is the EM Drive a hoax?

>>8304650
Yes, obviously. Only people from 4chan and a few from Reddit were ever tricked over this.

Be sure to donate more to SeaShell on reddit XD totally not a scam

>>8304657
>>8304656

then why isn't there a paper explaining why and how it is a hoax?

>>8304669
http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.00494

>>8304650
Turbulet flow in NS equations hasn't been solved.
are NS equations a hoax?

>>8304699
Conversely anything that presumes to 'solve' a non-linear dynamical problem like turbulence is very much a hoax.

>>8304669
Because there isn't a need to debunk rather weak results claiming violation of conservation laws.

>>8304687
>http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.00494
All this says is that making a massless drive produce useful amounts of thrust would violate thermodynamics, it doesnt say the principle itself does

>>8304650
Either a hoax or is just not fully understood how it operates.

iirc the observed thrust was tiny enough that it could still be written off to instrument error. If they make one that can actually propel something with significant mass, then it'll be worth investigating

>>8304770
>The fact that the EM drive, or any other reactionless drive that has a thrust-to-power
ratio greater than a photon-emitting device, would enable a perpetual motion machine of the
first kind suggests that such a device cannot exist. This objection is not as easily explained
away as the conservation of momentum objection to a reactionless drive, because this result
suggests than a source of free and infinite energy is already at our technological disposal.
Any conditions placed on the operation of the hypothetical “space drive” in order to make
is consistent with the First Law would also render it useless as a propulsion device; if it can
work as a propulsion device, it can also function as a perpetual motion machine of the first
kind. Further investment into investigating this concept should be tempered by the history
of attempts to realize perpetual motion machines.

No, in principle such drives would never work

I mean unless they show that it is conclusively instrument error what is the issue with looking further into it? What is the harm?

>>8304809
What is the harm in investigating invisible magic unicorns that shit rainbows? After all no one has proved they cannot exist. The memedrive on the other hand clearly violates conservation of energy. So investigate those unicorns first.

>>8304809
the harm is that taxpayer dollars are going into a project that a fucking highschool retard can debunk in 5 minutes.

there's literally nothing interesting about this device. It's just a front to hide the actual electro-gravitics stolen from tesla's lab before it was ransacked by the government.

believe in the power of the 3,6,9

>>8304650
it's either a hoax, or something unknown is influencing the measurements taken around it.

either way it is supremely unlikely we've made a machine that doesn't obey our current understanding of physics.

>>8304809
There is no harm in this. The problem is that they ran with their weak results to the public without looking further into it and eliminating noise as a potential cause.

>>8304789
how is this a fact

>>8304828
all tax payer spending is completely wasted, whether its spent on the meme drive or welfare, its all just being burnt up.

>>8304906
>free energy device enthusiast also doesn't understand anything about the economy

What a surprise!

File: emdrive-cavity-diagram.jpg (33KB, 736x350px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 736x350px

It's not really a "hoax"

The EM radiation forms an interference pattern, and the momentum comes from the efflux.

>>8304906
>how is this a fact
If the memedrive had the thrust to power ratio it's claimed to have, you could make it go around a track until it reached a speed at which its kinetic energy exceeded the amount of energy that you put into it. Then all you would have to do is use a regenerative brake to recover the excess energy and you would have free energy.

>>8304948
Then how can it be more efficient than a photon rocket? Also, that's not how it's claimed to work.

>>8304966
>claimed to work
by idiots

That's how it works. The momentum exactly equates the nodes for the lost photons.

I'm not sure how it's efficiency compares to a photon rocket so I can't speak to that.

>>8304966
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/adva/6/6/10.1063/1.4953807

>>8304906
>how is this a fact
>how is physics fact

Because years of hard work done by men smarter than you say so

>>8304964
why would it have to reach speed first? couldn't you jsut apply the regenerative braking at the beginning?

File: 543143_3621928085736_831815643_n.jpg (29KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x640px

>>8304853

> supremely unlikely

>>8305022
>physics
>>>/x/

Rather than jerk myself off like every other "muh newton laws are getting broken" dick head in this thread (the laws are not being broken, by the way) I'll just wait and see until people smarter than everyone in this thread combined, who are actually doing the experiments, come back with the results.