PDA

View Full Version : OT New reactionless engine



ploughman
08-31-2005, 01:55 AM
Be kind, this could change your lives...eventually.

A new form of propulsion using microwaves has been 'developed' that does not require a reactant mass. The Emdrive is the brainchild of aerospace engineer Roger Shawyer who is backed by the UK government.

An understandably frosty reception to this concept by academics may be giving way to the realisation that this new propulsion technology is based on theoretically sound principles and could transform spaceflight. Although currently only able to propel peanut sized objects, using superconductors thrust similar to that obtained from jet engines is envisaged.

As long as this technology doesn't prove to be bogus the implications are incredible; cheap and rapid interplanetary travel, flying cars, floating homes, everything Roger Ramjet had that you wanted.

And no, this technology is not used in Spitfires.

Link to engine designers site which is quite boring. (http://emdrive.com/)

Link to article on the Emdrive which could use some paragraphs. (http://www.eureka.findlay.co.uk/eureka_editorial/news_reference/F-Emdrive.htm)

Disclaimer. I am not mad.

ploughman
08-31-2005, 01:55 AM
Be kind, this could change your lives...eventually.

A new form of propulsion using microwaves has been 'developed' that does not require a reactant mass. The Emdrive is the brainchild of aerospace engineer Roger Shawyer who is backed by the UK government.

An understandably frosty reception to this concept by academics may be giving way to the realisation that this new propulsion technology is based on theoretically sound principles and could transform spaceflight. Although currently only able to propel peanut sized objects, using superconductors thrust similar to that obtained from jet engines is envisaged.

As long as this technology doesn't prove to be bogus the implications are incredible; cheap and rapid interplanetary travel, flying cars, floating homes, everything Roger Ramjet had that you wanted.

And no, this technology is not used in Spitfires.

Link to engine designers site which is quite boring. (http://emdrive.com/)

Link to article on the Emdrive which could use some paragraphs. (http://www.eureka.findlay.co.uk/eureka_editorial/news_reference/F-Emdrive.htm)

Disclaimer. I am not mad.

carguy_
08-31-2005, 02:14 AM
The sad part is that not many of us will live to see it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

Waldo.Pepper
08-31-2005, 02:42 AM
Woo Hoo!

Gotta build me one.

dazza9806482
08-31-2005, 02:51 AM
Where's Raaaid?

Grue_
08-31-2005, 04:58 AM
Consulting his lawyer.

Airmail109
08-31-2005, 05:15 AM
LMFAO! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif....raaid..heheh

vanjast
08-31-2005, 05:29 AM
The Rail Gun has been around for some time.
The high energy accellerators used for particle bombardment and creation has been around since the year dot
All working on similar principles ?? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This not to say that all we've been taught is 'gospel', but there is space for something alternative.

ploughman
08-31-2005, 05:47 AM
Van Jast, I think the 'potential' for this method of propulsion is that although you do need an energy source, ie; solar power or maybe a reactor, you don't need reaction mass. This system doesn't work like a rocket, chucking stuff out the back to make you go forward, it takes advantage of relativistic properties of the group behaviour of microwaves to generate thrust. As such, there is no need for the giant fuel tank full of reactive mass that constitutes the bulk of most rockets today. At first glance it would appear to violate Newton's Third Law of Thermodynamics, but by cunningly operating in the realm of physics described by relativity etc. it appears to be able to get round Law 3 without actually violating the laws of physics as they are currently understood.

It differs from a rail gun or a particle accelerator in that the rail gun/accelerator is shooting something, reaction mass, along or out of it and if used as a propulsion system would be utilising Newton's Third Law.

Beyond that I have no idea how the group behaviour of microwaves in a prescribed volume could possibly lead to any thrust at all.

BSS_Goat
08-31-2005, 05:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dazza9806482:
Where's Raaaid? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL I was thinking "RAAIDS gonna be PISSED!!"

ploughman
08-31-2005, 06:01 AM
Raid's got nothing on me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Tully__
08-31-2005, 09:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Beyond that I have no idea how the group behaviour of microwaves in a prescribed volume could possibly lead to any thrust at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
EM radiation has mass. The shorter the wavelength, the easier it is to develop thrust using this property. I haven't read the article yet, but light sails and laser thrusters have been on the drawing boards for decades.

Edit: Now I have read the article. It would seem that someone has found a way to dramatically increase the effectiveness of "light" pressure drives, using microwaves instead of light and some fancy manipulation to increase the yield. Even so, they're still talking about only 0.02N thrust from a ~9kg drive unit with an 850W power source. In applications in a gravity well this is just not practial, but if you've got plenty of time it's sufficient for orbital manouvering.

Daiichidoku
08-31-2005, 12:57 PM
take a look at this:

"lifters"


http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm

XyZspineZyX
08-31-2005, 03:46 PM
well, i read the article and now ive gone crosseyed

vanjast
08-31-2005, 04:35 PM
No problem Ploughman I understand the setup..

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif I didn't know Newton had laws in Thermodynamics ?
The Rail gun and Accelerator use synchronised wave 'mechanics', which sounds similar to this group microwave idea. If it's moving peanut objects, is it not just an Accelerator/Rail Gun ?

An interesting offshoot to this is that it might be using 'Dark Matter' to derive it's propulsion.
Analogous to this is sound waves in mediums such as liquids or solids. What ?? Yup So how can light, sometimes a Wave sometimes a massless particle, travel through space - so the theory of Dark Matter/Medium in space.

edt: Sorry Dark = Cannot see/detect it (Yet)

VMF-214_Prop is crosseyed, read on and you'll all be very 'Bent' soon.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

FI-Aflak
08-31-2005, 04:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vanjast:
The Rail Gun has been around for some time.
The high energy accellerators used for particle bombardment and creation has been around since the year dot
All working on similar principles ?? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

This not to say that all we've been taught is 'gospel', but there is space for something alternative. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Railguns and particle accelerates are old technologies that use well understood and accepted pricipals of physics. Both are possible under newtonian physics (though particle accelerators need to be adjusted for relativistic dialation in order to function properly at higher energy levels).

This drive is completely new and apparently hasn't been unanimously accepted as physically possible until recently. You're comparing apples to spaceships here.

vanjast
08-31-2005, 05:16 PM
I think we must be carefull here as we've ingored one of the most important aspects of research... $$$$$. Who's going to pay for this ?
And there are a gazillion con-artists in the scientific world, just waiting to hook wannabee investors.

We had a local guy here telling us that he could generate electricity out of the ground. There was this photo of him in the paper, with his invention staked into the ground and a standard office fan in his hand, which was turning (blades blurred). 'Wow!' said my wife. 'Wow' said I as I showed her that his hair was also blown in one direction by the wind, which also turned the fan!
Simple, yet if you don't look for the obvious you never see it. This guy conned a few people outof their $$$$
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

ploughman
09-01-2005, 12:48 AM
Thermodynamics? Er...motion (moron that I am). http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Of course it could be bogus, or a error in measurement etc., but the bloke is credible as an aerospace engineer. He used to make missile guidance systems for Sperry Gyroscope and has a reputation to lose. The fringes of science are full of kooks and charlatans as you've pointed out, but this might be something. Currently the money is coming in dribbles from the UK government to build although there is also interest from the USA and China.