Meh. I designed and successfully tested such a device two years ago. I just have to scale it up a bit.
Posted on 04/29/2024 9:25:53 AM PDT by kawhill
From the article: "As with anything that appears to thumb its nose at Newton and Einstein, scientists raised more than a few eyebrows, and two decades of testing eventually boiled down to an inevitable (and somewhat predictable) conclusion in 2021: the EmDrive was bunk."
Bunk. Bunko. Related words.
And embedded is promotion of a YouTube channel run by Tim Ventura. "Tim is a futurist, business executive, startup founder, and media influencer, with a proven track record generating tens of millions of dollars in bottom line revenue and media appearances on TV & radio around the world. His work has been featured in publications like CNN, Wired, Janes Defence Weekly, The Discovery & History Channels, Nippon TV & more." Source: https://www.timventura.com/
Add to bunk and bunko, startup founder and media influencer. Claims. As in:
"Dr. Charles Buhler, a NASA engineer and the co-founder of Exodus Propulsion Technologies, has revealed that his company's propellantless propulsion drive, which appears to defy the known laws of physics, has produced enough thrust to counteract Earth's gravity." Source: https://thedebrief.org/nasa-veterans-propellantless-propulsion-drive-that-physics-says-shouldnt-work-just-produced-enough-thrust-to-defeat-earths-gravity/So IF TRUE, there would be zero need to "reveal" and seek investors, since this would indeed pay and pay and pay enormous dividends for the owners. Interestingly, the DeBrief and other media all reference back to Ventura, of the "startup founder, and media influencer" world of media appearances.
M A R K E T I N G. Send money. What could possibly go wrong? < s a r c >
Oh, by the way, one can listen and watch his YouTube video interview titled "Natasha Vita-More - Transhumanism & Philosophy." Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY48C2-62TQ
This last interview would surely been termed "fascinating." And some other adjectives also apply....
Meh. I designed and successfully tested such a device two years ago. I just have to scale it up a bit.
On the ground, you can push against the ground to move (e.g. automobile tires). In the water you can push against the water to move (e.g. speedboat). In the air you can push against the air to move (e.g. airplane).
But in a vacuum (e.g. space), there is nothing to push against. You have to carry everything with you, pusher and pushee.
That's why rockets are useful. It's not just that we understand them -- they work in a vacuum. If you're talking about propulsion that "overcomes Earth's gravity", it has to work in space, otherwise you're just re-inventing the car, boat, or airplane.
I feel lighter already.
Cats work on the law of physics all the time maybe they can get together
Don’t let the global warming crowd know about this.
Gravity doesn’t hurt. You can’t feel gravity.
The sudden stop at the bottom of a gravity well is another thing.
So long my as it lasts for a guaranteed 120 years with no maintenance or intervention at a all, that’s close enough for me and come to think of it, way close enough...
(Add... Seriously WITH a levity emoji...)
Thanks kawhill.
I guess we'll have to drag this out like cold fusion.
I don’t think Hillary went to Bryn Mawr.
There’s just one problem—such a device would defy the laws of physics.
Well, today most crilminals (and DAs and Judges,etc.) are defying the laws of the country.
But in space you get the bonus of Newton’s 3rd law. Maneuvering thrusters are basically fire extinguishers with attitude, by pushing “stuff” out it applies opposite thrust. Also in space you can use gravity to gain speed.
Part of the idea of getting away from rockets is actually what you put out. Most of that rocket ride it’s in AIR. Why not use that.
And no you’re way of getting out of the gravity well doesn’t HAVE to work in space. You can have more than 1 system. functionally we do that already, they’re just different rockets (when we need a rocket in space, which we don’t always). But there’s launch rockets and in space rockets.
The big problem with rockets is they have this terrible math. You need X amount of propellant to get the payload into space. But of course that propellant has weight, and needs something to contain and aim it which adds more weight. So now you need more propellant. Which adds more weight. More propellant. More weight. You just keep repeating that until you finally get to 0 on the math. If you look at all of our classic space rockets the vast majority of the propellant they use is to launch propellant, not payload.
Think of the classic 3 stage Saturn. Basically (and yes I am over simplifying) the 3rd stage is what we needed to launch the capsule, stage 2 is for launching stage 3, and stage 1 is for launching stage 2. And THAT is the basic problem with rockets. They are grossly inefficient brute force engines that waste a lot of energy in fire and weight.
The space crowd has been wanting to get away from rockets for decades. But all the alternatives are expensive and untried and nobody ever wants to fund them. We can barely get funding for tried and crappy. Forget invent a new technology that works on the chalkboard but nobody has built it.
“I’ve got a bottle of special water that turns ordinary lead into gold!!”
hey, would you like to trade one bottle of your magic water for one of my magic geese that lays golden eggs?
A claimed force of 1 G is a bit much for some sort of measurement error.
It's such a significant amount of force, that the guy is either a liar or he's on to something.
It's a significant enough claim that I am willing to wait before I make up my mind that he's a fraud or a fool.
Throughout his APEC presentation, Buhler highlights his team’s long chain of experiments, with a more detailed focus on the last decade....For the device to increase its thrust to exceed gravity, it will need a lot more snake oil.
For example, from 2016 to the end of 2020, their best devices were producing a little more than one hundred thousandth of a gravity. In the coming years, that would go up exponentially.
“The aim is to approach and exceed unity...”
You’re correct. She just speaks there every year or so to shake down the alumni hags. I have several in my family. They are so Hillary enamored I thought it was on an alumni connection. It’s just checkbooks out kinda thing.
She spoke many places. But she didn’t attend Bryn Mawr.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.