow something here seems familiar.

>It being real isn't based on it being to lift anything into space.
Well yes, but that's trivial since it can't lift anything into space. That's not what a thruster does.

>I'm not. I've been cautiously optimistic from the start, with zealot-like arguments when people decried it just because they were idiots for disregarding experiments suggesting new science when the best thing about science is experiments that disprove shit and force people to rethink it.
The experiments haven't proven anything though. The experimental results are barely distinguishable from noise and such extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A real test of its thruster capability is not difficult to achieve and would conclusively prove or disprove it.

>Shawyer's theory was disproved awhile back so the theoretical maximum thrust/energy is entirely unknown
I'm not talking about it's maximum efficiency, I'm talking about the experimental observations:

emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results

All of he experiments that have found thrust have found it to be several multiples of a photon rocket. So which is it? Do these experiments show conservation of energy is false? Or are the experiments false? If the former, where is the free energy?

If you actually care about results over theory, then wait for actual, tangible results. Until then, memedrive is bullshit.

Image was the first one from Google for "EMDrive."

Why would you ever use it for that?

> Well yes, but that's trivial since it can't lift anything into space. That's not what a thruster does.
Um, no. There are shitloads of thrusters that don't have the thrust to lift anything into space that are used extensively in space - pretty much all of them fall in this category, yet the EM Drive will be the first that is reactionless.
> The experiments haven't proven anything though. The experimental results are barely distinguishable from noise and such extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. A real test of its thruster capability is not difficult to achieve and would conclusively prove or disprove it.
This is wrong - in fact the very topic ITT is that this point is wrong.
>All of he experiments that have found thrust have found it to be several multiples of a photon rocket. So which is it? Do these experiments show conservation of energy is false? Or are the experiments false? If the former, where is the free energy?
Even if it were the equivalent of a laser pointer sitting in space in terms of thrust, that would be fucking enormous in itself. The point here is it is reactionless, it has proven to be reactionless by all known laws of physics and work with a signal exceeding the noise by a great enough degree to be certain of that for all intents and purposes. This means new physics - something we haven't actually had since the last round that gave us computers or the one before that that gave us nukes. There is no way to overstate just how huge this is.

Peer review makes it science, just because it's science doesn't mean it's true.

>Um, no. There are shitloads of thrusters that don't have the thrust to lift anything into space that are used extensively in space - pretty much all of them fall in this category, yet the EM Drive will be the first that is reactionless.
Are you unable to read English? I said that thrusters don't lift things into space.

>This is wrong - in fact the very topic ITT is that this point is wrong.
How is it wrong? Where is the extraordinary evidence?

>Even if it were the equivalent of a laser pointer sitting in space in terms of thrust, that would be fucking enormous in itself.
Again, moron, can you not read? A laser pointer cannot achieve such thrusts. A photon rocket's maximum efficiency is the maximum efficiency of a propellantless drive without violating conservation of energy. And no, this does not assume that there is constant acceleration with constant energy input, this is a relativistic limit. So either we have a violation of conservation and free energy, or the drive is less efficient than a photon rocket and useless. The fact that all the experiments purporting to show the emdrive producing thrust also imply violation of conservation, and yet no one is producing free energy, is very good reason to believe that such experiments are fatally flawed.

Please don't post if you don't understand what you're talking about. Please don't post if you don't understand what the person you are replying to is saying. No one is fooled when you pretend.

Peer review by aeronautical engineers with no experience in the physics being invoked does not make it science.

Sure it does, but just because it's science doesn't mean it's fact