Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: NASA tests ‘impossible’ no-fuel quantum space engine – and it actually works

  1. -1
    DisturbedShifty's Avatar
    Wort-wort-wort!!!

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2006
    Posts:
    5,784
    vCash:
    1951
    Loc:
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Xbox LogoHalo LegendaryGalactic Empire medalPlaystation LogoNintendo Logo

    NASA tests ‘impossible’ no-fuel quantum space engine – and it actually works

    A study conducted last year by NASA scientists has become the latest, and by far the highest profile, piece of evidence in favor of a seemingly impossible space thruster design that’s been evoking worldwide skepticism for some time now. Apparently annoyed by the persistent boosters of several similar but distinct designs, the space agency finally agreed to test an American-made variant called the Cannae Drive. “Alright!” they said. “We’ll test your stupid drive that won’t work.” Except it did work. Seemingly in contravention of the law of conservation of momentum, the team confirmed that the device produces thrust by using electricity, and nothing else. Supporters call them microwave thrusters or quantum vacuum plasma thrusters (QVPT), while most others use the phrase “anomalous thrust device.”
    Source: http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...actually-works

    If this is true this would accelerate, pun not intended, of space travel. If you could get a engine that only requires electricity, as this article suggests, then all the fuel you would need is for launch and reentry. I would make a trip to Mars a lot more doable that is for sure. Only problem there would be getting off the planet. Still though, it is very exciting.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -2
    NY8123's Avatar
    Sophisticated Redneck

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2008
    Posts:
    11,766
    vCash:
    5743
    Loc:
    out in the Ding Weeds
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Just shows how flawed "modern" physics really is. I find problems with Hawking and a few other physicists that seem to be bound by their own theories. They have closed their minds to what Einstein already knew, there is a huge hole in physics and the interactions between quantum mechanics.

    If this testing holds up it is truly exciting.
    "I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally" ~ W.C. Fields

    Quote Quote  

  3. -3
    fishfanmiami's Avatar
    grip it and rip it

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2008
    Posts:
    7,751
    vCash:
    10638
    Thanks / No Thanks
    DolphinDolphinDolphin
    i did a science project on this very subject back in jr high that garnished a blue ribbon. I don't think the judges actually understood it but i had some bells and whistle that got everyone's attention.
    It was called Ionic propulsion and required minimum fuel storage for long interstellar flights.

    Quote Quote  

  4. -4
    LouPhinFan's Avatar
    Hall Of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2006
    Posts:
    5,093
    vCash:
    8092
    Loc:
    Louisville, KY
    Thanks / No Thanks
    I hate to rain on the parade but Phil Plait sums it up best:

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro..._evidence.html

    ...The bottom line here is what the team is proposing violates a very basic law of physics; all the forces inside the device appear to be balanced, yet a thrust is still generated. The law of conservation of momentum says that’s not possible. The only other way this device could possibly work is if it's interacting with “virtual particles,” an interesting idea, but a highly speculative one—and the authors of the paper don't discuss the physics. It's important to note that the paper is not an official announcement of verified results; it's more like a progress report.


    I’ll be clear: Of course science has overturned earlier notions of how the Universe works. But sometimes, those rules are shown to be true so much and so often that when you come up with an idea that overthrows all of it, you’d better have iron-clad evidence of it.


    This device doesn’t have that yet. The effect is incredibly small, and one thing we’ve learned many times in history is that very small effects are usually due to something not being built or measured correctly. Steve rightly points out the faster-than-light neutrinos story, which were not real; the measurements were messed up by a faulty cable. And as Baez points out, this new device in question wasn’t even tested in a vacuum! That’s extremely important; assuming the measurements are real, the thrust seen could be due to air being warmed up and moving around.


    I’m reminded very strongly of the Pioneer Anomaly: The twin Pioneer spacecraft were slowing down a teeny tiny bit faster than expected as they sailed through space. A breathless media talked about a fifth force and other exotic explanations … but it turned out to be far more prosaic. One part of the spacecraft was warmer than the other parts. It emitted infrared light, which carried away momentum, slowing the Pioneers down. It was hard to measure, and hard to determine, but once it was figured out it was clearly the right answer.


    I suspect that’s what’s going on here. It would be fantastic to have a reactionless drive, something that gets its momentum from the virtual particles swimming into and out of existence in the quantum foam (or some other bizarre concept), and needs no propellant to generate thrust. But the more I want something to be true, the higher I set the bar of evidence to make sure I don’t get fooled. And if you want to invent new physics, or overthrow the law of conservation of angular momentum, that bar is very, very high. I don’t think this device has yet cleared it.
    If you're breaking a law of physics then you better be damn sure.
    Insert pithy saying here.

    Quote Quote  

  5. -5
    fishfanmiami's Avatar
    grip it and rip it

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2008
    Posts:
    7,751
    vCash:
    10638
    Thanks / No Thanks
    DolphinDolphinDolphin
    back to the drawing board

    Nothing is for nothing in physics
    Last edited by fishfanmiami; 08-05-2014 at 05:50 PM.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -6
    Buddy's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    3,587
    vCash:
    13170
    Loc:
    Victoria, TX
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by LouPhinFan View Post
    I hate to rain on the parade but Phil Plait sums it up best:

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astro..._evidence.html



    If you're breaking a law of physics then you better be damn sure.
    Man, I love to hear real scientists debate these types of issues. Plait is objective but realistic. His mind is open to any new information but considers all possibilities for the information being what it is before carving it in stone. Outstanding stuff and very interesting.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. C'mon, NASA, name that space thing after Stephen Colbert
    By finataxia24 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-30-2009, 06:24 PM
  2. Obama May Merge NASA, Pentagon Space Programs
    By LouPhinFan in forum Science & Technology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-03-2009, 05:19 PM
  3. New engine can run on bio-fuel and fit into existing designs
    By Miamian in forum Science & Technology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-16-2008, 02:23 AM
  4. NASA to beam Beatles into space
    By finsrule84 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-02-2008, 10:31 AM
  5. New fuel? works on horses... I guess...
    By Wildbill3 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-17-2005, 10:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •