EM Drive

[GIThruster]

But vacuum energy has been proven to exist experimentally. Its called the Casimir effect.

No. It has not been proven. Casimir effect is just as easily explained by van der Waals forces. While Casimir is consistent with and coherent with the vacuum energy conjecture, Casimir in no way requires vacuum energy as it is easily explained through van der Waals. And this has been my point on multiple occasions--the vacuum people routinely misrepresent this issue and claim Casimir is evidence when it is most certainly NOT. In fact, if you read Millis and Davis, they do this through and through the book. It's a good book and I'm friends with Davis, but Casimir is not evidence for vacuum energy. In fact, if you read the wiki piece you'll see there are not just two, but three possible explanations for Casimir:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect

so it is not evidence for vacuum energy. For evidence, you need to rule out the other two explanations and no one has done this, despite decades of opportunity and reason to do so on the part of the vacuum evangelists.

Note too the point made in the wiki piece that:

"There is currently no compelling explanation as to why it should not result in a cosmological constant that is many orders of magnitude larger than observed."[15]

In fact the "many orders of magnitude" difference between the cosmological constant predicted and observed is 120 orders of magnitude, which is why this is often called the "worst prediction in the history of modern physics". This is why people call this stuff "bullshit".

[Axil]

But vacuum energy has been proven to exist experimentally. Its called the Casimir effect.

No. It has not been proven. Casimir effect is just as easily explained by van der Waals forces. While Casimir is consistent with and coherent with the vacuum energy conjecture, Casimir in no way requires vacuum energy as it is easily explained through van der Waals. And this has been my point on multiple occasions--the vacuum people routinely misrepresent this issue and claim Casimir is evidence when it is most certainly NOT. In fact, if you read Millis and Davis, they do this through and through the book. It's a good book and I'm friends with Davis, but Casimir is not evidence for vacuum energy. In fact, if you read the wiki piece you'll see there are not just two, but three possible explanations for Casimir:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect

so it is not evidence for vacuum energy. For evidence, you need to rule out the other two explanations and no one has done this, despite decades of opportunity and reason to do so on the part of the vacuum evangelists.

Note too the point made in the wiki piece that:

"There is currently no compelling explanation as to why it should not result in a cosmological constant that is many orders of magnitude larger than observed."[15]

In fact the "many orders of magnitude" difference between the cosmological constant predicted and observed is 120 orders of magnitude, which is why this is often called the "worst prediction in the history of modern physics". This is why people call this stuff "bullshit".

The dynamic Casimir effect can only be explained by the virtual photons that populate the vacuum.

[GIThruster]

Says who?

[qraal]

Says who?

Clearly more than one person. Ron, I know you're a partisan for Dr Woodward, but crying "bullshit" every other post doesn't really help make your point.

[GIThruster]

Hey, I read the piece on "dynamical Casimir" at MIT and they don't make the claim that this is the ONLY explanation. And you need to understand, for Casimir to be evidence for crazy vacuum physics, it needs to be the only explanation. This is how science works. And despite that so many physicists have weighed in here, some even stepping forward with such strong language, there is no end of people waving the magic wand of "ZPF" over nonsensical claims and urging they have solved the propulsion problem. Happens all the time.

If Eagle has something, we'll find out. So far as the warp claims, I don't know what to make of them. When you look at the history of that experiment, and the fraudulent claims made about it from the start, it's very difficult to put any stock in the current claims.

[williatw]

If Eagle has something, we'll find out. So far as the warp claims, I don't know what to make of them. When you look at the history of that experiment, and the fraudulent claims made about it from the start, it's very difficult to put any stock in the current claims.

I assume you are referring to this:

Sonny White formulated a compressible quantum vacuum conjecture that requires us to live in a portion of the universe that is immersed in a false vacuum that apparently has a ground or zero-energy level much smaller than science first assumed. However what will drive this debate is experimental data first and foremost. Experimental data like what just came out of the Eagleworks Lab's latest warp-field interferometer tests based on 27,000, 1.5 second long on/off data samples that indicates we have finally observed the first spacetime contraction effects that we are fairly confident are the real deal.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/04/magnet ... ction.html

Game on? comments anyone?

I would agree regardless of what you think of Sonny White personally which I have no opinion about one way or another. I believe it was the late Carl Sagan who said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far as I know Eagle Works are the only ones making the extraordinary claim of positive warp-field results so until multiple labs have replicated his results it doesn't meet the criteria of "extraordinary evidence"

[birchoff]

If Eagle has something, we'll find out. So far as the warp claims, I don't know what to make of them. When you look at the history of that experiment, and the fraudulent claims made about it from the start, it's very difficult to put any stock in the current claims.

I assume you are referring to this:

Sonny White formulated a compressible quantum vacuum conjecture that requires us to live in a portion of the universe that is immersed in a false vacuum that apparently has a ground or zero-energy level much smaller than science first assumed. However what will drive this debate is experimental data first and foremost. Experimental data like what just came out of the Eagleworks Lab's latest warp-field interferometer tests based on 27,000, 1.5 second long on/off data samples that indicates we have finally observed the first spacetime contraction effects that we are fairly confident are the real deal.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/04/magnet ... ction.html

Game on? comments anyone?

I would agree regardless of what you think of Sonny White personally which I have no opinion about one way or another. I believe it was the late Carl Sagan who said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far as I know Eagle Works are the only ones making the extraordinary claim of positive warp-field results so until multiple labs have replicated his results it doesn't meet the criteria of "extraordinary evidence"

While I am sure you didn't mean it this way. I get the impression that your assuming that there are labs lining up to commit the resources necessary to attempt the replication. From my read of the situation, I doubt anyone takes the warp interferometer experimental results seriously enough to do so. I might be wrong about this (and I sure as hell hope I am) but I suspect most people with access to labs capable of a reproduction attempt are more interested in other things, and have set the bar so high that they wont take notice until EagleWorks begins reporting results that are really far above the noise level and have published a theory that has made it through peer review of some journal deemed respectable enough.

Till then I fully expect the work that EagleWorks is doing to be treated as fringe science, not because someone has not attempted a replication of it. But instead because no one believes there is enough evidence (smoke) to warrant them stopping what they are doing and trying to do a replication.

[Maui]

EmDrive = Alcubierre drive?

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2015/04/n ... arp-drive/

Edit: I totally missed this was already being discussed above, sorry.

[GIThruster]

Did someone like Paul specifically report that they shined a laser into the EM drive chamber? To the best of my knowledge, there are entirely different experiments, both designed to validate Dr. White's theory and that instead both falsified it. I think the guy at MU is conflating the two experiments. Surely EM Drive /= Alcubierre Drive.

[ScottL]

As I understand it, the test was on the Em drive cavity. According to what's being discussed at NSF and from Paul I do believe they're claiming a possible warp field, but that they can't be sure it isn't just atmospheric heating in the chamber until it's put into vacuum.

[birchoff]

EmDrive = Alcubierre drive?

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2015/04/n ... arp-drive/

Edit: I totally missed this was already being discussed above, sorry.

No EmDrive != Alcubierre drive.

its more like EmDrive physics ~= Alcubierre drive. While this distiction is small it is meaningful. From the discussions that are on NSF forum about the EmDrive. Paul reported that they had run the interferrometer test with one leg of the light path running through "pill box" (Cylindrical) cavity. The EmDrive moniker is normally used to refer to the tapered frustum experiments of Shawyer, Juan Yang and EagleWorks. The only other party with something like an Emdrive that is not a tapered frustum design is Cannae.

[GIThruster]

As I understand it, the test was on the Em drive cavity. According to what's being discussed at NSF and from Paul I do believe they're claiming a possible warp field, but that they can't be sure it isn't just atmospheric heating in the chamber until it's put into vacuum.

So this is another instance of claims without the proper scientific controls, and people responding to those crazy claims.

Some people never learn.

[ScottL]

I think Paul is being open about it all, but I think others are jumping to conclusions. I believe he's saying the results look promising, but may not hold up. People jumped on that first part and well you know how the average person can be. I think I read that there would be a vacuum test in June possibly which would put all of this to bed so the end is near so to speak.

[JoeP]

I think Paul is being open about it all, but I think others are jumping to conclusions. I believe he's saying the results look promising, but may not hold up. People jumped on that first part and well you know how the average person can be. I think I read that there would be a vacuum test in June possibly which would put all of this to bed so the end is near so to speak.

Myself, I'm pretty much taking none of this seriously without any rigorous vacuum testing.
My guess is ion wind or some issue with the materials transmitting force is otherwise the source of the thrust.

[Axil]

The key to faster than light trvel is negative vacuum energy and squeezed vacuum.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/cienc ... energy.htm

http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0511/0511086.pdf

http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9805003v2.pdf