After eight days of work, which involved using a highly sensitive low-thrust torsion pendulum within a stainless steel vacuum chamber, the scientists were able to confirm that around 30-50 micro-Newtons of thrust were produced. Furthermore, they were able to verify that the force was not generated by something other than the test system. While the result may be significantly smaller than those obtained by Chinese scientists, it’s still a positive result, which is impressive to say the least.

For physicists out there to fill their boots, the paper states: “Test results indicate that the RF resonant cavity thruster design, which is unique as an electric propulsion device, is producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon and therefore is potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma.”

Read more

Just what I’ve been looking for. Satisfying…….

“For physicists out there to fill their boots, the paper states: “Test results indicate that the RF resonant cavity thruster design, which is unique as an electric propulsion device, is producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon and therefore is potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma.””

“Fill her up with quantum vacuum virtual plasma, please.”

“Leaded or unleaded?”

Bubblecar said:

“Fill her up with quantum vacuum virtual plasma, please.”

“Leaded or unleaded?”

it’s unfettered actually…………

:P

Bubblecar said:

“Fill her up with quantum vacuum virtual plasma, please.”

“Leaded or unleaded?”

sounds like downloading via dialup.

Hope CE doesn’t mind if I continue with the concept that gravitation is a similar interaction between matter an quantum virtual plasma.

I won’t get too excited just yet.

The reported force is small enough to have been created by interaction with the supporting structure and/or other non-virtual quantum plasma (whatever that is) effects.

Also suspicious that every one of the first 3 pages of Google hits links to blog type reports rather than reputable research organisations.

http://www.dvice.com/2013-2-8/china-claims-successful-test-microwave-relativity-engine

pushing against the virtual particles, probably not.

“Test results indicate that the RF resonant cavity thruster design, which is unique as an electric propulsion device, is producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon and therefore is potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma.”

http://www.iflscience.com/technology/nasa-scientists-claim-impossible-space-travel-engine-could-actually-work#AwXYzU4EKgHpbHG0.99

who made that quote? it isn’t attributed to anyone. Sawyer, the inventor, doesn’t say that is how it supposedly works…

“However, if we believe Shawyer, the EmDrive is in fact able to extert a small amount of thrust that propels it towards the large side of the cone. Shawyer says this happens because inside the resonating cavity, the velocity of the microwaves changes significantly as the cavity diameter varies. The velocity changes enough, in fact, to exert a larger force on the larger end of the cavity, and a smaller force on the smaller end of the cavity, resulting in net thrust. Shawyer argues that this isn’t a violation of anything, because you have to treat the electromagnetic wave itself as acting in a different reference frame than the cavity, in accordance with Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, meaning that the system is actually not closed.”

http://www.dvice.com/2013-2-8/china-claims-successful-test-microwave-relativity-engine

Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum

JudgeMental said:

Anomalous Thrust Production from an RF Test Device Measured on a Low-Thrust Torsion Pendulum

Could be a physics gold rush in it.

SciForums contains links and a discussion

JudgeMental said:

SciForums contains links and a discussion

“In terms of the likelihood of this being a real effect, I think it’s pretty low – this will most likely turn out to be an anomalous interaction between unexpected parameters – say, the circulation within a magnetron and the Earth’s magnetic field. But it is definitely worth finding out. Try ten unlikely solutions, and the odds of one of them working out is pretty high. “

That’s what I think too.

JudgeMental said:

SciForums contains links and a discussion

That krash661 has a style that reminds me of someone that has been on here or another incarnation.

The Nasa experiment is producing a thrust about 20,000 times smaller than claimed by the Japanese.

I don’t know how you can rule out interaction effects with the planet, with a force that small.

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Nasa experiment is producing a thrust about 20,000 times smaller than claimed by the Japanese.

I don’t know how you can rule out interaction effects with the planet, with a force that small.

With a fancy pendulum?

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Nasa experiment is producing a thrust about 20,000 times smaller than claimed by the Japanese.

I don’t know how you can rule out interaction effects with the planet, with a force that small.

With a fancy pendulum?

What is the engine thrusting with?

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Nasa experiment is producing a thrust about 20,000 times smaller than claimed by the Japanese.

I don’t know how you can rule out interaction effects with the planet, with a force that small.

With a fancy pendulum?

There is a fair possibility that interaction with the planet is minimising the effect…….

Also strange that the so-called “full paper” is a single page with no detail at all.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Nasa experiment is producing a thrust about 20,000 times smaller than claimed by the Japanese.

I don’t know how you can rule out interaction effects with the planet, with a force that small.

With a fancy pendulum?

What is the engine thrusting with?

Microwaves.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Also strange that the so-called “full paper” is a single page with no detail at all.

Not so strange when they are reluctant to posit a theory before having exhaustive scrutinisation.

Facinating.

I reckon they’d develop more power if they used a larger font.

Ian said:

Facinating.

I reckon they’d develop more power if they used a larger font.

Keeps my interest in physics keen…..

:)

Two points that I would proffer as something that may eventuate from this research;

a) It is quantum virtual plasma that establishes and maintains FoR

b) If this is so then there may be room to circumvent the exponential energy required to accelerate masses toward c…….(questionable but applicable).

Phil Plait

Is this the new “Cold Fusion”?

mollwollfumble said:

Is this the new “Cold Fusion”?

No………….

Postpocelipse said:

mollwollfumble said:

Is this the new “Cold Fusion”?

No………….

As Phil Plait says (and mollwoll implies), it’s possible that it isn’t the new “Cold Fusion”.

But it’s very likely that it is.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

mollwollfumble said:

Is this the new “Cold Fusion”?

No………….

As Phil Plait says (and mollwoll implies), it’s possible that it isn’t the new “Cold Fusion”.

But it’s very likely that it is.

so, no doesn’t cut it?

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

No………….

As Phil Plait says (and mollwoll implies), it’s possible that it isn’t the new “Cold Fusion”.

But it’s very likely that it is.

so, no doesn’t cut it?

Pessimistic opinion does not change physics. This is the entirely within the dynamics I have been examining and it is the first tangible examination of ZVVP dynamics I have seen that isn’t obscured by examination of a particles quantum transitions against it.

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

As Phil Plait says (and mollwoll implies), it’s possible that it isn’t the new “Cold Fusion”.

But it’s very likely that it is.

so, no doesn’t cut it?

Pessimistic opinion does not change physics. This is the entirely within the dynamics I have been examining and it is the first tangible examination of ZVVP dynamics I have seen that isn’t obscured by examination of a particles quantum transitions against it.

There is a difference between scientific scepticism and pessimism.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

so, no doesn’t cut it?

Pessimistic opinion does not change physics. This is the entirely within the dynamics I have been examining and it is the first tangible examination of ZVVP dynamics I have seen that isn’t obscured by examination of a particles quantum transitions against it.

There is a difference between scientific scepticism and pessimism.

sorry science but you aren’t always necessary.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

so, no doesn’t cut it?

Pessimistic opinion does not change physics. This is the entirely within the dynamics I have been examining and it is the first tangible examination of ZVVP dynamics I have seen that isn’t obscured by examination of a particles quantum transitions against it.

There is a difference between scientific scepticism and pessimism.

If the subject is eventually found to be observable and apparent there is no practical difference.

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

Pessimistic opinion does not change physics. This is the entirely within the dynamics I have been examining and it is the first tangible examination of ZVVP dynamics I have seen that isn’t obscured by examination of a particles quantum transitions against it.

There is a difference between scientific scepticism and pessimism.

If the subject is eventually found to be observable and apparent there is no practical difference.

Physics aside, semantics is often a distraction.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

Pessimistic opinion does not change physics. This is the entirely within the dynamics I have been examining and it is the first tangible examination of ZVVP dynamics I have seen that isn’t obscured by examination of a particles quantum transitions against it.

There is a difference between scientific scepticism and pessimism.

sorry science but you aren’t always necessary.

There are many totally unsceptical people who call themselves sceptics, so I think the “scientific” is warranted.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

There is a difference between scientific scepticism and pessimism.

sorry science but you aren’t always necessary.

There are many totally unsceptical people who call themselves sceptics, so I think the “scientific” is warranted.

it was, tongue in cheek. You want more?

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

sorry science but you aren’t always necessary.

There are many totally unsceptical people who call themselves sceptics, so I think the “scientific” is warranted.

it was, tongue in cheek. You want more?

tongue,, or cheek?

Postpocelipse said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

There are many totally unsceptical people who call themselves sceptics, so I think the “scientific” is warranted.

it was, tongue in cheek. You want more?

tongue,, or cheek?

practicality pervades.

I’m going to throw this out there in case any can provide meaningful feedback in regard.

Rather than having a substantially particulate nature, I have to forward the concept that photons are a deregulation of spatial expansion.

More thoughts may follow………..

Postpocelipse said:

I’m going to throw this out there in case any can provide meaningful feedback in regard.

Rather than having a substantially particulate nature, I have to forward the concept that photons are a deregulation of spatial expansion.

More thoughts may follow………..

Aren’t photons more of an energy expansion?

This force if proven true is it any more powerful say than Princess Leia getting out and pushing the Millennium Falcon

Cymek said:

This force if proven true is it any more powerful say than Princess Leia getting out and pushing the Millennium Falcon

She could fart

that could generate momentum in space

Cymek said:

This force if proven true is it any more powerful say than Princess Leia getting out and pushing the Millennium Falcon

It is all pervasive so what can be derived from it may well be substantial.

CrazyNeutrino said:

Postpocelipse said:

I’m going to throw this out there in case any can provide meaningful feedback in regard.

Rather than having a substantially particulate nature, I have to forward the concept that photons are a deregulation of spatial expansion.

More thoughts may follow………..

Aren’t photons more of an energy expansion?

That description would be compatible with my referring to them as a deregulation of spatial expansion.

Looks grim