From: Jack Cole
Mike McCulloch has come up with a way to test his MiHsC theory, which he has applied to the EM Drive. I have some skepticism about the EM Drive based on some negative reports that I have read, but more testing is needed. Anyway, at least McCulloch has developed an idea for an experiment that would falsify his theory and would be an amazingly simple drive system for spacecraft if it works. He proposes using a simple loop of fiber optic cable with a metal barrier on one side to dampen Unruh waves. <http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2016/07/lemdrive.html> http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2016/07/lemdrive.html Jack, There are possible problems with this approach which should be mentioned. One problem was coincidentally mentioned here a couple of days ago – the “preferred frame” (and aether). I did not comment on this when it was posted, since it opens up a Pandora’s box. The other problem is that light in a fiber optics cable travels about 30% slower than lightspeed (however, specialty optics could become available soon, to mollify that problem). A preferred frame is inherent in any definition of “aether” and its existence applies to the EM drive measurement - in the form of a number of baseline assumptions depending on how it is to be measured. Wiki has an incomplete entry on the Michelson/Morley experiment which is said to invalidate aether, but in fact did no such thing. When the experiment was repeated using lasers, 100 years later (Silvertooth) – aether was found, roughly as had been predicted. A few modern observers have offered lame excuses to keep M&M in place, but the issue is not yet closed, and consequently we should NOT assume the absence of aether. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_loyzL9Wi4> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_loyzL9Wi4 In short, in theories that presume that light travels at a fixed speed relative to a detectable aether, the “preferred frame” would be where aether appears stationary and we must include the local vectors. But if light was travelling slower in a cable, you compound the problem and might believe there was acceleration where it doesn’t exist, or if aether does not exist we have the inverse problem. Amazingly, the majority of fizzicysts still quote the M&M mistake as if it meant something today - and blindly ignore the implications of real aether and a preferred frame, on measurements of this kind.
