"Impossible" EM Drive Has Met Peer Review In New NASA Paper

[JimC]

I'm not confusing the two. If gravity is viewed as a warping of space time then the effect is instantaneous.

No. If a massive object is oscillating, then the warping effect on local space-time becomes wave-like. The oscillations thus produced (which are effects of gravity) travel at the speed of light, and have recently been detected.

[pErvinalia]

I'm not confusing the two. If gravity is viewed as a warping of space time then the effect is instantaneous.

Nope. Just as the pull of the bungee rope is due to the warping or stretching of the fibres, gravity is like the stretching of spacetime.

No it's not. Where did you get that idea from?

[pErvinalia]

I'm not confusing the two. If gravity is viewed as a warping of space time then the effect is instantaneous.

No. If a massive object is oscillating, then the warping effect on local space-time becomes wave-like. The oscillations thus produced (which are effects of gravity) travel at the speed of light, and have recently been detected.

I know. But I'm referring to MM's claim that gravity was always considered non-instantaneous via Einstein. I understood Einstein's description of gravity to be a curvature of space-time. In such a model gravity would have to be instantaneous.

[JimC]

I'm not confusing the two. If gravity is viewed as a warping of space time then the effect is instantaneous.

No. If a massive object is oscillating, then the warping effect on local space-time becomes wave-like. The oscillations thus produced (which are effects of gravity) travel at the speed of light, and have recently been detected.

I know. But I'm referring to MM's claim that gravity was always considered non-instantaneous via Einstein. I understood Einstein's description of gravity to be a curvature of space-time. In such a model gravity would have to be instantaneous.

The word "instantaneous" implies zero time for the effects to be felt, at a certain distance away. Sure, gravity is seen as a curvature of space-time; in a static situation (effectively like a star with planets), nothing is being propagated. However, if the star were to disappear, then both the lack of gravity and the absence of light would reach a planet at the same time.

[mistermack]

Like I said, perv is confusing constant with instantaneous.

The spacetime around the Earth is curved, not instantly by the Sun, but constantly.
The curvature that we are experiencing now is only there because the Sun was in place 8 minutes ago. Even though we feel the curvature every instant, it's happening with an 8 minute delay.
Like Jim said, if the Sun suddenly disappeared, we would lose the gravity and the light at the same instant.

[Feck]

Look at the figures the thrust is almost the same as the margin of error They turned 100w into almost no thrust ,now IF that is even real we aren't getting flying cars, space launches or a colony (of cancer sufferers ) on Mars . Given a 1,000 kg space vehicle with a 100KW power source (if that was even possible ) and the quoted (d)efficiency of this ion drive (if that was even possible ) how long would it take to get to even 1% of C ? How long does it take to get to our nearest stellar neighbor at 1% of C ?
This one goes in the same bucket as "Solar Freakin Roadways "

[pErvinalia]

It would get us to Mars at many multiples of speed as the best we currently have.

[Jason]

Fucking microwaves - how do they work?

[Hermit]

Fucking microwaves - how do they work?

"Tide comes in, tide goes out. Nobody knows..."

[Feck]

It would get us to Mars at many multiples of speed as the best we currently have.

(I'd love to see even hypothetical figures on that ) rockets work in space rockets generate massive thrust this thing generates less thrust than a boiling kettle honestly given a seven man crew their farts generate more energy, sitting on the back in a space suit with a catapult and a bag of marbles would give more thrust. This a bust for anything more urgent than sending a huge probe very very slowly into deep space .
For the last fucking time time! Humans are not going to live on Mars IF the USA and China spend two or three percent of their GDP on it Then in about 50 years there may be some people dying on Mars

[pErvinalia]

It would get us to Mars at many multiples of speed as the best we currently have.

(I'd love to see even hypothetical figures on that )

Perhaps you should read the article.

[Feck]

I did read the article ,and the paper and several commentaries about it and you STILL can't answer how a drive that inefficient can be useful going to Mars ESPECIALLY since any way of generating the VAST amounts of power needed to provide any significant thrust would have a mass and quantum physics and science fiction aside A=F/M . I stand by my assertion that an astronaut repeatedly firing a catapult from the back of the vehicle would generate more thrust . Actually I didn't mention another point If that much power is needed to make such a tiny tiny amount of thrust where does the rest of it go ? heat I s'pose so how do you cool the damn thing (do remember the dog they roasted to death ! ) Maybe they could use heat exchangers and use all that heat to boil a kettle and point the spout backwards, the astronaut can have a nice cup of tea after a shift outside with his catapult .
Next it's SOLAR FREAKIN ROADWAYS and we can all go on the bright yellow fucking brick road to Mars .
Sorry I'm bored now I have to get the replicator to make supper before I take the matter transporter to somewhere warm .

[Tero]

It's all sounding much more reasonable now that Sarah Palin is going to be head of the VA.

[JimC]

I'm confident that one of my Physics students will eventually invent the inertialess space drive, which he will name in honour of me...

[pErvinalia]

I did read the article ,and the paper and several commentaries about it and you STILL can't answer how a drive that inefficient can be useful going to Mars ESPECIALLY since any way of generating the VAST amounts of power needed to provide any significant thrust would have a mass and quantum physics and science fiction aside A=F/M . I stand by my assertion that an astronaut repeatedly firing a catapult from the back of the vehicle would generate more thrust . Actually I didn't mention another point If that much power is needed to make such a tiny tiny amount of thrust where does the rest of it go ? heat I s'pose so how do you cool the damn thing (do remember the dog they roasted to death ! ) Maybe they could use heat exchangers and use all that heat to boil a kettle and point the spout backwards, the astronaut can have a nice cup of tea after a shift outside with his catapult .

Space is extremely cold. I'm sure you can work out where the heat goes if you think about it.

Regarding the thrust and whatnot, you seem to have missed the critical point, this thing doesn't require any (or much fuel). Therefore it ways next to nothing compared to an ordinary space craft. That's why it only needs small amounts of thrust.

Next it's SOLAR FREAKIN ROADWAYS and we can all go on the bright yellow fucking brick road to Mars .
Sorry I'm bored now I have to get the replicator to make supper before I take the matter transporter to somewhere warm .

You should get the replicator to pour you another cooking sherry and then get it to fix your caps lock key...