Discussion
It's even made the DM, no mention of the effect on house prices yet though
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-330...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-330...
The thing about EM drive threads - they're slow but keep going for ages.
The Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
Just found this as well, a team in Finland that have a hypothesis for the drives operation. The suggestion being that microwaves fed into the chamber bounce around and occasionally two photons line up with exactly opposing waves - at this point they cancel each other out electromagnetically and so can pass through the chamber walls. The shape of the chamber means this is biased towards one direction resulting in thrust. Or, in other words, the EM drive is a light rocket.
The Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
Just found this as well, a team in Finland that have a hypothesis for the drives operation. The suggestion being that microwaves fed into the chamber bounce around and occasionally two photons line up with exactly opposing waves - at this point they cancel each other out electromagnetically and so can pass through the chamber walls. The shape of the chamber means this is biased towards one direction resulting in thrust. Or, in other words, the EM drive is a light rocket.
maffski said:
The thing about EM drive threads - they're slow but keep going for ages.
The Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
by comparison the hall-effect thruster varies wildly but is around 40 millinewtons per kilowattThe Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
Foliage said:
maffski said:
The thing about EM drive threads - they're slow but keep going for ages.
The Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
by comparison the hall-effect thruster varies wildly but is around 40 millinewtons per kilowattThe Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
Even with such a low thrust - they would still be useful for long duration spaceflight probes - and you don't need a haul a load of propellant around either. The lower thrust is countered (to a degree) by a potentially lighter spacecraft. The Xenon propellant on the Dawn spacecraft for example comprised around 35% of the spacecraft's total launch mass.
Moonhawk said:
Foliage said:
maffski said:
The thing about EM drive threads - they're slow but keep going for ages.
The Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
by comparison the hall-effect thruster varies wildly but is around 40 millinewtons per kilowattThe Register is reporting that the NASA results have been leaked, and they do record a thrust from the drive - about 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt.
Even with such a low thrust - they would still be useful for long duration spaceflight probes - and you don't need a haul a load of propellant around either. The lower thrust is countered (to a degree) by a potentially lighter spacecraft. The Xenon propellant on the Dawn spacecraft for example comprised around 35% of the spacecraft's total launch mass.
Would be interesting to put some numbers into the equations of motion. It should be possible to build a 1kW RTG that weighs less than 250kg.
Ignoring the mass of the EM drive itself, and also the decay in the power output of the RTG, 1.2 millinewtons applied over five years would only get you about 1700 miles per hour. Given the roughly fixed power/weight of RTGs, building a bigger one wouldn't help. A nuclear reactor like Topaz has a better power density, but 10kW/1000kg for five years still only gets you to about 4200mph.
Shawyer is currently claiming that 30kN/kW is going to be achievable. That would accelerate a 10kW/1000kg object hard enough that my Newtonian physics falls over in days.
Ignoring the mass of the EM drive itself, and also the decay in the power output of the RTG, 1.2 millinewtons applied over five years would only get you about 1700 miles per hour. Given the roughly fixed power/weight of RTGs, building a bigger one wouldn't help. A nuclear reactor like Topaz has a better power density, but 10kW/1000kg for five years still only gets you to about 4200mph.
Shawyer is currently claiming that 30kN/kW is going to be achievable. That would accelerate a 10kW/1000kg object hard enough that my Newtonian physics falls over in days.
http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/
I reckon he's right.
A very interesting theory that explains:
EM drive
Dark matter
Dark energy
Dark flow
Inertia
All without contouring up mysterious substances that have odd properties and can't be directly detected or factors to allow for the possible existence of different amounts of such stuff everywhere we look but it absolutely has to exist otherwise our pet theories are wrong.
I reckon he's right.
A very interesting theory that explains:
EM drive
Dark matter
Dark energy
Dark flow
Inertia
All without contouring up mysterious substances that have odd properties and can't be directly detected or factors to allow for the possible existence of different amounts of such stuff everywhere we look but it absolutely has to exist otherwise our pet theories are wrong.
warp9 said:
Well NASA reckon it stacks up!
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120
Am I alone in feeling slightly disappointed that Roger Shawyer is not acknowledged in that paper?http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff