German Scientists Just Tested NASA’s EM Drive… Does It Work Now?



Further testing of the EM Drive provides the latest update on the controversial device, but what does this change the future of space travel? *Disclaimer: The …

38 Comments

  1. The sarcastic part of me (which is most of it) says, "Yeah, they said it was 'educational' – meaning that this will help them test out other really stupid ideas in the future. Come to think of it, the rest of me thinks that, too. This idiotic non-drive piece of junk isn't worth anyone's time. Not anyone sane, that is. The very fact that they had to go and test the thing is actually sad. It's not going to quell the nut-bomb believers; no – they'll just start a big stanky conspiracy thing over it. "Oh…the governments don't want us to know they have a reactionless drive! Dumbasses. That's not science. And for the scientists, it only proves what they already knew. So, lots of time & money wasted so nobody could learn anything new. Perfect. Can I go home now? 𝙍𝙞𝙠𝙠𝙞 𝙏𝙞𝙠𝙠𝙞.

  2. Solar radiation
    Pressure affects the momentum of an object in space. What if that obect radiates an insane amount of high energy photons? Would the opposite happen? Is this physically impossible?

  3. I mean what did you guys expect? You guys really that this would work lol? There's plenty we can do with known physics, we can still move stars around or entire galaxies. We don't need ridiculous Clarketech, and if we ever do build things that break the laws of physics, it will be much more complicated, and made from someone who understands those laws quite well, not some hack who doesn't understand basic science.

  4. Physic is not wrong ! We just don't know everything mini worm hole's are real and dark matter. In physic energy and mass are real. Em drive makes sense if reaction passes on mass then you get movement. That how microwave works. So reaction can be used to move a something fasted in space 🎯🤔

  5. I wouldn't throw the impossible drive out the window just yet. I think there is still potential in it. I wish I could help as I'd love to contribute to the making of starships.

  6. I know this is old but I still have a question, what’s the point of these drives? Hypothetically would the measured performance of the EM drive be more energy efficient than just shining a laser in space? And at that point you’d probably need solar panels so a solar sail would be more efficient.

  7. Nasa did check the interaction with ambient magnetic fields. Here is a citation from the official NASA publication, 
    " The third error is magnetic interaction, which has the potential for a false positive resulting from dc currents in power cables interacting during test article operation with ambient magnetic fields (e.g., local Earth field, magnetic damper) to generate a torque displacement on the pendulum. All dc power cables are a twisted pair or twisted shielded pair to minimize magnetic interaction. The test article is tested in forward, reverse, and null thrust orientations, but dc power cable routing and orientation is the same for all three configurations (power cables come in from the top of the test article), meaning any false positives will be the same magnitude and polarity for all three tests. This is not observed during the test campaign". Read More: https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/1.B36120

  8. Why is a reactionless drive impossible? You can use magnets for instance to repel each other. You are generating force at a distance and for instance pushing the other magnet across a table just by bringing the first magnet close to it.

    would in not be possible to create a ship with one electromagnet and the front end and one in the back end in such a way that it gives you "thrust"

  9. The EM drive, though I'm not supporting it, is still being tested, as there are also many fringe theories about how it works that goes into deep physics and also crazy physics. The key here is if they find the EM drive works, or any anomolyic readings for that matter, that research will be steered into a certain direction, however if experimental data disproves any of these theories, then our actual testing prowess will have increased (as you have mentioned).

  10. Just… (oh, God, *facepalm, deep breath*)… for the record: EM drives are based off of the same theories that found Hawking and Unruh radiation. This is science vs science. Stop saying that "science wins this debate!", it makes you sound like a idio… like an average millennial.
    But then again, this IS Seeker; garbage in, garbage out.

    When one does the experiments, the effect is relative to H-bar (ie, plank scale), so it's vanishingly small; it's a very, very, extremely-fucking-very difficult experiment to do. And the krauts couldn't even get their basic nuclear science right back in the day, so color me skeptical of their EM research.

  11. I still don’t feel we have a complete understanding of the universe and the laws that surround it. So I’m always excited when Newton’s fullproof laws are put to the test.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*