1

Topic: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

2

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

At first it is necessary to wait for years hundred. And that here 100 years ago wrote that red wine is useful, and now conducted research that the alcohol is harmful in any amount.

3

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Arsen. Shnurkov, you wrote: AS> And that here 100 years ago wrote that red wine is useful, AS> and now conducted research that the alcohol is harmful in any amount. "That here to think? It is necessary to shake!" For that to wait that? While  arrive and tell as correctly ? The engine is. Experimentally did not find errors, confirmed operation. On the earth. Now in space launch - there send on errands. If will work there - that remarkably, the problem in necessity of hundreds fuel is solved for many years. It is possible to complete instead of fuel devices with solar batteries/jadryonym the reactor and to maneuver it is some, instead of until then while in tanks  is. And that the theory of operation of the engine did not understand that, so it is a matter of time and in this case it is unimportant. People used gravitation many millenia while Einstein did not explain  yes as.

4

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> the report Content about the same that was already allocated in a network, but in the last version of the document there is an official inference that EmDrive, created in NASA, develops pull in 1,2  on watt in vacuum. Thus experts during tests and after them tried to find a possible error in a construction of the test bed or the engine, as leads to appearance of pull or, at least, to its fixing. Errors and problems it has not been found that allows to say that the engine really works. No, it allows to say only that errors and problems is not found yet. Certainly a piece tempting, but too not suckers invented physics. Most likely something did not consider. While this nonsense does not start companions to adjust, the probability of an error remains very big.

5

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, vsb, you wrote: S>> the report Content about the same that was already allocated in a network, but in the last version of the document there is an official inference that EmDrive, created in NASA, develops pull in 1,2  on watt in vacuum. Thus experts during tests and after them tried to find a possible error in a construction of the test bed or the engine, as leads to appearance of pull or, at least, to its fixing. Errors and problems it has not been found that allows to say that the engine really works. vsb> is not present, it allows to say only that errors and problems is not found yet. It agree, it is s/is valid/most likely/, but not my moped vsb> Certainly a piece tempting, but too not suckers invented physics. Most likely something did not consider. While this nonsense does not start companions to adjust, the probability of an error remains very big. So.

6

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> Well, at least in NASA did not find to what to carp. Yes at all forums freaks of all colors heart-rendingly  about it. There pull monstrously small also I think simply is certain  effect, it turns out as in that history when at  Italians it (seems) a velocity of light it was exceeded.  - all into place rose.

7

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, DreamMaker, you wrote: DM> Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S>> Well, at least in NASA did not find to what to carp. DM> yes at all forums freaks of all colors heart-rendingly  about it. DM> there pull monstrously small also I think simply is certain  effect, it turns out as in that history when at  Italians it (seems) a velocity of light it was exceeded.  - all into place rose. At " Italians" an error found almost right after a loud statement, and here more than ten years measure, measure, but on places all does not rise in any way. The people shouting here are more similar to freaks that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments.

8

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: Inside the cat of Shryodingera  also creates force.

9

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, turbocode, you wrote: T> Inside the cat of Shryodingera  also creates force. . , he told - "". . . . .

10

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K> At " Italians" an error found almost right after a loud statement, and here more than ten years measure, measure, but on places all does not rise in any way. The people shouting here are more similar to freaks, K> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. And what with reproducibility of the engine? Somebody, except NASA measured?

11

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Michael7, you wrote: M> Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K>> At " Italians" an error found almost right after a loud statement, and here more than ten years measure, measure, but on places all does not rise in any way. The people shouting here are more similar to freaks, K>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. M> and what with reproducibility of the engine? Somebody, except NASA measured? Yes like very many people measured, 15 years already measure. Nobody showed that the engine does not work (for someone works, at someone is not clear, works or does not work). But all these experiments of the special do not cause trust, as "freaks" measured in the core. Serious scientists considered to be engaged below the advantage in such hogwash (and so after all that cannot clearly work). I so understand that NASA - the first, really, authoritative organization which led measurements. I hope that it forces serious scientists to look at last at this piece and... Either to find an error, or to confirm serviceability of the engine.

12

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Sheridan, you wrote: S> People used gravitation many millenia while Einstein did not explain  yes as. So after all did not explain, only gave the specified formulas  how to consider. The mechanism of a curvature of space in FROM does not speak.

13

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K> At " Italians" an error found almost right after a loud statement, and here more than ten years measure, measure, but on places all does not rise in any way. The people shouting here are more similar to freaks, well not almost at once, and after some months if storage does not change. Here the serious experience first however-thread. Result microscopic enough and, I suppose, there are variants. To fly meanwhile flies nothing and does not gather. K> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. About the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course?

14

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, DreamMaker, you wrote: K>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? So for example appropriate symmetry in a reality can and not to be

15

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: K>>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM>> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? EP> so for example appropriate symmetry in a reality there can and be no an in a reality it is that the astrophysics confirms. Now not the Middle Ages when it was possible to refute in pair simple experiences dogmas  and to make "the new physics". Too many experimental data are saved up and the existing theory if cracks, is faster only in the field of ultrahigh energies and other exotic states.

16

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

17

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, DreamMaker, you wrote: K>>>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM>>> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? EP>> so for example appropriate symmetry in a reality there can and be no DM> an in a reality it is That in a reality nobody knows, we have only models partially confirmed with some experiments. DM> that the astrophysics confirms. Aha - the model is stretched on experiments by a brute force by means of dark energy and any mother of a matter. DM> now not the Middle Ages when it was possible to refute in pair simple experiences dogmas  and to make "the new physics". Too many experimental data are saved up and the existing theory if cracks, is faster only in the field of ultrahigh energies and other exotic states. Most likely indeed, my point in other - in a rule reality can be any, have some special cases, to be as much as necessary harmonous or on the contrary ugly. And being in system there is no possibility to prove that the model is exceptional precisely corresponds to source codes. Even if all last experiments show 100 % coincidence, there is no warranty of that that tomorrow there will be no new phenomenon on the same experiments absolutely not not leaving in model.

18

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, DreamMaker, you wrote: DM> Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K>> At " Italians" an error found almost right after a loud statement, and here more than ten years measure, measure, but on places all does not rise in any way. The people shouting here are more similar to freaks, DM> well not almost at once, and after some months if storage does not change. DM> here the serious experience first however-thread. Result microscopic enough and, I suppose, there are variants. DM> to fly meanwhile flies nothing and does not gather. I did not speak that it is necessary to fly at once, but results of experiment at least deserve serious learning. K>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? Here it also irritates me. What else theorem? How it influences results of experiment? You can result here though one hundred theorems, what they prove? The theory is under construction on the basis of results of experiment, but in any way on the contrary. It is necessary to search for an error directed by experiment or in , to try to play back result in other conditions, and then already to speak about theorems.

19

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K>>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM>> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? K> here it also irritates me. What else theorem? How it influences results of experiment? You can result here though one hundred theorems, what they prove? Theorems superimpose a row of rigid restrictions and allow to do rigid outputs, BUT ONLY in a case if axioms/assumptions/hypotheses (concerning properties of the real world) underlying theorems are valid in a reality that certainly is not a fact in evidence, and strictly speaking cannot be proved the observer being in system - it is possible to speak only about certain statistical correspondence between model and an observable reality. K> the theory is under construction on the basis of results of experiment, but in any way on the contrary. Not absolutely so, it is not absolutely truly formulated more precisely. It is possible to construct at first the theory, then on the basis of it to construct experiment showing phenomenon described by this new theory - for example as was with hunting on gravitational  during solar eclipses.

20

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: EP> Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K>>>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM>>> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? K>> here it also irritates me. What else theorem? How it influences results of experiment? You can result here though one hundred theorems, what they prove? EP> theorems superimpose a row of rigid restrictions and allow to do rigid outputs, BUT ONLY in a case if axioms/assumptions/hypotheses (concerning properties of the real world) underlying theorems are valid in a reality that certainly is not a fact in evidence, and strictly speaking cannot be proved the observer being in system - it is possible to speak only about certain statistical correspondence between model and an observable reality. Many clever words, but I and did not understand from this, what it is necessary to do if the theory is not coordinated with experiment? K>> the theory is under construction on the basis of results of experiment, but in any way on the contrary. EP> Not absolutely so, it is not absolutely truly formulated more precisely. It is possible to construct at first the theory, then on the basis of it to construct experiment showing phenomenon described by this new theory - for example as was with hunting on gravitational  during solar eclipses. It is possible to construct the infinite set of consistent beautiful theories, but they have no sense if do not prove to be true experiment. Yes, it is possible to construct at first the theory, and then to make experiment confirming it. But before experiment it will be not the theory, and a hypothesis, and you will build it all the same on what basis that of existing theories of experiments and observations.

21

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K> Many clever words, but I and did not understand from this, what it is necessary to do if the theory is not coordinated with experiment? To add the theory, to search for another, etc. If "simple" words - I "on your side" in this question. My point that theorems allow to remove superfluous hypotheses (if they are deduced from others) to give certain restrictions, etc. K>>> the Theory is under construction on the basis of results of experiment, but in any way on the contrary. EP>> Not absolutely so, it is not absolutely truly formulated more precisely. It is possible to construct at first the theory, then on the basis of it to construct experiment showing phenomenon described by this new theory - for example as was with hunting on gravitational  during solar eclipses. K> it is possible to construct the infinite set of consistent beautiful theories, but they have no sense if do not prove to be true experiment. Rather  realities - yes, sense any.

22

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K> I did not speak that it is necessary to fly at once, but results of experiment at least deserve serious learning. To begin with they deserve independent acknowledgement in other laboratory. Meanwhile to speak there is nothing. K>>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM>> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? K> here it also irritates me. What else theorem? And why it does not surprise me? K> as it influences results of experiment? You can result here though one hundred theorems, what they prove? K> the theory is under construction on the basis of results of experiment, but in any way on the contrary. K> It is necessary to search for an error directed by experiment or in , to try to play back result in other conditions, and then already to speak about theorems. Well years 300 + back somewhere and was. Let's mix  brains of a turtle with the blood of the pregnant woman taken in a full moon  - tooth I give this compound a consumption treats. And theories any to you! If that, the Parisian academy of Sciences categorically does not consider perpetuums mobile from the end of 18 (!) centuries. Too on the base of "any theorems". More shortly, learn physics

23

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, DreamMaker, you wrote: DM> if that, the Parisian academy of Sciences categorically does not consider perpetuums mobile from the end of 18 (!) centuries. Too on the base of "any theorems". It and stones from the sky did not consider, while with a nose did not stick

24

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.

Hello, DreamMaker, you wrote: DM> Hello, ksandro, you wrote: K>> I did not speak that it is necessary to fly at once, but results of experiment at least deserve serious learning. DM> to begin with they deserve independent acknowledgement in other laboratory. Meanwhile to speak there is nothing. Completely with it it agree, I and speak about it. A problem that many scientists too well know the theory, and do not trust that this piece can work, and consequently do not want to waste time and money that on determination will not work. As a result independent acknowledgement or a refutation can strongly be tightened. K>>>> that, time theoretically it cannot work, it means and does not work and to spit on experiments. DM>>> about the theorem Noether you, probably, not in course? K>> here it also irritates me. What else theorem? DM> and why it does not surprise me? I correctly understand that if results of experiment contradict the theory these results simply we throw out because should learn the physicist, instead of any there not clear  to put. In the textbook all is written! K>> as it influences results of experiment? You can result here though one hundred theorems, what they prove? K>> the theory is under construction on the basis of results of experiment, but in any way on the contrary. K>> It is necessary to search for an error directed by experiment or in , to try to play back result in other conditions, and then already to speak about theorems. DM> well years 300 + back somewhere and was. We mix  brains of a turtle with the blood of the pregnant woman taken in a full moon  - tooth I give this compound a consumption treats. And theories any to you! Not only, there was still a theory that God created the world for 6 days. You do not trust? More shortly, learn the Bible! DM> if that, the Parisian academy of Sciences categorically does not consider perpetuums mobile from the end 18 (!) Centuries. Too on the base of "any theorems". DM> is shorter, learn physics And you under textbooks learned the physics to 18 century? In 18 century already existed mechanic Newton, and even the fundamental conservation law of mass has been opened.  the world pattern was already almost clear to all, and almost all theory of a universe has already been invented. It was necessary to complete fine details only

25

Re: "Impossible" engine EmDrive works.