Whoa! New type of space drive discovered

Paratus · May 3, 2015

norseamd said:
At first I was against how much the agencies and companies were wanting to use this technology in lunar colonies and space stations. Because they were inflatable I thought they were less reliable, solid, and durable than traditional rigid space structures like pods. However it seems that inflatable space structures are actually as hard as concrete.

Thought it was a technology? There is also a company with the same name?

Sorry, Ad Astra, the company that designed VASIMR has the contract.

Darwin333 · May 3, 2015

Fritzo said:
Well, it turns out this crazy EM drive...which we still have no idea how it works...also works in a vacuum, meaning it will work in space. It's like a real-life Impulse engine from Star Trek! They're even saying it could potentially propel spacecraft at near relativistic speeds. Cool

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

Very cool! Although I can't find anything on the warpstar concept vehicle, anyone have a link?

norseamd · May 3, 2015

Murloc said:
probably should have went with STEMs. If you're making a plural out of an acronym, you're treating is as a noun. The s is not part of the acronym so it's lower-case. I still don't understand what he wants to say.

CZroe said:
"STEM fields" is much clearer and closer to what norseamd intended to say.

STEM fanatics. There is a lot of popularity of STEM in society right now to the point they are yelling that they are not given sufficient attention and funding (which is true) and that America would be far nicer off if they ran the country (which is not true) and other stuff like that. There is no problems with the STEM subjects themselves.

And this is a concern for science overall and even most every academic subject especially with the publish or perish and careerism that is so corrupting everything in any intellectual or professional field or community.

norseamd · May 3, 2015

Ichinisan said:
No. I'm paraphrasing here, but you have have called people "stupid" on multiple occasions after being told that one of your statements was incomprehensible. I don't want to go back and find examples right now.

I didn't say you were stupid. I said you have difficulty conveying your thoughts. That much is very clear to those of us that are familiar with your posting history.

If I was in your position, I'd want to recognize the problem and try my best to make comprehensible posts. At the very least, clarify what you meant with the post in question. Attacking people is not the proper response.

Fine. That may occur from time to time but it is not my general want to respond that everyone who disagrees with me is dumb.

Fritzo · May 4, 2015

Elon Musk is calling out the EM Drive on Twitter, saying to "take it with a grain of salt". Here's some more in depth analysis:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/

CZroe · May 4, 2015

Fritzo said:
Elon Musk is calling out the EM Drive on Twitter, saying to "take it with a grain of salt". Here's some more in depth analysis:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/

Still interested.

CZroe · May 4, 2015

They are talking about the EM drive on Fox News right now and saying that it would be used for "faster than light travel" or "warp drive."

I saw that they were testing for relativistic effects to see if there was any effect on spacetime, but that wouldn't allow them to push a vehicle to faster than light speed. Anything that moves with mass has relativistic effects. That's why they call it "relativity."

Harabec · May 4, 2015

Fritzo said:
Elon Musk is calling out the EM Drive on Twitter, saying to "take it with a grain of salt". Here's some more in depth analysis:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/

Musk failed on this one. The article he refers to simply says "wait and see when they publish the facts", and all tests so far were positive. Why crap on it?

Ruptga · May 4, 2015

Harabec said:
Musk failed on this one. The article he refers to simply says "wait and see when they publish the facts", and all tests so far were positive. Why crap on it?

Because it's not proven until it's proven.

CZroe · May 4, 2015

Harabec said:
Musk failed on this one. The article he refers to simply says "wait and see when they publish the facts", and all tests so far were positive. Why crap on it?

He didn't "crap on it." He explained perfectly why we should take it with a grain of salt. I'm still interested.

Phoenix86 · May 4, 2015

Harabec said:
Musk failed on this one. The article he refers to simply says "wait and see when they publish the facts", and all tests so far were positive. Why crap on it?

Wait and see is a far cry from crapping on it.

Jeff7 · May 4, 2015

CZroe said:
They are talking about the EM drive on Fox News right now and saying that it would be used for "faster than light travel" or "warp drive."

I saw that they were testing for relativistic effects to see if there was any effect on spacetime, but that wouldn't allow them to push a vehicle to faster than light speed. Anything that moves with mass has relativistic effects. That's why they call it "relativity."

It's this old thing again.

disappoint · May 4, 2015

Jeff7 said:
It's this old thing again.

lol here's another jab at journalists:

FerrelGeek · May 4, 2015

CZroe said:
They are talking about the EM drive on Fox News right now and saying that it would be used for "faster than light travel" or "warp drive."

I saw that they were testing for relativistic effects to see if there was any effect on spacetime, but that wouldn't allow them to push a vehicle to faster than light speed. Anything that moves with mass has relativistic effects. That's why they call it "relativity."

If Fox didn't do it, one of the other 24/7 cable outlets would. Remember the guy that postulated that the Malaysian airliner got sucked up by a black hole? Wasn't Fox.

DrPizza · May 4, 2015

Fritzo said:
Right now, humans have all of their eggs in one basket: we live on one planet, 75% if which is uninhabitable. One asteroid, one disease, one nuclear exchange, one supervolcano eruption....that's all it would take to wipe all of us out. Space exploration and colonization is essential for the survival of our species.

Just in case you're mistaken, that 75% uninhabitable part of Earth is orders of magnitude more habitable than any place else in the solar system.

darkswordsman17 · May 4, 2015

CZroe said:
He didn't "crap on it." He explained perfectly why we should take it with a grain of salt. I'm still interested.

That's the problem. Him not gushing about is effectively him crapping on it to most people. Hell he's not even actually saying anything himself, he's just linking a blog. Yet look at people letting that settle it without actually reading up on it.

DrPizza said:
Just in case you're mistaken, that 75% uninhabitable part of Earth is orders of magnitude more habitable than any place else in the solar system.

Not only that, but history has proven that won't necessarily be the end of things. A super volcano wouldn't even wipe out humanity (not sure why the fuck people keep going apeshit over that, don't get me wrong it would be devastating but humans could very well survive that), and life has survived multiple asteroids, and we've survived so much diseases that letting fears like those be some call to arms for space development is just nonsense.

Not to say we shouldn't be working to explore space (if only we could have our defense budgets put towards such things...), but that's also why we should be working to work better with our current situation.

norseamd · May 4, 2015

Right now ocean colonization is promising with huge potential rewards like habitation space, energy production, resource exploitation, and food gathering.

Space programs still however makes lots of sense especially constructing outposts, resource research and prospecting, and scientific research and experimentation. All of this can be done on the moon right now.

ImpulsE69 · May 4, 2015

DrPizza said:
Just in case you're mistaken, that 75% uninhabitable part of Earth is orders of magnitude more habitable than any place else in the solar system.

Heh, yea I think sometimes people forget that.

Paratus · May 4, 2015

Fritzo said:
Elon Musk is calling out the EM Drive on Twitter, saying to "take it with a grain of salt". Here's some more in depth analysis:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/

The first post at in that reddit thread is an excellent summary of the situation for anyone who hasn't been keeping up.

DrPizza · May 4, 2015

Paratus said:
The first post at in that reddit thread is an excellent summary of the situation for anyone who hasn't been keeping up.

Excellent summary.

norseamd · May 4, 2015

What I am questioning is the timings of this tweet from Elon Musk. His tweet would have made sense back when this started getting into the news but now there are multiple testings of these experimental technologies.

Jeff7 · May 4, 2015

ImpulsE69 said:
Heh, yea I think sometimes people forget that.

Of course, being dead due to drowning is (currently) just as big of a problem as is being dead due to exposure to a vacuum.

Phoenix86 · May 5, 2015

DrPizza said:
Just in case you're mistaken, that 75% uninhabitable part of Earth is orders of magnitude more habitable than any place else in the solar system.

Turns out, the surface of the ocean isn't very interesting. Below that becomes interesting but your orders of magnitude easier to survive decreases significantly as you get deeper.

I'd suspect surviving in the far depths isn't really much less complicated than orbit.

William Gaatjes · May 5, 2015

What would be more difficult to design and maintain ?

A structure supporting a 1 bar cabin pressure in the vacuum of outerspace.
Or
A structure supporting the weight of thousands of pounds of pressure from the surrounding water at deep sea.

I would think that that cabin in outer space is more easier but to be honest i could be wrong.

CU · May 5, 2015

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/

Update at the bottom from April 5th. They have modeled the EM Drives thrust. Sounds like they learned a lot about how it works.

Whoa! New type of space drive discovered

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Golden Member

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Diamond Member

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Lifer

Platinum Member