- Mar 8, 2012
Just what I wanted to say.giles said:The thing about modern physics, and the reason why no physicist would ever claim anything violates momentum conservation, is that momentum is basically DEFINED to be conserved. It is the conserved current due to translational symmetry of the theory. If we get a weird source of momentum somewhere our formulation of the theory was incomplete (i.e. we forgot something).
Now, on to the facts. Note that we can COMPLETELY SCRATCH the original "inventor" and his explanation because he never submitted it to peer review. That's never a good sign.
Moving on to Dr. Yang ( http://www.emdrive.com/NWPU2010translation.pdf ) my eyes already hurt from the lack of LaTeX. If a freshman handed this in I would immediately give it back to him and tell him to make an effort at presenting his findings if he wants to be taken seriously. Now I know that Dr. Yang's team published it ONLY in Chinese and this is a translation, and they submitted it to peer review, but I really can't take this seriously in the way this is presented. Especially if we take into account that Dr. Yang's team is several orders of magnitude off the NASA results. In conclusion the current experimental data on the subject is scetchy at best. Note: wikipedia claims there was an official english peer reviewed paper submitted by Dr. Yang and claims to link to the PDF but it doesn't work for me. If anyone could find the PDF I'd appreciate it.
Now the last of the actual (peer reviewed) sources I could find to explain this is http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.5690v3 . Now it's already a great sign that this is on arXiv. However, even the author admits that this is still highly speculative. It's simply a possible way to explain a very strange effect that we don't even know is there yet. No physics had to be violated.
TL;DR: [b/]STOP MISREPRESENTING SCIENCE IN THE SCIENCE SECTION[/b]
Also, have you read the NASA paper? They did the test in a sealed vacuum chamber... that wasn't in use. In other words, it had air in it.
Now then, what happens when you unevenly fire microwaves at a structure like that engine? Well, it creates heat-difference!
And what does heat-difference create? AIR-FLOW THAT CAN SERVE AS THRUST!
Seriously, they forgot to control for something that ridiculously simple?! Especially when they are measuring their results in microNewtons?