The peer-reviewed EMDrive works according to Finnish scientist

As I'm still interested in this controversial propulsion system , that if works could bring us to the moon in about 4 hours. Has another breakthrough by Finnish scientist who peer reviewed the already tested EMdrive by NASA.

Physicists have just published a new paper that suggests the controversial EM drive - or electromagnetic drive - could actually work, and doesn't defy Newton's third law after all.

Despite that not-insignificant setback, the EM drive shows no signs of quitting, and test after test - including trials by NASA scientists at the Eagleworks lab, and an independent researcher in Germany - has conceded that the propulsion system, somehow, does produce thrust.

A new peer-reviewed paper on the EmDrive from Finland states that the controversial electromagnetic space propulsion technology does work due to microwaves fed into the device converting into photons that leak out of the closed cavity, producing an exhaust.

The research, entitled "On the exhaust of electromagnetic drive", is published in the journal AIP Advances 6 and is the brainchild of Dr. Arto Annila, a physics professor at the University of Helsinki; Dr Erkki Kolehmainen, an organic chemistry professor at the University of Jyväskylä; and Patrick Grahn, a multi physicists at engineering software firm Comsol.

Well now , so if I understand not only Finnish scientists but also German scientists are now saying that it actually works. That's great news , now lets built us a spaceship that takes further and faster into our solar system.

International business times

originally posted by: 0bserver1
As I'm still interested in this controversial propulsion system , that if works could bring us to the moon in about 4 hours.

I didn't see anything in your source about getting to the moon in 4 hours and I don't find that claim credible with an EM drive. However I don't find the idea of an EM drive should violate any basic principles of physics, so I'm not surprised there is some thrust. However I'd expect the thrust to be extremely small (and it's my understanding that in the experiments that's the case), which is why I don't believe it will get to the moon in 4 hours from a standard Earth orbit.

give it time. it will fizzle out
you ain't goin nowhere

I found Annila's explanation to be sort of hard to swallow as well, if it's strictly a photon drive, then you ought to get more thrust by simply removing the cone and turning up the microwaves.

Well, you might need some sort of impedance matching horn. But that's the general idea.

a reply to: 0bserver1

"Getting us to the Moon in four hours," would be delivering a mush of human remains there. Let's see, there is the acceleration and the deceleration. That would create mush on the rear bulkhead and on the front bulkhead if I'm not mistaken.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I didn't see anything in your source about getting to the moon in 4 hours and I don't find that claim credible with an EM drive

scientists confirmed that an electromagnetic propulsion drive, which is fast enough to get to the Moon in four hours

to Mars within 70 days or Pluto within 18 months. A trip to Alpha Centauri, which would take tens of thousands of years to reach right now, could be reached in just 100 years

Maybe this reminds you of that article once published by the telegraph?
the words are not actually mine, but I can imagine creating a much bigger cavity , they might pull it off?

a reply to: Aliensun

Probably if you get completely immerse in a pool of engine oil you would be alright, you would also need to fill your lungs with oil too but at least we would be sending corpses to the moon in 4 hours and not human paste.

originally posted by: 0bserver1
a reply to: Arbitrageur

I didn't see anything in your source about getting to the moon in 4 hours and I don't find that claim credible with an EM drive

scientists confirmed that an electromagnetic propulsion drive, which is fast enough to get to the Moon in four hours

to Mars within 70 days or Pluto within 18 months. A trip to Alpha Centauri, which would take tens of thousands of years to reach right now, could be reached in just 100 years

Maybe this reminds you of that article once published by the telegraph?
the words are not actually mine, but I can imagine creating a much bigger cavity , they might pull it off?

I crease the cavity size and you increase the mass too so it wont make alot of diffrence.

a reply to: Bedlam

But, do we need to produce the microwaves ourselves? I mean isn't the general idea to capture microwaves from stars to gain more thrust?

originally posted by: 0bserver1
a reply to: Bedlam

But, do we need to produce the microwaves ourselves? I mean isn't the general idea to capture microwaves from stars to gain more thrust?

No, they've just got an electric drive with no reactants. Which is nothing to sneeze at, if it actually works, but I'm still interested in the part where everyone was also seeing thrust with the drive off, which is also a knock for Annila's conjecture, or a knock for the test metrics, or something unexpected.

a reply to: Bedlam

Completly revolutionises saterlites as instead of life spans of decades they could stay nb orbit for centurys

a reply to: crazyewok

Could the mythical "Black knight satellite " be a advanced version of what we just discovered ?

Forget space I just want a aeroplane that allows me to go to a decent holiday destination and not feel like death warmed up livestock at the other end after 13 hours..



RA

originally posted by: Indigent
a reply to: Aliensun

Probably if you get completely immerse in a pool of engine oil you would be alright, you would also need to fill your lungs with oil too but at least we would be sending corpses to the moon in 4 hours and not human paste.

Try to sell that "safe" concept to an egg yolk. A dissimilar mass rapidly accelerating in a liquid is still not going to progress as a intact unit.

a reply to: 0bserver1

Other than conventional uses if this pan's out and can be refined to provide terrestrial usable thrust level's then it offers a method to produce thrust without conventional fuel's which mean's that for example in architecture you could build top heavy super tall towers that could be supported in part and stabilized against cross wind's and building oscilation by ring's of these type of EM thrusters at interval's the higher you go, perhaps each section loosely connected to the one beneath to allow more flexibility and then of course such contraption's as space elevators become far more possible as a result even without the need for super strong and hard to produce exotic material's.

Clean power converted into fuel-less thrust is a wonderful concept, of course I am daydreaming and they only so far produce a lower than weight ration percentage of thrust compared to chemical rocket's, but of course it can be maintained indefinitely as long as there is energy to convert so slow but stead and constant acceleration in zero gravity environment's with the potential to produce thrust based gravity simulation within space vehicles (suitable for manned mission's on longer flight's to other planets) is likely to be there main and even potentially only use unless they can be made significantly more powerful.

Let's hope we do eventually see a terrestrial application of this technology.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: 0bserver1

"Getting us to the Moon in four hours," would be delivering a mush of human remains there. Let's see, there is the acceleration and the deceleration. That would create mush on the rear bulkhead and on the front bulkhead if I'm not mistaken.

Well , I don't know much how it would work out in space . I think the first tests in space will be robotic I presume?

for all their creative ideas for actual space propulsion they still haven't found a great way to get people into orbit without burning a ton of fuel and having every launch be a massively complicated and expensive undertaking. They're still working with the idea of rockets and rockets are always going to be big, expensive and wasteful.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
for all their creative ideas for actual space propulsion they still haven't found a great way to get people into orbit without burning a ton of fuel and having every launch be a massively complicated and expensive undertaking. They're still working with the idea of rockets and rockets are always going to be big, expensive and wasteful.

M.T. Keshe's latest videos are showing the chinese how to reach other solar systems let alone vertical antigravity lift.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

If you have any better ideas, by all means share them with the academic community.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
They're still working with the idea of rockets and rockets are always going to be big, expensive and wasteful.

Because mgh is a cruel taskmaster.