EMDrive, new exploration possibilities in real life?

There are lots of designs for electromagnetic thrusters, ion drives, etc. They all work in theory but in practice there are problems with them.

Barring science fiction, the only way to make something move in space is to throw something out the back and rely on Newton's 3rd law. It then becomes a matter of how much (mass) and how hard (velocity) you can throw stuff out the back. A rocket motor throws a lot of stuff very fast. Electromagnetic drives throw infinitesimally small stuff extremely fast. It works but, so far, not good enough.

Things like EMdrive claim that they will violate conservation of momentum; i.e.: they will give the effect of throwing something out the back without actually throwing something at all. In terms of the physics involved it's not just a free lunch it's a self-licking free ice-cream cone. Calling that kind of stuff "quack science" usually insults the quacks, who like to pretend to be at least bound by physical law as it appears to be. EMdrive makes as much sense (and has as much experimental science behind it to back it up) as jumping up in the air a clicking your heels to get somewhere. Sure, it might happen. But don't get excited until it actually does.

That things like EMdrive get ink at all is due to two things:
- A lot of fringe scientists are relentless in promoting their ideas. Oddly, they prefer to go around talking to reporters about secret stuff, rather than generating actual testable results. They are either con-artists or delusional. But, because they're not actually doing, you know, repeatable experiments and establishing the scientific framework in which those experiments can be interpreted, they have a lot of time to give interviews, write books, and talk to journalists.
- Science journalism is dead. The number of things a typical scientific journalist gets wrong almost always outnumber the actual facts in any given situation. With the advent of internet journalism, in which any bonehead who can set up Wordpress can run a "news site" it's even worse.

Tl;dr
Don't get excited.
 
I have been following this for a while. Greg Egan, who is one of my favorite authors and not prone to nonsense, famously debunked the science that was behind a proposed reason why this drive appeared to work a few years ago.
However, there are other possibly known scientific reasons it may work, including some quantum level interactions, as well of course as unknown reasons. Unfortunately there are also a lot of possible explanations as to how it could be experimental or measuring error. The big one for me is that acceleration appears to follow a thermal like curve. This screams out that it is in some way measurement error.
I hope this is resolved one way or the other soon. It seems reasonable to expect it to be possible to rule out experimental error by now.
 
Last edited:
Probably wiser to sink dollars into research that is likely yield practical and useful results than to chase the aerospace engineer's equivalent of cold fusion. There are other far more promising theoretical drive designs out there. Beyond that, if we want new designs then we need new physics to spark new engineering possibilities, and that means more basic research. Chasing bugbears in a anomalous results that aren't significant or reproducible will only yield flashy headlines and more earth bound humans.
 
It'd be cool if this was true, but when the primary source seems to be the Daily Mail I'm somewhat sceptical. Still, even if it doesn't work as a space ship drive it should cure cancer. Although it'll cause it a couple of days after that.
 
Back
Top Bottom