1

Topic: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Pattern oil: "killing of a fine hypothesis by the vile fact" https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio … _Thrusters we Burn down the following " space-time", ...

2

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, c-smile, you wrote: CS> the Pattern oil: "killing of a fine hypothesis by the vile fact" It was all from the very beginning, it was necessary  in sacred wars.

3

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

We wait for exposure LENR

4

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, c-smile, you wrote: CS> the Pattern oil: "killing of a fine hypothesis by the vile fact" CS> https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio … _Thrusters do not distort, under the link there is no the unambiguous output all". There is an output" the factors insufficiently considered in the previous researches are found out ".

5

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> It was all from the very beginning, it was necessary  in sacred wars. All the same sometimes it is necessary to check even obvious it would seem to a thing. Without it sciences will not be.

6

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Michael7, you wrote: N>> It was all from the very beginning, it was necessary  in sacred wars. M> All the same sometimes it is necessary to check even obvious it would seem to a thing. Without it sciences will not be. The science not so works.

7

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: M>> All the same sometimes it is necessary to check even obvious it would seem to a thing. Without it sciences will not be. N> the science not so works. Well for example history with a stain of the Poisson you know? He has been assured that the dark stain in the middle of a direct line from a light source is a bosh, but actually so confirmed the wave nature of light (at classical level). Henry Gerts like too just was going not to find out in the beginning a radio-wave, and to prove that Maxwell's equations are erratic or something something like that. Then already seized and researched. Experiment of Majkelsona. Should confirm hobby of light (radio-waves) for an ether, but proved that the velocity of light does not depend on speed of a source. Even till now not all believe that it indeed. Einstein-Polish-Rozena paradox. Originally has been invented for the proof of incompleteness of the quantum theory as from it followed quantum . Absolutely on 100 % truth it is not proved yet, but meanwhile all made experiments confirm that it (if Bell's inequalities are more exact) is fulfilled. It generally one of the most fantastic results of the modern physics. It literally the first that came to a head from fundamental in a science when obvious after check it appeared wrong.

8

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Michael7, you wrote: M> It literally the first that came to a head from fundamental in a science when obvious after check it appeared wrong. And all enumerated cases are not similar to a situation with a bucket.

9

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Ejnstok Fajr, you wrote: > we Wait for exposure LENR More likely, exposure

10

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> the Science not so works. To You whence the nobility. Approximately and works, someone does nonsense, someone refutes another.

11

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, denisko, you wrote: N>> the Science not so works. D> to You whence the nobility. Really. D> approximately and works, someone does nonsense, someone refutes another. In 1775 the Parisian academy of Sciences made the decision not to consider projects of a perpetuum mobile because of obvious impossibility of their creation of Nonsense and refutation happen different. Some count for something, some - are not present. The bucket - is not necessary initially and obviously.

12

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, denisko, you wrote: N> it is valid. Well generally a reasonable question to the person without formation and publications. N> in 1775 the Parisian academy of Sciences made decision not to consider projects of a perpetuum mobile because of obvious impossibility of their creation N> Nonsense and refutations happen different. Some count for something, some - are not present. The bucket - is not necessary initially and obviously. By what criteria it is not necessary, it is simply interesting. Why radiation  costed, and the bucket is not necessary?

13

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, denisko, you wrote: N>> In 1775 the Parisian academy of Sciences made decision not to consider projects of a perpetuum mobile because of obvious impossibility of their creation N>> Nonsense and refutations happen different. Some count for something, some - are not present. The bucket - is not necessary initially and obviously. D> by what criteria it is not necessary, it is simply interesting. Why radiation  costed, and the bucket is not necessary? Because a bucket: 1. Initially it has not been justified, it was direct announcement of authors. Laziness to search for the text, but already initial postulate showed that it is a question about next . 2. Against their general low competence they tried to refute quite fundamental laws. Such attempts becomes millions, but from them the price have well if units, and they look not how in a case with a bucket. 3. To a heap if to track a subject the first checks lowered effect of a bucket on orders that actually  showed its senselessness.

14

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, denisko, you wrote: N>> it is valid. D> well generally a reasonable question to the person without formation and publications. And from what you took, what I without formation? I without the diploma, it not the same that without formation.

15

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, wildwind, you wrote: W> Hello, c-smile, you wrote: CS>> the Pattern oil: "killing of a fine hypothesis by the vile fact" CS>> https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio … _Thrusters W> do not distort, under the link there is no the unambiguous output all". There is an output" the factors insufficiently considered in the previous researches are found out ". The unambiguous output is not present, but now supporters already should make again experiments already taking into account these considered factors most not enough. So it most likely in a reality is valid" EMDrive all ". Simply present scientists from believing people always doubt difference and prefer not to do loud statements.

16

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, Michael7, you wrote: M>> It literally the first that came to a head from fundamental in a science when obvious after check it appeared wrong. N> and all enumerated cases are not similar to a situation with a bucket. Why are not similar? In a situation with a bucket too there were results of experiment, which  theories. It is necessary or to refute or confirm these results with other experiments. And simply to speak does not work, because so to bibles the physics textbook it is written, it not scientific, but the religious approach. Pay attention, even in the given research authors do not shout that the bucket does not work, and only state that they found factors which have not been considered in the previous researches. Any loud statements, at once it is visible that scientists who even treat the results with distrust,  wrote.

17

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, ksandro, you wrote: N>> And all enumerated cases are not similar to a situation with a bucket. K> why are not similar? In a situation with a bucket too there were results of experiment, which  theories. Not, there were no results of experiments. Was  from certain low-standard persons.

18

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, ksandro, you wrote: N>>> And all enumerated cases are not similar to a situation with a bucket. K>> why are not similar? In a situation with a bucket too there were results of experiment, which  theories. N> not, there were no results of experiments. Was  from certain low-standard persons. Like there were the results received in one of  NASA. Can there scientists were and not the most authoritative, but it precisely were not ufologists and not bio-energetics. Well, I certainly understand that many representatives of truly scientific community instead of understanding, would prefer to declare experiment by antiscientific heresy, and experimenters to burn on a fire that another  was. But in a science not all is lost, and there were people who decided to understand all the same in essence, and to try to understand whence such results of experiment undertook.

19

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Not, there were no results of experiments. Was  from certain low-standard persons. Pay attention, in the given subject from you there is no argument in essence, but only subjective/emotional. Somehow it is not similar to the person with formation.

20

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, wildwind, you wrote: N>> Not, there were no results of experiments. Was  from certain low-standard persons. W> pay attention, in the given subject from you there is no argument in essence, but only subjective/emotional. Somehow it is not similar to the person with formation. Well apprx. And I see that people with unscientific mentality produce wished for the valid, and even is simple  distortions. Freaks from physics all history was much. Accordingly, if the person clearly produces wished for the valid: 1. It can be ignored. 2. He can explain that it is not right. 3. It is possible to show simple experiment that it is not right (to show it to not mandatory freak, show to other people, exposing the freak the idiot, as though speaking: it is not necessary so). In a case with a bucket the main postulates initially sounded antiscientifically, hence it was advanced by explicit freaks. I will remind: We do not know as, we made something, and we think that broke a pack of the most fundamental physical laws having  consequences. Aha, as if the same  millions times did not hear earlier (see a phrase about the French academy). Already on it it would be possible to close, since one business when the checked scientist precisely capable carefully, is forged to formulate the task, he understands boundaries of possible effect and, thus, does erratic outputs. All of us people, all we are mistaken, but here at least there is a soil for talk. And another matter when to you incompetent persons come, with the story that they broke fundamental laws with  consequences, in area which is already studied up and down which bring to you a device, the remote which analogs are used already one hundred years and nobody noted any this sort of deviations. , from such release is not present and will not be, to spend for them time - it is not necessary. All right, a heap of people not owning elements of the scientific approach lit up idea. There were enthusiasts who decided to check up. They led full-scale , and making hardly better preparation, at once received result in tens times less, from the initial. What does it mean? That was not primary the factor, there was badly delivered experiment. I.e. both the theory , and practice. And both these subjects have been closed many years ago. And those who did not understand it - freaks and to speak with them in essence, generally it is senseless.

21

Re: EMDrive everything, and is a pity

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> And those who it did not understand - freaks and to speak with them in essence, generally it is senseless. What for to repeat all the same? Your position is extreme clear. It is not necessary to listen to freaks, because they freaks. Only here it does not need to be defended. Go with it in ST. Here another story.