NASA engineers

[dystopian]

I think people here are not aware how retarded this whole idea is.
What retarded british engineer suggested was a tapered tube closed on both sides. Fill it with EM radiation and since ends have different area it will produce overall thrust. He ignored force on tapered walls. By the same logic pretty much any bottle filed with air would fly away if left alone in space. And this is what NASA considered spending time and money testing.

What you fail to realize is that someone could discover an effect and build a device around it that actually works, while simultaneously putting forth a completely ridiculous explanation for why it works. The latter does not invalidate the former.

Well at least they proved that chineese engineers are retards, because their measurement was reduced 100 times by simply using more accurate equipment.

From what I've read, the Chinese used a somewhat different device that supposedly operates along similar lines; meaning it might not just be down to testing equipment. But that's exactly the sort of thing that only *repeated* testing can establish.

 

[barbos]

What you fail to realize is that someone could discover an effect and build a device around it that actually works, while simultaneously putting forth a completely ridiculous explanation for why it works. The latter does not invalidate the former.

Well at least they proved that chineese engineers are retards, because their measurement was reduced 100 times by simply using more accurate equipment.

From what I've read, the Chinese used a somewhat different device that supposedly operates along similar lines; meaning it might not just be down to testing equipment. But that's exactly the sort of thing that only *repeated* testing can establish.

You completely missed the point. Try to get the point and THEN post.

 

[James Brown]

This is only one thing they have done research on. How does that make the entire organization retarded?

Internet servers are powered by hyperbole and sweeping generalizations. If your network speed seems to be declining lately, it's because not enough people are using Caps Lock.

 

[steve_bnk]

I don't see anything wrong with the test setup and experiment. I understand the engineering and physics of the experiment. The only thing new to me was the use of liquid metal contacts to fulminate wire drag.

The calibration procedure looked good.

It was a quick manual exploratory experiment with lessons learned that will feed into the next iteration.

From my experience these kinds of things always end up being an evolutionary process, IOW 'the scientific method'.

'….This paper describes the test campaigns designed to investigate and demonstrate viability of using classical magnetoplasmadynamics to obtain a propulsive momentum transfer via the quantum vacuum virtual plasma. This paper will not address the physics of the quantum vacuum plasma thruster (QVPT), but instead will describe the recent test campaign..'


This was one step in a program. I do not see where Barbos gets bent out of shape. The possibility of tapping into a distributed quantum energy source is an established theory. There are no claims of actual success in the paper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_vacuum_plasma_thruster

'...Interaction with quantum vacuum plasma is hypothesized to be the cause for thrust produced by an experimental engine (abbreviated to "Q-thruster") proposed for use in deep-space propulsion. It is claimed by various experimenters, including a research team led by Harold G. White at the NASA Johnson Space Center, that novel physics may be responsible for thrust observed from prototypes. If it is correct that quantum vacuum fluctuations can support thrust sufficient to propel a spacecraft, a spacecraft fitted with such a thruster would not need to carry any propellant for its operation.

Using a torsion pendulum, White's team has measured approximately 30-50 micronewtons of thrust from a microwave cavity resonator designed by Guido Fetta in an attempt at propellant-less propulsion. Using the same measurement equipment, a non-zero force was also measured on a "null" resonator that was not designed to experience any such force, which Brady et al. suggest hints at "interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma".[1] If correct, this would essentially be a proof-of-concept for quantum vacuum plasma thrusters. John Baez has described this as "graduate-level baloney", adding that " 'Quantum vacuum virtual plasma' is something you'd say if you failed a course in quantum field theory and then smoked too much weed. There's no such thing as 'virtual plasma' "[2]. All measurements were performed at atmospheric pressure, presumably in contact with air. So far, the research has not been published in a peer reviewed journal, only as a conference paper.[3] Chinese scientists have found similar results.[4]...'

I'd hardly call it a waste. The ability to extract energy and do work from a quantum source would be the most important science in human history.

You never know where those hose pesky anomalies will lead. Those who call it graduate school baloney would appear to be ignorant of the history of science. Einstein made his creds on the Photoelectric Effect, he got no traction with Relativity. Time and space are not absolute? Baloney!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect#19th_century

'...In 1839, Alexandre Edmond Becquerel discovered the photovoltaic effect while studying the effect of light on electrolytic cells.[17] Though not equivalent to the photoelectric effect, his work on photovoltaics was instrumental in showing a strong relationship between light and electronic properties of materials. In 1873, Willoughby Smith discovered photoconductivity in selenium while testing the metal for its high resistance properties in conjunction with his work involving submarine telegraph cables..

In 1905, Albert Einstein solved this apparent paradox by describing light as composed of discrete quanta, now called photons, rather than continuous waves. '

Cold Fusion was quickly shown to be non repeatable. NASA got similar results to the Chinese. I'd say worthy of further study.

 

[dystopian]

You completely missed the point. Try to get the point and THEN post.

Irony, the gift that never stops giving.

 

[barbos]

I don't see anything wrong with the test setup and experiment. I understand the engineering and physics of the experiment. The only thing new to me was the use of liquid metal contacts to fulminate wire drag.

The calibration procedure looked good.

It was a quick manual exploratory experiment with lessons learned that will feed into the next iteration.

From my experience these kinds of things always end up being an evolutionary process, IOW 'the scientific method'.

'….This paper describes the test campaigns designed to investigate and demonstrate viability of using classical magnetoplasmadynamics to obtain a propulsive momentum transfer via the quantum vacuum virtual plasma. This paper will not address the physics of the quantum vacuum plasma thruster (QVPT), but instead will describe the recent test campaign..'


This was one step in a program. I do not see where Barbos gets bent out of shape. The possibility of tapping into a distributed quantum energy source is an established theory. There are no claims of actual success in the paper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_vacuum_plasma_thruster

'...Interaction with quantum vacuum plasma is hypothesized to be the cause for thrust produced by an experimental engine (abbreviated to "Q-thruster") proposed for use in deep-space propulsion. It is claimed by various experimenters, including a research team led by Harold G. White at the NASA Johnson Space Center, that novel physics may be responsible for thrust observed from prototypes. If it is correct that quantum vacuum fluctuations can support thrust sufficient to propel a spacecraft, a spacecraft fitted with such a thruster would not need to carry any propellant for its operation.

Using a torsion pendulum, White's team has measured approximately 30-50 micronewtons of thrust from a microwave cavity resonator designed by Guido Fetta in an attempt at propellant-less propulsion. Using the same measurement equipment, a non-zero force was also measured on a "null" resonator that was not designed to experience any such force, which Brady et al. suggest hints at "interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma".[1] If correct, this would essentially be a proof-of-concept for quantum vacuum plasma thrusters. John Baez has described this as "graduate-level baloney", adding that " 'Quantum vacuum virtual plasma' is something you'd say if you failed a course in quantum field theory and then smoked too much weed. There's no such thing as 'virtual plasma' "[2]. All measurements were performed at atmospheric pressure, presumably in contact with air. So far, the research has not been published in a peer reviewed journal, only as a conference paper.[3] Chinese scientists have found similar results.[4]...'

I'd hardly call it a waste. The ability to extract energy and do work from a quantum source would be the most important science in human history.

You never know where those hose pesky anomalies will lead. Those who call it graduate school baloney would appear to be ignorant of the history of science. Einstein made his creds on the Photoelectric Effect, he got no traction with Relativity. Time and space are not absolute? Baloney!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect#19th_century

'...In 1839, Alexandre Edmond Becquerel discovered the photovoltaic effect while studying the effect of light on electrolytic cells.[17] Though not equivalent to the photoelectric effect, his work on photovoltaics was instrumental in showing a strong relationship between light and electronic properties of materials. In 1873, Willoughby Smith discovered photoconductivity in selenium while testing the metal for its high resistance properties in conjunction with his work involving submarine telegraph cables..

In 1905, Albert Einstein solved this apparent paradox by describing light as composed of discrete quanta, now called photons, rather than continuous waves. '

Cold Fusion was quickly shown to be non repeatable. NASA got similar results to the Chinese. I'd say worthy of further study.

Really? nothing wrong with experiment?
Lack of errors in measurement, no?
Use of bullshit terms like "quantum vacuum plasma"?
I wondered why they did not go with hydrinos.

Yes, NASA did get similar to chineese results - that is their measurement is within errors from zero, it's just NASA apparatus is 100 times more accurate than chinese garbage.

 

[Emily Lake]

Lack of errors in measurement, no?

How do you measure errors in measurement, barbos?

To my knowledge, they come in two forms:

1. Known margin of error in the equipment doing the measuring
2. Differences in a large number of repeated measurements

Which of these do you believe NASA did not report to your satisfaction?

 

[barbos]

Lack of errors in measurement, no?

How do you measure errors in measurement, barbos?

To my knowledge, they come in two forms:

1. Known margin of error in the equipment doing the measuring
2. Differences in a large number of repeated measurements

Which of these do you believe NASA did not report to your satisfaction?

Both

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How do you measure errors in measurement, barbos?

To my knowledge, they come in two forms:

1. Known margin of error in the equipment doing the measuring
2. Differences in a large number of repeated measurements

Which of these do you believe NASA did not report to your satisfaction?

Both

I don't think either of these is the answer--NASA knows enough not to say it worked if the error bars includes zero.

Either the drive is real (and we have a lot of physics to rethink) or there's something they aren't expecting in the test apparatus.

 

[barbos]

Both

I don't think either of these is the answer--NASA knows enough not to say it worked if the error bars includes zero.

I have doubts NASA knows enough.
In peer review (in physics at least) zero error bars gets paper thrown out automatically accompanied with a lot of expletives.

Either the drive is real (and we have a lot of physics to rethink) or there's something they aren't expecting in the test apparatus.

Wow, what informative conclusion!

 

[steve_bnk]

It is a brief paper presented as a summary at a conference. The link says libertarian. An unformed libertarian site posted it as an example of waste. If you want details you could email the principal..

1. The displacement sensor is calibrated against a know mechanical length.
2. The torsion balance is calibrated by electrostatically inducing a force. Pretty clever.
3. The RF section checked by a network analyzer.
4. Local geology evaluated, system placed o a vibration isolation table.
5. Removed the cavity and put a resistor in place to check for radiated systemic effects.

Procedurally sounds like what I would do.

Subjectively the difference in magnitude between the null value and test values indicates real thrust.

The spring constant o the balance can be measured. The only question I
would have is how the electrostatically induced force is calibrated for the balance calibration.

The RF network analyzer cal and the reference for the displacement sensor I’d consider trivial.

NASA is a large distributed organization. To say 'NASA engineers' as a group is uniformed. Internally NASA is undoubtedly highly competitive. There are always exceptions but I doubt you would get a project like that without having a rep for competence. If it were a truly sloppy experiment I expect internal peer pressure and crtique would be high let alone making an open presentation ooenng up external critique.

 

[Underseer]

It is a brief paper presented as a summary at a conference. The link says libertarian. An unformed libertarian site posted it as an example of waste. If you want details you could email the principal..

1. The displacement sensor is calibrated against a know mechanical length.
2. The torsion balance is calibrated by electrostatically inducing a force. Pretty clever.
3. The RF section checked by a network analyzer.
4. Local geology evaluated, system placed o a vibration isolation table.
5. Removed the cavity and put a resistor in place to check for radiated systemic effects.

Procedurally sounds like what I would do.

Subjectively the difference in magnitude between the null value and test values indicates real thrust.

The spring constant o the balance can be measured. The only question I
would have is how the electrostatically induced force is calibrated for the balance calibration.

The RF network analyzer cal and the reference for the displacement sensor I’d consider trivial.

NASA is a large distributed organization. To say 'NASA engineers' as a group is uniformed. Internally NASA is undoubtedly highly competitive. There are always exceptions but I doubt you would get a project like that without having a rep for competence. If it were a truly sloppy experiment I expect internal peer pressure and crtique would be high let alone making an open presentation ooenng up external critique.

NASA is a government agency, therefore you're wrong that they are anything other than completely incompetent. A Fair And Balanced^TM source showed you the proof and you still would not believe in the facts before your very eyes. Why do you hate our freedom? What's so great about having the government rule every aspect of our lives? Why are you a statist?

 

[steve_bnk]

It is a brief paper presented as a summary at a conference. The link says libertarian. An unformed libertarian site posted it as an example of waste. If you want details you could email the principal..

1. The displacement sensor is calibrated against a know mechanical length.
2. The torsion balance is calibrated by electrostatically inducing a force. Pretty clever.
3. The RF section checked by a network analyzer.
4. Local geology evaluated, system placed o a vibration isolation table.
5. Removed the cavity and put a resistor in place to check for radiated systemic effects.

Procedurally sounds like what I would do.

Subjectively the difference in magnitude between the null value and test values indicates real thrust.

The spring constant o the balance can be measured. The only question I
would have is how the electrostatically induced force is calibrated for the balance calibration.

The RF network analyzer cal and the reference for the displacement sensor I’d consider trivial.

NASA is a large distributed organization. To say 'NASA engineers' as a group is uniformed. Internally NASA is undoubtedly highly competitive. There are always exceptions but I doubt you would get a project like that without having a rep for competence. If it were a truly sloppy experiment I expect internal peer pressure and crtique would be high let alone making an open presentation ooenng up external critique.

NASA is a government agency, therefore you're wrong that they are anything other than completely incompetent. A Fair And Balanced^TM source showed you the proof and you still would not believe in the facts before your very eyes. Why do you hate our freedom? What's so great about having the government rule every aspect of our lives? Why are you a statist?

I worked in some very competitive environments in the defense, aerospace, and commercial worlds.

Engineers and scientists are skeptical and competitive . It is human nature and how they are trained in school, it doesn't matter what the organization is. There will always be somebody out to prove you wrong. I have been in some fierce peer reviews.

It is never perfect of course. Personal bias, group politics, and the bureaucracy can and does at times override what is technically correct. There are always people in a larger organization who are less than able and are politically protected by personal relationships. People who's work quality is moctably below the group but is never taken to task on it.

When I worked at a Lockheed division they had around 3000 engineers ad scientists in the division.. On a project I was running I was forced to take on an incompetent engineer by my boss. They were related through in-laws. I chronically had to redo his work.

You will see the same thing in the commercial world.

 

[beero1000]

 

[Underseer]

NASA is a government agency, therefore you're wrong that they are anything other than completely incompetent. A Fair And Balanced^TM source showed you the proof and you still would not believe in the facts before your very eyes. Why do you hate our freedom? What's so great about having the government rule every aspect of our lives? Why are you a statist?

I worked in some very competitive environments in the defense, aerospace, and commercial worlds.

Engineers and scientists are skeptical and competitive . It is human nature and how they are trained in school, it doesn't matter what the organization is. There will always be somebody out to prove you wrong. I have been in some fierce peer reviews.

It is never perfect of course. Personal bias, group politics, and the bureaucracy can and does at times override what is technically correct. There are always people in a larger organization who are less than able and are politically protected by personal relationships. People who's work quality is moctably below the group but is never taken to task on it.

When I worked at a Lockheed division they had around 3000 engineers ad scientists in the division.. On a project I was running I was forced to take on an incompetent engineer by my boss. They were related through in-laws. I chronically had to redo his work.

You will see the same thing in the commercial world.

What do you mean "it doesn't matter what the organization is"? How can you even make such an insane and absurd claim? It's because of people like you that we currently live under the brutal rule of a socialist dictator. It's because of people like you that we lost all of our freedom. Why do you want the government to rule everything in your life? What's so great about communism? Don't you know that only organizations funded by rich people, large corporations, and/or banks can ever be competent at anything?

 

[Elixir]

But they are not using science at all.

What do you call trying stuff to see if it works?

Since when Chinese engineers became authority on science?

Since they established a positive balance of trade with the US, probably. Nonetheless, "made in China" means you better test it first.

The thing is, these NASA imbeciles addressed hypothetical "physics". Of course it was utter baloney, but they did. It's a shame.

Thing about hypothetical physics - it's always a battle to make it non-hypothetical. The only two ways to do that are to either faslify it or find a lot of support for it.

 

[barbos]

Not all engineers are retards, but when you come across really retarded idea, chances are good, engineer is behind it.

Thing about hypothetical physics - it's always a battle to make it non-hypothetical. The only two ways to do that are to either faslify it or find a lot of support for it.

And why are engineers doing physics here? Why do their "physics" have to be utter nonsense?

 

[Elixir]

And why are engineers doing physics here? Why do their "physics" have to be utter nonsense?

Just a guess, but from the photos there was considerable engineering required, and:

This paper will not address the physics of the quantum vacuum plasma thruster (QVPT), but instead will describe the recent
test campaign.

 

[TacticalLoco]

Not all engineers are retards, but when you come across really retarded idea, chances are good, engineer is behind it.

Thing about hypothetical physics - it's always a battle to make it non-hypothetical. The only two ways to do that are to either faslify it or find a lot of support for it.

And why are engineers doing physics here? Why do their "physics" have to be utter nonsense?

I don't know barbos. But I can't take your bullying thread seriously since you are not even smart enough to refrain from calling people by horrible and pejorative names. Why don't you just slink off and find some dark skinned engineers you can call nigger? Huh? You fucking bully!

 

[skepticalbip]

Not all engineers are retards, but when you come across really retarded idea, chances are good, engineer is behind it.

Thing about hypothetical physics - it's always a battle to make it non-hypothetical. The only two ways to do that are to either faslify it or find a lot of support for it.

And why are engineers doing physics here? Why do their "physics" have to be utter nonsense?

The same reason that every university with a decent school of science (and funding) wanted to try to duplicate the Fleischmann–Pons claims to have achieved cold fusion. If there was something to it then they would be in on the ground floor in describing a "new physics". If there was nothing to it then they would be noted as identifying the claim as nonsense.