However, apparently a dummy load produced zero thrust... And I think the other designs need to be better understood, should they really be null?
http://i.imgur.com/daNmDty.png On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 10:09 PM, John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com> wrote: > It looks like I can answer my own question. > > http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140006052.pdf > > Thrust was observed on both test > articles, even though one of the test articles was designed with the > expectation that it would not produce > thrust. Specifically, one test article contained internal physical > modifications that were designed to produce > thrust, while the other did not (with the latter being referred to as the > “null” test article). > > > On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 9:16 PM, John Berry <berry.joh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Alain, where did you read that the blank/dummy control drive also worked? >> >> From what I read it seemed to indicate that it passed (got negative >> result) on that drive. >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >> >