Futurology

1760 readers

76 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Although not peer reviewed or replicated, a NASA veteran claims their Propellantless Propulsion Drive, that physics says shouldn’t work, just produced enough thrust to overcome Earth’s gravity (thedebrief.org)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

49 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Why do they talk about isolating it from the air, but not from conductive material around it?

Surely air is the easier of the two to do. If you're concerned that it's working by pushing on the air around it, just put the thing in a box. Measure the net force on the box; if it's pushing on the air then that force will be 0.

My automatic assumption from the way they describe the machine is that if it's not breaking the laws of physics, it's probably pushing on conductive material nearby with an electrostatic force. You can mitigate that with a similar approach by surrounding it with a faraday cage I guess, but that part at least seems somewhat more tricky.

Disclaimer I know absolutely nothing about the issues involved but that's my immediate take on it and it seems weird to me that they don't mention anything about isolating it from conductive material.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

it's probably pushing on conductive material nearby with an electrostatic force.

You think a Doctorate expert in electrostatics would miss that?

Dr. Buhler’s background confirms that he is indeed one of NASA’s top experts in electrostatics. In addition to overseeing the management of electrostatic discharge (ESD) and ESD safety for the Space Shuttle, the ISS, and Hubble, Dr. Buhler also established NASA’s Electrostatics and Surface Physics Laboratory at Kennedy Space Center.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I do not, no. I am sure he thought of that in addition to 10 other factors I didn't think of. I'm just saying it seems weird for it not to be mentioned in the article.