I watched this since the 1st announcement by the UK scientist who invented it. Now successfully tested by China and NASA. For those versed in physics I don't have to tell you how Earth shattering this news is. For those who skipped physical science classes in Jr. High and H.S., let's just say that this is probably the biggest breakthrough in physics that will occur during your lifetime.
party-smiley-020.gif (6.33 KiB) Viewed 7095 times
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
Can you imagine? Being able to build spacecraft that use continuous acceleration? Even at 1/100 of a G that puts Mars (using median distance) just 37 days away from Earth, Jupiter (and its moons) just 65 days away!!!!
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
I wouldn't celebrate just yet, there is a lot more "proving" that actually needs to be done.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Treebore wrote:I wouldn't celebrate just yet, there is a lot more "proving" that actually needs to be done.
Well, NASA tested and it works. China's space agency tested and it works. It has been producing thrust at the lab where created in UK for YEARS. I checked with a good friend of mine that is a current JPL rocket scientist and they are already working on plans as it has proven to produce thrust. I don't know where you are getting your data from...
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
History. There have been many "break throughs" over the years, that early on looked like they worked, and then didn't. So I'm going to wait to celebrate.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
"history" doesn't trump the scientific method of empirical observation & testing of physical universe phenomenon. This one has been tested for YEARS. It works, has worked for several years and is currently working in at least 3 separate labs as we speak.
It would be like waiting for more proof after the Wright's, Vuia & Ellehammer were successful...
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
That is awesome! So interesting. I wonder what applications of this we will see in my lifetime? (I'm 40, so there are a good many years left for them to do cool stuff, if I'm lucky)
Holy crap. My contact said that BAE has been working with the original inventor and says that their tests indicate thrust ~ 30 kN/kW, (3 tons per KW), if using superconductors (ones that exist), is within design limitation they currently have.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
"history" doesn't trump the scientific method of empirical observation & testing of physical universe phenomenon. This one has been tested for YEARS. It works, has worked for several years and is currently working in at least 3 separate labs as we speak.
It would be like waiting for more proof after the Wright's, Vuia & Ellehammer were successful...
I know, you are chatting with someone who has two Science degree's.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
"history" doesn't trump the scientific method of empirical observation & testing of physical universe phenomenon. This one has been tested for YEARS. It works, has worked for several years and is currently working in at least 3 separate labs as we speak.
It would be like waiting for more proof after the Wright's, Vuia & Ellehammer were successful...
I know, you are chatting with someone who has two Science degree's.
Great!
Now, back to out regularly scheduled info...
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
There is a long-standing disagreement between Traveller grognards regarding reactionless thrusters. The general thought is that they are impossible. I never got involved in those types of discussions because they eventually devolved into arguments about useless minutiae in the Third Imperium setting, but it's good to know that the game got it right all along.
If BAE can do in ~6 yrs what it believes possible; Usable, manned flying craft could be built that were very easy to operate, FAR, FAR more reliable than even the best commercial craft and, very economical. That is if the gov's of the various countries to clamp down on the drives use in the name of "national security". Cheap, personal intercontinental craft would be feasible. Gov's would HATE that with more passion than I could convey here.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
Traveller wrote:There is a long-standing disagreement between Traveller grognards regarding reactionless thrusters. The general thought is that they are impossible. I never got involved in those types of discussions because they eventually devolved into arguments about useless minutiae in the Third Imperium setting, but it's good to know that the game got it right all along.
Well, to be fair, it violates what we believe true about the physical universe. But, most people have NO idea how little we really understand. We are still totally clueless about underlying reason why gravity exists. We don't even really understand why mass can have inertia.
But, it is cool that MT writers came VERY close. Sci-fi authors often accurately predict future science though.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
Again, don't start celebrating too soon, there are a lot of questions that still need to be answered, etc... So despite what Arduin wants to think, etc... be patient, and wait. This has been proven not to work before, so if it works now, it still has a lot to do to adequately prove itself.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Treebore wrote:Again, don't start celebrating too soon, there are a lot of questions that still need to be answered, etc... So despite what Arduin wants to think, etc... be patient, and wait. This has been proven not to work before, so if it works now, it still has a lot to do to adequately prove itself.
Treebore, put up the questions (YOU know from the data given) that aren't answered in the exhaustive testing by NASA, China & UK, that shows that it isn't producing thrust or, please start another thread.
I'm asking nicely.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
Seems like when I interviewed Arthur C. Clarke over 10 years ago, he said that sci-fi authors were horrible at predicting future science or technology. I'd have to dig up the cd to see exactly what he said.
tylermo wrote:Seems like when I interviewed Arthur C. Clarke over 10 years ago, he said that sci-fi authors were horrible at predicting future science or technology. I'd have to dig up the cd to see exactly what he said.
Hmm, start with Wells & Verne... Lots of good stuff there. Ion drives from Roddenberry. Ray guns turned into lasers. I could sit here and start naming then from my admittedly feeble and faulty memory. I'm not interested in an opinion but stats.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
True, I was just paraphrasing some comment from Mr. Clarke. Not fact, was just saying. As for Star Trek, they also had some sort of technical advisor. May have been an Air Force captain. I'd have to revisit some dvd special features. I think that guy (name and details escape me) may have been responsible for some of those computer monitors (sitting in desks in the crew quarters), among other things. Those monitors looked very much like what we had until the flat screens. Just saying.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Treebore wrote:Again, don't start celebrating too soon, there are a lot of questions that still need to be answered, etc... So despite what Arduin wants to think, etc... be patient, and wait. This has been proven not to work before, so if it works now, it still has a lot to do to adequately prove itself.
Treebore, put up the questions (YOU know from the data given) that aren't answered in the exhaustive testing by NASA, China & UK, that shows that it isn't producing thrust or, please start another thread.
I'm asking nicely.
Or what? Get over yourself.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Treebore wrote:Again, don't start celebrating too soon, there are a lot of questions that still need to be answered, etc... So despite what Arduin wants to think, etc... be patient, and wait. This has been proven not to work before, so if it works now, it still has a lot to do to adequately prove itself.
Treebore, put up the questions (YOU know from the data given) that aren't answered in the exhaustive testing by NASA, China & UK, that shows that it isn't producing thrust or, please start another thread.
I'm asking nicely.
Or what? Get over yourself.
BLATANT Trolling reported.
Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill
Treebore wrote:Again, don't start celebrating too soon, there are a lot of questions that still need to be answered, etc... So despite what Arduin wants to think, etc... be patient, and wait. This has been proven not to work before, so if it works now, it still has a lot to do to adequately prove itself.
Treebore, put up the questions (YOU know from the data given) that aren't answered in the exhaustive testing by NASA, China & UK, that shows that it isn't producing thrust or, please start another thread.
I'm asking nicely.
Or what? Get over yourself.
BLATANT Trolling reported.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Maybe you two ought to put each other on ignore. But if you did that I wouldn't be able to offer popcorn.
That said, Tree you claim to have proof the drive does not work, despite claims to the contrary from people far smarter than all of us. So cite your proof. Give links.
Traveller wrote:
That said, Tree you claim to have proof the drive does not work, despite claims to the contrary from people far smarter than all of us. So cite your proof. Give links.
I never said it doesn't work, I just said to not celebrate just yet, and that in the past it hadn't worked. Plus I did give a link, 6 or 7 posts up. Which says pretty much what I said, it looks promising, but it still has a ways to go to get excited about. See, I follow over 500 Scientists in my Google Feed, so I have been very aware of why this is cool, but still not something to get overly excited about. Yet.
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
Treebore wrote:This has been proven not to work before...
So you're denying saying this? If it has been proven not to work before, according to your own words, you should be able to provide evidence to support the claim. The link you provided isn't evidence.
The original link was to Wired. Tree responded with a link to Vice, but of course if you get on google you'll find a number of articles calling this into question. For example, http://space.io9.com/a-new-thruster-pus ... 1615513781 .
Now, I am hesitant to say just because an article in some news aggregator casts doubt on something that there is similar doubt among credible scientists; we certainly see this used often to cast doubt on things where science is largely in agreement. My day job is nowhere near that sort of thing, so I don't know who is and isn't credible. Certainly, though, the links given would give someone as much reason to express doubt as an article in Wired would give one to believe.
It seems sort of silly to ask Treebore for detailed proof when the original article is just a newsy summary. It's also sort of silly to believe that starting a thread lets you decide what people can post in it.
I think this is cool and I'd like for it to be true, but for the time being everything is getting filtered through the sensational media.
Treebore wrote:This has been proven not to work before...
So you're denying saying this? If it has been proven not to work before, according to your own words, you should be able to provide evidence to support the claim. The link you provided isn't evidence.
And Tree doesn't need my help and I won't post any more in this thread, but I am guessing he really meant "not proven to work before" rather than "proven not to work before".
