Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

News about space exploration and scientific advancements. What do you find interesting?

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
The forum is intended only for space and science information. Discussions about how it applies to Starfire is encouraged - there might be some great ideas we can use!

1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby aramis on Sun 04 Sep 2016 00:13

A peer-reviewed paper on the EMDrive is slated for december in
[quote=IFLS]Update (2 September): It has been confirmed to IFLScience by the AIAA that a paper on the EmDrive is being published in December 2016. They said:

“The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Journal of Propulsion and Power has accepted for publication a paper in the area of electromagnetic propulsion. However, it is AIAA’s policy not to discuss the details of peer reviewed papers before/until they are published. We currently expect the paper in question to be published in December 2016.”[/quote]
Source: http://www.iflscience.com/technology/ru ... lly-works/
IFLS's title is not quite congruent to their text, but even getting it accepted for peer review, let alone publication, is a major step. Be interesting to see the paper.
aramis
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon 01 Mar 2010 00:42
Location: Eagle River, Alaska

Re: Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby southwestforests on Sun 04 Sep 2016 08:08

Here is one reference to a paper which might also be worth looking at,
"Abstract
Recent reports about propulsion without reaction mass have been met on one hand with enthusiasm and on the other hand with some doubts. Namely, closed metal cavities, when fueled with microwaves, have delivered thrust that could eventually maintain satellites on orbits using solar power. However, the measured thrust appears to be without any apparent exhaust. Thus the Law of Action-Reaction seems to have been violated. We consider the possibility that the exhaust is in a form that has so far escaped both experimental detection and theoretical attention. In the thruster’s cavity microwaves interfere with each other and invariably some photons will also end up co-propagating with opposite phases. At the destructive interference electromagnetic fields cancel. However, the photons themselves do not vanish for nothing but continue in propagation. These photon pairs without net electromagnetic field do not reflect back from the metal walls but escape from the resonator. By this action momentum is lost from the cavity which, according to the conservation of momentum, gives rise to an equal and opposite reaction. We examine theoretical corollaries and practical concerns that follow from the paired-photon conclusion.
I. INTRODUCTION
Thrust without exhaust is of course impossible. Namely, for every action there has to be an equal and opposite reaction. This conservation of momentum entails that a rocket can accelerate forwards only by directing backwards a force of equal magnitude. Yet, certain resonant cavities, when fueled with microwaves, deliver thrust without apparent exhaust.1,2 The thrust has been detected independently3–9 but there is no consensus about its origin. Possible side-effects have been pointed out, and hence certain experiments have been inconclusive about the thrust.10 Also credibility of some earlier experimental results has been recently reconsidered in relation to instrumental precision.11
Since explanations12,13 and their refutations14–17 have not been conclusive, we bring up a new line of thought to the profound discourse that targets to important applications, most notably to keep satellites on orbits. We maintain that the EM drive, like any other propulsion engine, does convert its propellant to expellant, but its exhaust has escaped both experimental detection and theoretical attention."

http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/jo ... 1.4953807#
Screw the rivets, I build models for atmosphere, not detail
User avatar
southwestforests
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon 27 Aug 2012 21:01
Location: Boonville, Missouri - a little antebellum burg on the Missouri River

Re: Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby Cralis on Wed 07 Sep 2016 00:26

Did I just recently read a report that someone is going to build a satellite using the EM drive to test it?

EDIT: More information http://www.sciencealert.com/the-impossi ... d-in-space
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby aramis on Thu 08 Sep 2016 20:58

If it works in space, all bets are off on Mars. It could put mars to under a month's travel at closest hohman approach.

WHich puts it well into the doable for martian orbit and back missions. It also puts the Oort Cloud into "be there this year" reach.

Tiny continuous acceleration is FAST.

While I personally have little doubt that it will work (I've read four papers showing clear results and attempting to null them by a variety of test variations), it's quite possible that it will not work as expected in orbit. I'll laugh maniacally if it produces more than expected in orbit...

Oh, and I'm of the school of thought that, when engineering or biology produces function and physics says it cannot, Physics needs to change.
aramis
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon 01 Mar 2010 00:42
Location: Eagle River, Alaska

Re: Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby Cralis on Thu 08 Sep 2016 22:45

aramis wrote:If it works in space, all bets are off on Mars. It could put mars to under a month's travel at closest hohman approach.

WHich puts it well into the doable for martian orbit and back missions. It also puts the Oort Cloud into "be there this year" reach.


And best of all? It's a CHEAP drive by comparison. Cheap to build. Cheap to power. If it really performs, it's a game changer, that's for sure.

Tiny continuous acceleration is FAST.


Well, except when you're about to hit something :)

While I personally have little doubt that it will work (I've read four papers showing clear results and attempting to null them by a variety of test variations), it's quite possible that it will not work as expected in orbit. I'll laugh maniacally if it produces more than expected in orbit...

Oh, and I'm of the school of thought that, when engineering or biology produces function and physics says it cannot, Physics needs to change.


That's true. But the problem is: how? That's always been the issue. We know it's not complete, we just don't know how it's not complete.

The big issue here is that it's such a simple concept that it's nearly unbelievable it hasn't been detected before.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby procyon on Fri 09 Sep 2016 04:01

I will wait for more tests, but I am skeptical.
If they are attributing the 'thrust' to errant photons creating thrust - you would be able to create a more effective 'thruster' by simply using the solar arrays to power a flashlight used as a thruster. Same principle - sending photons in a direction and waiting for the 'implied mass' of the energy emitted to create thrust.

So maybe there is some other dynamic creating the 'thrust'. But I will need more data supporting this before I am sold on it.
...and I will show you fear in a handful of dust....

Cralis wrote:I would point out that the "what was" which is different from "here and now" can easily change in the "future then."
User avatar
procyon
Sky Marshal
Sky Marshal
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Mon 26 Apr 2010 16:26
Location: SE IOWA

Re: Peer Reviewed paper on EM-Drive

Postby Whitecold on Sun 11 Sep 2016 01:10

procyon wrote:I will wait for more tests, but I am skeptical.
If they are attributing the 'thrust' to errant photons creating thrust - you would be able to create a more effective 'thruster' by simply using the solar arrays to power a flashlight used as a thruster. Same principle - sending photons in a direction and waiting for the 'implied mass' of the energy emitted to create thrust.

So maybe there is some other dynamic creating the 'thrust'. But I will need more data supporting this before I am sold on it.


My thoughts exactly. Field theory is not really my specialty, but I don't see where excess momentum over what the generated photons carry.
It can't be that tough, photon momentum is ridiculously low. A kW gives you a lousy 3 uN, 1000 times lower than the claimed thrust of the system.
Whitecold
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
 
Posts: 446
Joined: Fri 19 Sep 2014 15:03


Return to Space and Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron