few bad point for the test are : 1- the thrust is much weaker than EmDrive 2- the "blank" reactor works too. the 1 is probably linked to the bad Q compares to EmDrive
the 2 maybe is simply that Fetta does not understand well his reactor, and that it worsk for another reason than the one he imagine. one hypothesis is that Shawyer is right (at least phenomenologically) and Fetta have build involuntarily 2 EmDrive point 2 rule out the fraud as a fraudster would have make the blank fail. the characteristic of rauds is that it work as expected. that Emdrive and Canae Drive work in 4 test setups make clear that it is not a measurement artifact. it is something unexpected linked to microwave, resonance... whether it is real thrust or artifact is a question, but it is a microwave resonance artifact if artifact. 2014-07-31 20:22 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com>: > See: > > > http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2014-07/31/nasa-validates-impossible-space-drive > > Eric > >
