Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Did the Chinese break the laws of physics? (EmDrive)

  1. #1

    Did the Chinese break the laws of physics? (EmDrive)

    Some links:

    http://www.iflscience.com/space/chin...rive-thruster/
    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/0...ropaganda.html


    The Chinese reckon that they have (or shortly will have) a working "reactionless" drive, which should violate the laws of physics as we know them. Unsurprisingly, they aren't letting on how it works.

    So, what's the opinion of our learned forum goers? Truth or spin or something else?

  2. #2
    Imagination in full swing ;-)

  3. #3
    Well, we just need to wait and see, I've seen ...more likely heard of such devices before, only to be disappointed.

  4. #4
    https://www.sciencealert.com/it-s-of...been-published

    Nasa already confirmed its working a bit ago.

    As for breaking Physics.
    It just means there is something we dont know yet.
    And given that we found out Gravity can Bend Light. Its not really new info that some of the Laws we worked by might need to be overhauled.

    Bigger Question is how useful the Technology is.
    The Thrust created is very small and needs alot of Energy.
    And for anything out of our Solar System the Solar Sails idea will not work.
    So Fuel is not off the table.

    Moreover even assuming we get it to work on a Spaceship sized Object.
    We dont know yet how things will be affected by the high speed.


    But it is clearly a good thing they work on it.
    We need Technology to get around this Galaxy ^^

  5. #5

  6. #6
    Well, the claim it broke the laws of physics is an overstated simplification.

    Newtons third law of motion was never proven, in fact, all of Newtonian laws are physics based on the world of the very large, and not true on the sub-atomic and quantum levels of physics, or the world of the very small.

    In that realm and on the sub-atomic level, bouncing microwaves around in a chamber produces heat, which in turn can be used as thrust, but on this scale, its in the "micronewton to millinewton level”, which would have to be scaled up to at least 100–1000 millinewtons, before it reaches any usefulness.

    Most physicist believe that Newton's third law is not exactly correct to begin with, and have restated it somewhat, as "every action has a less than equal and less than opposite reaction" at the sub-atomic and quantum level. This accounts for atomic decay in general, and from order to chaos theory.

    Be well.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by CMDR Richard Daystrom View Post (Source)
    Most physicist believe that Newton's third law is not exactly correct to begin with, and have restated it somewhat, as "every action has a less than equal and less than opposite reaction" at the sub-atomic and quantum level. This accounts for atomic decay in general, and from order to chaos theory.
    Ummm... source? Please? Newton's laws are impressive, considering that he was only aware of the macro world. His laws of motion do not consider quantum effects, true, but so what? The three laws combined basically amount to the statement that "energy cannot be created or destroyed: in a closed system the total energy remains constant" and as far as I know there isn't a sane scientist in the universe who would argue with that.

    If I'm wrong please correct me. I'd love to know.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Tomtom View Post (Source)
    Ummm... source? Please? Newton's laws are impressive, considering that he was only aware of the macro world. His laws of motion do not consider quantum effects, true, but so what? The three laws combined basically amount to the statement that "energy cannot be created or destroyed: in a closed system the total energy remains constant" and as far as I know there isn't a sane scientist in the universe who would argue with that.

    If I'm wrong please correct me. I'd love to know.
    It's one of those things that is commonly believed, but no one will risk their degree or career to actually say it. It's mumbled in low breaths, and only by those directly involved at the quantum level, and mostly by those at CERN, where I have worked.

    I heard it all the time, but I have yet to see it written with a physicists name next to it. As a quick proof, Hubble's expanding cosmos. As it expands, all matter, energy, light and gravity will be pulled apart. If we run the movie forward to conclusion, then there will be no gravity, no light, no energy and the matter will be so far apart, it will influence nothing. So, is that an "equal" action with an equally "opposite" reaction? If true, then there is no expansion, but there is, and it has been proven. Of course, I am speaking of the sub-atomic and quantum level of matter, energy, gravity and light, and not Newton's large world observations.

    The statement that everything is equal cannot be true if you think about it. If both sides of a equation are equal, then they balance out to zero, and nothing happens. If one side is less, then you have some where to go with it.

    I wrote and published a book which states this, between the lines, as not to become a heretic. Your welcome to a free copy. Visit my profile and follow the instructions there.

    All laws of physics are subject to change the more we learn about it. No one would believe a crystal could be anything but a crystal, as the lattice structure has always been stable and the lattice lines up. Then comes quasicrystals, proving the theory "not quite right".

    Be well.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Tomtom View Post (Source)
    Ummm... source? Please?
    Originally Posted by CMDR Richard Daystrom View Post (Source)
    It's one of those things that is commonly believed, but no one will risk their degree or career to actually say it. It's mumbled in low breaths, and only by those directly involved at the quantum level, and mostly by those at CERN, where I have worked. I heard it all the time, but I have yet to see it written with a physicists name next to it.
    Ah, okay. So, no source. Exactly what I predicted

    Sorry, but a second hand report of hushed whispers doesn't hold much weight. If there was a general consensus that the theory of energy conservation was wrong, there would be an huge rush to be the first to publish the paper with definitive proof, as that would guarantee the author a Nobel Prize and eternal fame.


    Originally Posted by CMDR Richard Daystrom View Post (Source)
    The statement that everything is equal cannot be true if you think about it. If both sides of a equation are equal, then they balance out to zero, and nothing happens. If one side is less, then you have some where to go with it.
    Okay, I thought about it. I don't see a problem with both sides of the equation balancing. It actually makes a lot of sense, if you think about it. I have no idea why it should make a difference to our ability to proceed with further scientific investigation either way.


    Originally Posted by CMDR Richard Daystrom View Post (Source)
    All laws of physics are subject to change the more we learn about it. No one would believe a crystal could be anything but a crystal, as the lattice structure has always been stable and the lattice lines up. Then comes quasicrystals, proving the theory "not quite right".
    I like being pedantic, so I have to correct that for my own satisfaction; our understanding of the laws of physics is subject to change, but the laws themselves aren't. Except they might be, but that's a whole different philosophy. Either way it's true that we don't know much, and we are simply doing the best we can. But when we promote a hypothesis to a law it is because it has relentlessly stood up to rigorous testing, retesting, and mountains of empirical evidence. I know that if there was any solid evidence whatsoever of a system breaking the law of conservation of energy it would be the biggest story of the day; it would be fantastic! Scientists everywhere would be shouting about it, not referring to it in hushed whispers behind closed doors.
    It would be great to have such a scientific shakeup, but without a shred of evidence it's just a fantasy.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by Talarin View Post (Source)
    Some links:

    http://www.iflscience.com/space/chin...rive-thruster/
    https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/0...ropaganda.html


    The Chinese reckon that they have (or shortly will have) a working "reactionless" drive, which should violate the laws of physics as we know them. Unsurprisingly, they aren't letting on how it works.

    So, what's the opinion of our learned forum goers? Truth or spin or something else?
    We know so very little about what we can't see (conversely we're good at measuring what we can see)

    I hope in the coming years we make progress on discovering what we call Dark Energy and Dark Matter truly is.

    I'd also love scientists to figure out what Gravity is (not just how it works,) how to generate it, and how to repulse it.

    But sometimes I don't think we've come very far at all, since those early days when scientists discovered that moving a magnet near a wire induced a current.

    Back to the question, if 1 billion neutrinos flow through each of us every second, doesn't it stand to reason there are many other "hard to detect" particles that make up the "particle soup" we live in?

    And if there are, why shouldn't it be possible to create thrust by pushing against that "particle soup"?

    Time will tell :-D

  11. #11
    If it's true,imo it's really a rediscovery of aspects of physics that was suppressed into secrecy by the globalist cabal for decades. i.e. "noiseless" UFO's such
    as the "phoenix lights".