It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: ChefSlug
Only if they find a way to kill off all the oil & gas energy conglomerates first!
They will fight with their last breath before making these system commonly accessible to any of us.
But that doesn't mean we can't do it ourselves!
Thats not exactly true. the ygot a small signal with the null tests. but this was part of a small systemic issue. it's not the same as confirming the null hypothesis. The largest part of the thrust signal appears to be genuine.
originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: ChefSlug
Don't get to hopeful about the EM drive. The report said they experienced the same results with the test when they disabled the drive. That means or should mean that their test was flawed in some way.
You know. If their instruments were telling them their was some thrust being measured even when the drive was off/dissabled then there is definitely something wrong somewhere.
incorrect. testing on the device has been very good. especially if oyu youcount variations on the theme by several different inventors and testing egimes. E.G; Dr Woodward's tests involved a faraday cage torsion ballance and a .5 milliTorr vacuum environment.
originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: stormbringer1701
Academics are critical of the em drive because the testing to date is FAR from conclusive, yet the press release (and supporters on this forum) make it out to be a done deal.
Academics are critical of Rossi's "testing" because it was neither transparent nor independent
Tbh I'm not seeing the link between the two here.
i watched some of these academics critiquing the various EM drives. LOL. in short the academics were accusing the testers of not doing things the testers clearly did. they didn't do this. um yes they did. it says so right here... they didn't because it violates the laws of physics! no it doesn't. the academics were full of it. they were woefully ignorant of the details of the tests but went with thier mental image of what had to have happened anyway. Iwas and am singularly unimpressed by the armchair critics on this.
originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: stormbringer1701
Academics are critical of the em drive because the testing to date is FAR from conclusive, yet the press release (and supporters on this forum) make it out to be a done deal.
Academics are critical of Rossi's "testing" because it was neither transparent nor independent
Tbh I'm not seeing the link between the two here.
originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: stormbringer1701
The testing is not conclusive. Nasa have preliminary identified tiny "anomalous thrust". Anomalous being the operative word, here. Just like how the LHC team preliminary identified faster than light neutrinos that turned out to be not-so-FTL. Preliminary results are far from settled science. There's countless reasons for anomalous results, to call the results so far "very good" is taking a premature leap of faith. Let science take its course before opening the bottle of champagne.
Just a few more months and we should see a whole new energy and transportation grid develop.
Mills says that with this new understanding he's produced clean and limitless energy and an entirely new class of materials and plasma that will reshape every industry in the coming decade.
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. is considering a public offering of BlackLight Power stock in 2000.
"I'll have demonstrated an entirely new form of energy production by the end of 2000," Mills responds. "If Dr. Kaku has escaped our universe through a wormhole by then, I'll send my first $1000 in profits to his new address."