How does it work?

>Guy bullshits some magic propulsion system (paper is hilarious btw, if you know physics)
>Far, far, far too many people take him seriously
>Load of people test the device
>Actually measure something
>But because they're either incompetent or irresponsible decide to communicate their results via blogs and forums before peer review
>Some Chinks recreate the experiment, publish, then discover a flaw that causes them to retract their paper. Some people still use it as evidence that magic drive works.
>Turns out that if you remove the atmosphere you also remove 99% of the effect.
>Some people [math] still [/math] hold on to the idea.
>Test articles constantly return null results, one particularly strange one has """thrust""" being recorded in one direction regardless of the orientation of the drive.
>All the graphs produced have the """"thurst"""" slow dying down to 0, that follows a textbook cooling curve.

tl;dr more pop-sci garbage that too many people took seriously.

Thanks, user.

Didn't Eagleworks publish a paper?

I post here everytime someone brings this thing up...

I am currently working on it...

I have an idea of how it works, or how a similar device could produce a similar thrust...

The mechanism for my idea of where the thrust comes from has already been experimentally verified...

I am building the system currently and will be working on similar things during my post doc...

If it works how I think it works, I am going all in and building a ship...

I am gonna be at a university that facilitates start up businesses too and will go full ham on starting a "space development" company if the idea proves to be robust...

It just werks

In a clown journal.

Eventually yeah, but it's not in a particularly reputable journal and it still has a load of problems with it. The point is it they started releasing their test results on NASA space flight forums (not actually affiliated with NASA) before putting those results though the standard channels.

No you aren't. And if you are it's like that guy who's working on """""electric fog""""".

bruh, I am indeed currently working on these things... :)

Everything I am using, by the way, has all been published in nature...

I am not claiming it will work well, work shittily, nor work at all...

I am claiming that I am working on it and that the idea is based on very cool and very well established science. If it works then good, if it fails then fuck it...

but I am most definitely in the lab, doing the math, etc. working on this thing currently...

You have done nothing to date. You have nothing to contribute to the conversation. You are just shitposting.

Okay then, what direction are you taking towards explaining the violation of conservation of momentum?

fair enough...

and i have done LOTS of work to date... i am just not gonna dox myself by stating what i am doing as it is easy to look up...

think about the shape of the cavity. think about boundary conditions, the standing wave, blah blah blah. This is type of stuff is literally an e&m homework problem...

The key is you shouldnt think about these things in terms of e&m... whats happening comes from quantum mechanics and e&m is simply mimicking the process with the phase...

conservation of momentum is not violated...

i said to this user that I am not gonna dox myself by saying too much about these things...

the key is to not think about the system with e&m, but with quantum mechanics instead. This gives a better intuition about whats happening...

>conservation of momentum is not violated...

It clearly is, unless you're arguing that it's not reactionless, in which case it's not a big deal at all. But then I have to ask, what's it pushing against?

>QM gives something better intuition
Literally the first time this have ever been written about anything. Tell me what quantum mechanical process is it using?

It doesnt

So chinese got trolled hard?

If my idea is correct then it is indeed not reactionless... however, it is still cool because of what the "propellent" is...

I am not trying be a fucking larpfag but I am not gonna say, yet, what the process is... but if you think about the system quantum mechanically, and look around a bit, you will figure out how it works, and what the propellent is...

>propellent
Then what is the propellant.

>I am not trying be a fucking larpfag
That's exactly what you are.

>but if you think about the system quantum mechanically
No. This thing makes no sense in anyway. Unless it's ablating some of the metal.

It is literally powered by dreams and the subtle influence memes exert on our plastic reality.

An early version of Tycho Brahe's false nose.

inb4 etherfag

Let me ask you all a couple questions...

1) What would you do if you thought you knew how it worked? Would you tell people, keep it secret, develop it yourself?

2) Is it stupid to tell people how it works? Then someone or some company with the resources can scoop your ass to all hell...

3) Is this thing too dangerous to have out there? In principle, if this thing works it is icbm tier dangerous. I am gonna get v& for publicly working on this?

4) If this works, i want to start my own company and develop space exploration. I don't want fucking google or some shit buying up everything and pushing me, or whoever, out of the way. Is this paranoid?

5) What would you do?

>Reaction
>Pushing against.

Oh lawd...

>Would you tell people, keep it secret, develop it yourself?

I'd develop it. But then I wouldn't be bragging about it on Veeky Forums. Just admit it you're nothing but a sad larping faggot.

>Talking abut this is dangerous, will get me vanned
>I will post about it on Veeky Forums, where the v& drivers gather daily to look for lolilovers to pick up.

Riiiiiiiiight...

I have my phd (in one week actually). I am working on this stuff now and will continue at my post doc. I am most definitely not a larpfag...

This larpfag shit is stupid. it is really fucking easy to tell what my physics level is...

look at these questions... I honestly dont know what to do in this situation...

now, in terms of quantum, stop and think about it... literally think about a wave in a conical cavity in terms of quantum, not e&m...

>I have my phd (in one week actually).

Sure, sure. I """believe""" you.

if you need me to be more pedantic so you don't get side tracked by metaphors then just ask

well how about ask me some questions about physics... it is quite easy to determine if i am a larpfag....

I'm just waiting for some basic ideas of it. Like what principles are you using to explain it?

Worlds smallest flashlight under a microscope

i am not going to say how it works... that is literally the stupidest thing to do right now... thats how one gets scooped...

I said enough above... stop thinking about it in terms of e&m and start thinking about it in terms of quantum

>I don't wana get scooped
>So Imma brag about it on Veeky Forums and hint at how to understand it.

Are you retarded senpai?

no, i am just curious to talk with people about it... just because i have an idea about how it works, and am keeping it close until i publish, does not prevent nice conversations to happen...

if this thing works it is a game changer... there is so much more to it than how it works...

Take: [eqn] \mathcal { L } = - \frac { 1 } {4 } F^2 _{ \mu \nu } + ( D_{ \mu } \phi )^* ( D^{ \mu } \phi ) -m^2 \phi ^* \phi [/eqn] Where [math] D [/math] is the usual gauge-covariant derivative. Find the free propagator and the interactions.

This thing produces thrust by microwaving copper atoms out of the fuck. its the world worst ion thruster

feels pretty nice to be one of the only people, back in the day, saying "its just heating up water vapor in the atmosphere."

this is a scalar model of qed. the positive and negative charged particles are given by \phi and \phi^{\ast}. the interaction for this theory is determined by enforcing, for the case of e&m, the local u(1) gauge invariance of the lagrangian. The interaction is there it is just written into the covariant derivative...

the propogator is computed via

Fair enough.

also, written explicitly out, the interaction would be something like

e \phi^{\ast} A \phi

A comes from F^2, with F^{\mu \nu} = d^{\mu}A^{\nu}-d^{\nu}A^{\mu}

This is the interaction that comes out of the local u(1)...

Thanks for asking... I hope this shows that I am not larping...

What do you work on by the way?

You don't want to know

I'm just about to finish the taught part of my M.Sc. My dissertation is going to be in a particularly niche area of particle theory.

nice... i am writing up my phd thesis right now (when not screwing around on 4chins)...

I work on things related to the unruh/hawking radiation...

Neat. The project I wanted was using the double copy to do some stuff, but I didn't get that.

I've never seen it before, no one has.

A *white* hole?

>Then what is the propellant.
My guess would be ellipses...

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=PvnF2bMnJtU

make one by yourself

when will you know if your theory is correct? some speculate the airforce is already flying something like your thing

popsci.com/emdrive-engine-space-travel-china-success

>Dr. Chen Yue, Director of Commercial Satellite Technology for the China Academy of Space Technology (CAST) announced on December 10, 2016 that not only has China successfully tested EmDrives technology in its laboratories, but that a proof-of-concept is currently undergoing zero-g testing in orbit

Why are people still pursuing this?

It must work even if no one has announced a good explanation why yet.

Multiple reasons:

>Popsci.com
>No citations
>Sometimes nations lie if they think they can suitably impress others
>China refuses to publish this supposed irrefutable proof of a functioning EMDrive
>China won't share their designed models.
>The EMDrive is physically impossible.

Now, I'll give you that last one. Things are only physically impossible until they aren't; we don't know everything and can be proven wrong. But China has made some fantastic claims before, and they have provided 0 proof that they have a functioning drive.

So you think the Chinks are just masters of banter/deception?

They sound fairly confident this is not a red herring.

ibtimes.co.uk/emdrive-chinese-space-agency-put-controversial-tech-onto-satellites-soon-possible-1596328

>"National research institutions in recent years have carried out a series of long-term, repeated tests on the EmDrive. NASA's published test results can be said to re-confirm the technology," Dr Chen Yue, head of the communication satellite division at the China Academy of Space Technology (Cast) said at the press conference.

>"We have successfully developed several specifications of multiple prototype principles. The establishment of an experimental verification platform to complete the milli-level micro thrust measurement test, as well as several years of repeated experiments and investigations into corresponding interference factors, confirm that in this type of thruster, thrust exists."

Of course the people setting the red herring are confident it isn't.

I'll be convinced when they either give NASA a model to test themselves or get a peer reviewed report approved.

>Muh in orbit test

Why the fuck do retards think this proves anything? Pioneer was in space yet still had thermal effects slowly push it off course.

>give NASA a model

As if the Chinese government would allow that.
I don't see why you're so convinced they are perpetrating a hoax.

It they have a range of prototypes and measurements but lack a complete theory of how it works, they would be mad to publish.

That would risk giving away useful information that others could use to beat them to goal of a sufficient theoretical understanding from which and optimised engine could be devised.

Once someone has a thorough understanding of how it works they can patent the optimum design and that is worth billions.

I don't mind waiting for China to do that. I'm just not going to claim it works when their word on the matter is "It does, but we can't show you and don't know how."

>think this proves anything?
Would prove it could moving things around in orbit powered purely by electricity.

Sounds useful.

>I don't mind waiting for China to do that.

The future is Chinese then I guess.

Remind me: the NASA paper in which they said it worked was proven wrong right?

NASA haven't published shit, it's Eagleworks.

It was shown to be extremely lacking in testing for thermal effects. This is one of the tests they show in the paper. The device is turned off but the "thrust" only peaks then, and then there is an exponential decline just like a cooling curve. These effects get a mention in the paper but they crudely attempt to model them out under the assumption of uniform heating, that assumption clearly isn't true as their two templates (expansion and thrust) cannot fit the curve I've posted together with constant heating and steady thrust. This combined with the fact the control isn't a true control for thermal expansion is a problem.

They're going to have to do a better job next time. It would help if they published in a real physics journal and got better review.

>Sounds useful.

Lol, retard. If it works it produces something on the order of microNewtons of thrust per Watt. That's fucking useless.

No, they didn't isolate all sources of error.

arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120

That's enough to steer something small in orbit.
Doing that with solar power is a good trick.

>microNewtons of thrust per Watt.
mN is millinewtons
milli - thousandths
micro - millionths

>It's very similar to the paper that was leaked online earlier this month and, most notably, shows that the drive does indeed produce 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt of thrust in a vacuum:

>>"Thrust data from forward, reverse, and null suggested that the system was consistently performing at 1.2 ± 0.1 mN/kW, which was very close to the average impulsive performance measured in air. A number of error sources were considered and discussed."

>To put that into perspective, the super-powerful Hall thruster generates force of 60 millinewtons per kilowatt, an order of magnitude more than the EM Drive.

>But the Hall thruster requires propellants, and that extra weight could offset the higher thrust, the team concludes.

>Light sails on the other hand, which are currently the most popular form of zero-propellant propulsion, only generate force up to 6.67 micronewtons per kilowatt – two orders of magnitude less than NASA's EM Drive, says the paper.

sciencealert.com/it-s-official-nasa-s-peer-reviewed-em-drive-paper-has-finally-been-published

>millinewtons per kilowatt
>MicroNewtons per watt

Really made me think about the caliber of person I'm arguing with.

>But the Hall thruster requires propellants, and that extra weight could offset the higher thrust, the team concludes.

Only if your spacecraft is 90% engine and propellant in mass. That is not the case for any ion powered spacecraft in real life.

>only generate force up to 6.67 micronewtons per kilowatt
Solar sails don't require power from the spacecraft at all. Talk about misleading numbers. EMdrive on the other hand (if it wasn't bullshit) would require solar panels. That adds mass which as they pointed out above can kill the advantage. What hypocrites.

Woah. Nice to see a legit guy here.

So it needs to be more efficient? So what?

Doesn't mean it doesn't work.

Is it real that smart guys are this triggered by something they can't explain?
They would call people frauds because the explanation is too hard for them?

That's not exclusive for smart guys. Just check the average Veeky Forums poster.

Did I say anything about the efficiency of EMdrive being too low? No. I criticised the bullshit comparison given in the article. Try reading what people actually write.

As someone said earlier in this thread the level of testing done on EMdrive so far is poor. I have not yet been convinced it isn't a systematic effect:
When they plug all the holes in their methodology people may start to listen.

>I'm scared of scientific breakthroughs

>Haha yes I am very smart and working on this trust me guys ;)
>Now excuse me while I write like an edgy dumb teenager using unnecessary ellipses everywhere

>Poor practice and bad methodology doesn't scare him

Back to R.eddit with you.

The Chinese started their experiements roughly ten years ago. Eagleworks, which is a subdivision of NASA, tested it in vacuum and confirmed that it works and there is a peer review. If these are not enough for you make your own tests.

forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/11/19/nasas-physics-defying-em-drive-passes-peer-review/#56348b55659d

See
And most importantly:
The Chinese team had to retract their results when they found an error that removed what little """"""thrust"""""" they originally detected.

Eagleworks is not a subdivision of NASA. They are an external contractor, they are not part of NASA and this work is not funded by NASA.

>If these are not enough for you make your own tests.
That's not how it works in science. If you want to claim X is true it is your responsibility to convince the community that is so. Burden of proof. Firing out some half-baked experiments does not cut it when there are still many systematic effects that they have not tested.

r/Physics actually had a very detailed discussion of the problems with the paper.

thats actually pretty funny...

None of which provide a link to any paper refuting it or any such retraction.

Their work is still copyright US government I noticed.

When people have made a device and shown it works surely the burden then lies with the nay sayers.

I've yet to see anyone bring a peer reviewed explanation of where everyone working on this is going wrong.

Even a rough outline of how flaws in their methodology could result in apparent thrust of the same magnitude would be welcome.

>where the v& drivers gather daily to look for lolilovers to pick up.
>no party van has yet to be seen
not even the FBI wants me

You forgot the part where the Chinese put it in a vacuum with its own batteries and found zero thrust

I have an experiment almost setup that is trying to measure a force with this mechanism. I probably won't get everything finished prior to leaving for my post doc, but the facility where I am going already has the experiments set up and in much better condition. Hopefully we can measure the force within a year...

Theoretically, I am dragging some ass. I have 4 papers backlogged that I have to finish prior to typing up this idea. This should be around a year as well...

What I am really excited about is the place I am going has all the facilities in place to get this thing off the ground...

The bottom line is this; If the idea works, and my post doc will have all the things necessary to check it, then it is gonna get done. There is a valid scientific pathway, based on very conservative(realistic) assumptions, towards making this thing actually work...

we shall see...

I will have to look into this air force thing a bit... could be interesting...

My ellipses game is tight son...

If you have any questions about physics, just ask. I am graduating senpai, and I feel like spreading some knowledge around...

Excruciatingly.

>When people have made a device and shown it works surely the burden then lies with the nay sayers.

No. If at the end of the day the paper doesn't convince you then it doesn't convince you. Peer review just means it probably isn't isn't filled with utter crap but it doesn't mean it isn't deeply flawed. Go to a journal club and see how many bad papers are published.

The flaws in the methodology are clear to see. The fact these haven't been dealt with yet says they haven't proven it actually works as claimed.

>I've yet to see anyone bring a peer reviewed explanation of where everyone working on this is going wrong.

You don't peer review criticism of papers. Only very occasionally will anyone publish a reply to your paper but only if you really annoy them. Given that this paper wasn't even published in a physics journal it probably won't garner much attention. Again it's the papers job to convince the reader.

>Even a rough outline of how flaws in their methodology could result in apparent thrust of the same magnitude would be welcome.

Again not how this works. Additionally the data isn't public so there is very little that anyone outside the team could do.

It persists

Even if you wait a hundred years it still won't be in commercial use because it's a hoax.

Like an eagle

These all sound like excuses from someone who denies what is shown to them because they don't understand it.

>The flaws in the methodology are clear to see.
And I'm still waiting for one of you smart guys to show me a single calculation that shows how those flaws could account for the result.

>You don't peer review criticism of papers.

A paper explaining where the 'magical' force is coming from would be a work in it's own right.
I feel like you're misrepresenting what I ask for so you can dismiss it.

>Again not how this works
So you have no idea how the result could be explained specifically, only general complaints about methodology.

I thought you Veeky Forums guys were smart guys.

>And I'm still waiting for one of you smart guys to show me a single calculation that shows how those flaws could account for the result.

Here an entire paper:
tu-dresden.de/ing/maschinenwesen/ilr/rfs/ressourcen/dateien/forschung/folder-2007-08-21-5231434330/ag_raumfahrtantriebe/JPC---Direct-Thrust-Measurements-of-an-EM-Drive-and-Evaluation-of-Possible-Side-Effects.pdf?lang=en

Hello user.
your level of intellect astounds me.

How did you learn so much about math to get to the point where you are right now? What fields o math are you using to make this thing? How will you get the materials and stuff to develop the actual device? I have been really interested in learning enough math to do cool space and sciency shit like this but I am not sure where to start.

At the moment I have books on Electrical Engineering, Calculus, Physics, Quantum Mechanics, and Mechanical Engineering. I chose those subjects because they are mostly what Nikola Tesla knew. I plan on researching the living fuck out of it all as best as I can.

It's powered by the butthurt of the establishment by smashing their dogmatic fabrications.

You, someone else, whatever. When do we see some LEO tests? Nobody can gainsay it if the thing just chugs along on its own.