Jump to content

The Electromagnetic Drive put to Bed:

Recommended Posts


In a comprehensive new test, the EmDrive fails to generate any thrust:

The EmDrive is a hypothetical rocket that proponents claim can generate thrust with no exhaust. This would violate all known physics. In 2016, a team at NASA's Eagleworks lab claimed to measure thrust from an EmDrive device, the news of which caused quite a stir. The latest attempt to replicate the shocking results has resulted in a simple answer: The Eagleworks measurement was from heating of the engine mount, not any new physics.


The EmDrive is a relatively simple device: It's an empty cavity that isn't perfectly symmetrical. According to proponents of the EmDrive, by bouncing electromagnetic radiation within the cavity, the tapering in the cavity results in a net thrust of the engine, despite nothing leaking from the drive. In 2016, a team at NASA's Eagelworks lab reportedly measured a net thrust from their EmDrive experiment, which they claimed was a revolution in our understanding of physics and the future of spaceflight.

Physicists were… skeptical. Conservation of momentum dictates that a stationary object cannot move without a net force acting on it, which the Eagleworks experiment claimed to violate. But conservation of momentum has been tested countless times over centuries—in fact, that principle forms the bedrock of almost every single theory of physics. So in essence, almost every time physics is tested, so is the conservation of momentum.

The results of the Eagleworks experiment were not very strong. While the team claimed to measure a thrust, it wasn't statistically significant, and appeared to be a result of "cherry-picking"—the authors watching random fluctuations and waiting for the right time to report their results.

But in the spirit of scientific replication, a team at the Dresden University of Technology led by Prof. Martin Tajmar rebuilt the Eagleworks experimental setup.

And they found squat.


more at link.....................

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the intermittent results be due to the off timing of the tests? A predominance of more kinetic energy on one end of the device vs. the other may  change rapidly, averaging to zero, and when the experiment is shut down at the right moment, the energy differential is near it's highest, giving it a "cherry picked" but real result  over the many test cycles.  This would mean it needs a precise and rapidly timed on/off sequence, giving pulses of thrust instead of a steady force.

Edited by hoola
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.