NASA approves new engine

I read about this too, but haven't heard enough to form an opinion yet. Anything that seems to violate the laws of physics is very interesting though.

That article is misleading, and characteristic of journalistic renditions of scientific studies. While it claims that the engine uses no fuel, how are the microwaves generated? Something has to be used to produce the electricity from which the microwaves derive, so there is "fuel," it's just at one remove from the thrust.

I've read several independent articles on this. Apparently the device NASA constructed produces thrust without pushing against anything or losing any of its own mass. Apparently in violation on Newton's third law of motion.

That may well be, and i'm not disputing that. What i am disputing is that the thrust is produced without using any fuel. That sounds to me like the kind of remark a thoughtless journalist would make. Something needs to be used to produce the microwaves, so there is some type of "fuel" involved. Within a star system, such as the solar system, the insolation could be harvested to produce the necessary microwaves to activate the drive. In that case, solar or stellar radiation is the fuel. My point is that you're not getting something for nothing out of this.

I think you're right. In the article(s) I read I think they used "fuel" when they should have used "propellant". It doesn't surprise me when common media articles are sloppy.

The particular article Gunga posted does reference propellant at least in one place:


But looking beyond that, it's interesting that they seem to have a device which doesn't need to push against anything to generate movement. If that pans out (which seems unlikely) then it's earth shaking news.

I agree, it will be very significant news if they can use such a system to generate thrust. It wold be ideal within the solar system, but beyond stellar systems, it would have to carry quite a load of fuel to generate the microwaves. Perhaps it could be a part of a hybrid system.

Assuming that the engine is efficient, it would not take very much fuel to travel between stellar systems. Most of the trip would require zero energy.

Newton's first law says you can bring the ship up to speed and point it in the right direction and then turn off the engine until you get close (you would be able to power the engine up to make small, relatively cheap corrections on route if you need to). Once you get close enough you will have access to more energy (in the form of a nearby star). With nuclear energy, we can pack several orders of magnitude more energy then we would need in a small amount of mass.

Propellant is the real hurdle to interstellar travel. If this is truly a solution, this is big deal.

I hope this turns out to be true.

I think you're reaching there. We don't know how much energy would be required to produce a useful amount of thrust, nor the energy requirements to get up to a significant, efficient speed. So far, i don't think there's any reason to assume that it would be efficient outside a star system. In the long term, i don't see us going to another star system without first knowing what we can expect to find there. That implies mechanized exploration first.

As always, interstellar flight, even at significant fractions of the speed of light, involves ship board times of years. Without speculating on "suspended animation" systems, which we don't now know to be feasible, any such interstellar mission would need to carry sufficient supplies to get the crew there alive, and a good margin of safety beyond that, as well as supplies to live on after reaching the destination.

I enjoy such speculations, but i try to avoid science fiction assumptions about what we can do, especially as science fiction of often ignores the nuts and bols--fuel, food, amtomospheric recycling, exposure to cosmic radiation, the effects of microgravity.

Of course we know how much energy it would take. This is a calculation that a high school physics student could make. And as I stated, assuming a reasonably efficient engine (not an unreasonable assumption) it wouldn't be very much.

The biggest hurdle as far as the ship goes is the propellent. If this engine works, we have have a solution to this problem.

Of course the concerns you raise concerning the human crew are all valid, but they weren't part of the question we were discussing.


The Physics (i.e. mechanics) of a spaceship doing interstellar travel are very well understood.


IOf

You do this **** all the time. You make authoritative statements implying that any matter can be resolved with simple scientific calculations, and then you start to trot out you list of assumptions. No, you don't know what the energy requirements would be for this type of engine to accelerate a mass so a speed reasonable for interstellar travel.

Come on Setanta. You made a statement that is scientifically incorrect. This is fine, you are not a scientist. But it was incorrect and I corrected you. This is an area in which I happen to have some expertise.

The basic point you were making is scientifically wrong. Anyone with a background in physics would understand that in fact this engine is very useful, maybe even crucial, for interstellar travel. We are already doing travel around the solar system without it.

You know more about history than I do. In the past when you have corrected me on a matter of historical fact, I have graciously accepted this. I have even appreciated learning something from you (which is one of the reasons I am here). I don't have to pretend I know everything.

Can you accept the fact that maybe on just a few topics there are people who know more than you?

That is to say written by people, and approved by editors, who have not the first damn clue about how science works.

You say something like that and claim to be a scientist? You have no idea what the efficiency of such an engine would be. If it required large amounts of energy, solar radiation would be useful, so long as one gets sufficient insolation. If you try to store energy in batteries for travel beyond the solar system, you will have increased the mass which must be accelerated. If you are transporting passengers, you have to protect against cosmic radiation, and provide a system to mitigate the effects of microgravity--once again increasing the mass which must be accelerated.

I made no statement which was scientifically incorrect. You did, however, a truly gross boner. You claimed that this was a matter of simple scientific calculations, and then you immediately assumed, upon no basis at all, that such an engine would be efficient. You don't know that. You don't know what the energy requirements would be.

The more you run your mouth, the more you convince me that you're no kind of scientist at all.

So the answer to the question I raised in my last post is apparently 'no'. We will leave it at that.

(Although I must say I am flattered by the attention you are giving me on multiple threads.)

Anyone who assumes, absent evidence that this engine is useful, without knowing the efficiency of the engine, or it's energy requirements, has no business claiming to be a scientist.

Heehee

Laugh if you want, but get a mirror first. You're the one making idiotic claims.

EDIT: Upon what basis do you assume the engine would be efficient? Upon what basis have you calculated the energy requirements for such an engine to operate efficiently? Oh yeah . . . that's right--you have no basis for such claims.

Just stop. Please just stop! heeheeeheeeheeeehee You are just too much

heeheeheee

Laugh if you want. I understand the part about mass no longer mattering once you are out of the influence of massive bodies. But first you have to get away from the gravitational influence of the earth and the sun. Until you have, mass matters very much. If you are using an engine to travel between stars, the standard model is to accelerate until the halfway point, and then to decelerate until you reach the destination. To do that, you'll need fule. The efficiency of the engine determines how much fuel you'll have to carry with you, and therefore influences escaping the gravitational influence of the earth, and of the sun, and maneuvering your craft once you are in the gravitational influences of the star system which is your destination.

You have just idiotically assumed the engine would be efficient, and you simply don't know that.