I'm dubious, but doubt on the theory justify experiments of good quality.
2013/6/25 Roarty, Francis X <[email protected]> > Alain,**** > > I hadn’t kept up with the EM drive, great to hear it is > producing thrust! I have supported it in the past as a related technology > and made a response to a comment at > http://www.me-sapiens.com/the-e-cat-and-the-emdrive-two-unicorns-that-might-change-the-world-tomorrow/ > that stated “On page 8 of this paper, Shawyer calculates the velocity of > each plate the waves hit. He does not treat these quantities as if they are > equal, which is a problem because they are the same device, which does not > stretch or move apart.”**** > > My reply..**** > > Ok, but if SR is invoked then one area could "contract" relative to the > other.. all 3 space seems equivalent to the Paradox twins, time dilation > and Lorentzian contraction are unobservable to the local observer, I also > recall something about modifications to spontaneous emissions being known > to occur in a microwave cavity - perhaps we have some sort of segregation > of virtual particle pairs by size like you have in Casimir effect where > only smaller particles can fit between the plates.. I do have a > relativistic interpretation of Casimir effect where the longer vacuum > wavelengths still exist between the plates but contract space-time to fit > between the remaining space.. If you combine that with the "normal" 3 space > observations of the Paradox twins it supports a "real" forth dimension > perpindicular to our "ant farm" existence.. conservation isn't violated but > you are exchanging time for space - you get propulsion but something else > gets older faster.**** > > Fran**** > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Alain Sepeda > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 25, 2013 2:29 AM > *To:* Vortex List > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Sci Am Attacks Cold Fusion yet again**** > > ** ** > > quite classic to use LENR as a bashing tool.**** > > see that article that claim EmDrive is 21th century cold fusion**** > > > http://johncostella.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/the-emdrive-the-cold-fusion-of-the-21st-century/ > **** > > I would like, but I have few hope (unlike LENR which is experimental > science, EmDrive is theory based with weak nonreproduced evidences...)**** > > ** ** > > by the way on the same subject, but much more enthusiast**** > > > http://www.me-sapiens.com/the-e-cat-and-the-emdrive-two-unicorns-that-might-change-the-world-tomorrow/ > **** > > ** ** > > I track some data on emdrive**** > > http://www.scoop.it/t/emdrive**** > > in case something emerge... however, hum... more chance than a lottery > ticket.**** > > ** ** > > 2013/6/25 David Roberson <[email protected]>**** > > I was just reading the July 2013 addition of Scientific American and was > dismayed by a negative reference to cold fusion hidden within one of the > articles. The title of the article is "In Search of a Mind-Reading > Machine" and at the very end of the 5th paragraph is a sentence that > compares the performance of various recognition softwares to cold fusion.* > *** > > > The comparison suggests that marketers temp people with recognition types > of products that do not work, hence the comparison. I guess that magazine > has no respect for our field just as others have reported many times. One > day they will realize how ignorant they are when these products become > commonplace. Let's hope that the time of reckoning is near.**** > > > Dave**** > > ** ** >
