New Test Suggests NASA's "Impossible" EM Drive Will Work In Space

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: stormbringer1701

easiest cite: Paragraph 2 of this article:

That does not say that a magnetic field affects space-time. It says that a moving mass has a gravitational effect different than that of a stationary mass. The term gravitomagnetic is applied because the effect is similar to the way a moving electrical field creates a magnetic field.

It is an analogy. It is not magnetic fields affecting space-time. The equations do not involve magnetism, just velocity, mass, (and distance if required).
en.wikipedia.org...

i said that is the easiest cite mostly due to the passage of time. at the time there were more articles and they made the link more explicitly.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Doesn't change the fact that general relativity does not link magnetism and gravity. Nor does is imply that magnetism affects space-time. Unless, of course, you can show otherwise.

a reply to: Phage

No citation needed for "my theory"

When an EM (electro magnetic wave) bounces off a conductive surface the E field goes to zero at the surface and all you have left is the B field. (Simple EM theory, read a physic book!)

a reply to: graysquirrel
That part is correct .

Where does space-time come into it? You talked about it in connection with general relativity. What in general relativity implies that magnetism affects space-time?

And what super powerful magnetic fields were involved with the experiment? From the microwaves? That's not what the experimenters think.

a reply to: Phage

With all due respect, your questions have already been answered. Please don't make me repeat this statement. Because I won't.

Hm.... EM drive, doubtful if it wii work.
Any ball park figures on thrust/power ratio?

originally posted by: Phage
What in general relativity implies that magnetism affects space-time?

The Einstein field equations tells us that the stress-energy tensor is the source of curvature of space-time. The stress-energy tensor depends on energy density and momentum density, and electromagnetic (and thereby magnetic) fields have both an energy density and a momentum density.

originally posted by: stumason
And there is also the possibility - as yet unconfirmed - that it might actually generate some kind of Warp field as well, something discovered by accident..

Exciting times...

EDIT: I would add though that is a great deal of scepticism on the various science forums I've visited as to whether this works at all - one of the tests produced a measured thrust even when it wasn't on, which could indicate a measurement error.

The actual signal was barely distinguishable from the noise in the measurements concerning the 'warp bubble'. So there's a lot of testing and analysis to be done to see if there was an actual signal there. And, in truth, what they may have possibly observed was actually photons exceeding the speed of light in certain areas of the resonance chamber. While a warp bubble could be a possible explanation for this, if it actually occured, the bubble itself was not observed.

Quite enjoying this thread until that red haired guy turned up, reminds me of someone who would take a steam hammer to open a peanut.

originally posted by: pikestaff
Quite enjoying this thread until that red haired guy turned up, reminds me of someone who would take a steam hammer to open a peanut.

Hey, steam hammers do an AMAZING job of opening peanuts.

hmm interesting thread.

hmm space time..

Does it mean that EM drive affect gravitational field? If so then you can connect space time, since gravity affect space time.

That if i understood the basic physic and Einsteins relativity theory.


-V-

a reply to: deloprator20000

Although photons do carry momentum energy, it is my undersdtanding that the push would be very weak using classical thinking. Whereas my approach is this: by energizing vacuum with photon energy, one increases the energy of such vacuum. Since quantum model tells us that vacuum energy can and does generate virtual particles through pair production, then by injecting energy into the vacuum, the EM drive stimulates a much higher production of virtual particles behind the engine, which in turn push the engine forward even in total vacuum.

As a bonus, since the engine creates a local energy surge in this area of spacetime, then my proposition also explains the scientist's claim of a small spacetime dilation during the operation of the engine.

originally posted by: pfishy

Hey, steam hammers do an AMAZING job of opening peanuts.

Speak for yourself. Steam hammers go nowhere near MY peanuts.

a reply to: swanne

You have a valid point there.

originally posted by: Deran

originally posted by: Phage
What in general relativity implies that magnetism affects space-time?

The Einstein field equations tells us that the stress-energy tensor is the source of curvature of space-time. The stress-energy tensor depends on energy density and momentum density, and electromagnetic (and thereby magnetic) fields have both an energy density and a momentum density.

Electromagnetic fields are not the same as magnetic fields. Nor is electromagnetic radiation the same as an electromagnetic field.


Einstein wanted to unite general relativity and electromagnetism. He really, really wanted to. He tried but could not do it. Others have tried and have been unable to do it. The Einstein field equations do not employ electromagnetic fields (or magnetism, or electricity). They don't fit in the equations. It doesn't work. If they did, Einstein would have died a happier man than he was.

These experiments have nothing to do with space-time. Nothing to do with general relativity. The theory being operated on uses special relativity and its effect on radiation pressure.

originally posted by: Nochzwei
Hm.... EM drive, doubtful if it wii work.
Any ball park figures on thrust/power ratio?

one kilowatt per newton.

a reply to: Phage

originally posted by: Phage

Electromagnetic fields are not the same as magnetic fields. Nor is electromagnetic radiation the same as an electromagnetic field.

There is only the electromagnetic field; magnetic fields do not exist separately from it. They are precisely the same thing.

Radiation is not a field, no, but when you have radiation, you also have a non-vanishing field.

originally posted by: Phage

Einstein wanted to unite general relativity and electromagnetism. He really, really wanted to. He tried but could not do it. Others have tried and have been unable to do it. The Einstein field equations do not employ electromagnetic fields (or magnetism, or electricity). They don't fit in the equations. It doesn't work. If they did, Einstein would have died a happier man than he was.

Not sure how this is relevant; the fact that electromagnetic fields curve space-time does not imply that general relativity is united with electromagnetism, if that's what you're implying. Einstein wanted to create a unified field theory that could explain both gravity and electromagnetism as two facets of the same thing, just as had been done with electricity and magnetism. Even though EM fields curve spacetime, we're still left with two quite separate things, one of which is a field and the other is not.

It has been established that it is energy density which curves spacetime. Changes in energy density (momentum density) also curves spacetime.

The electromagnetic field has both energy density and momentum density. You can even have a non-zero momentum density in static field configurations.

So, it is entirely possible to curve space-time using just electromagnetic fields. (magnetic, electric, or whatever you wish to call them)

The real question is whether you can curve it to produce thrust. I'll leave that one open.

a reply to: Deran

That's a more clear explanation, thanks.
Has such a phenomena been observed? How does it apply to the experiments being discussed?

a reply to: Deran

Thanks for this information. I figured this was the case, I just didn't know it was "official". In your spare time (no hurry) could you provide a link to more detailed information on "energy density curved space-time." I believe you, I just want to look into this more for my own educational purposes and it would be nice to have an entry point.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

One kilowatt per newton is awfully impressively high. Are you sure that is the right ratio?