Mark was very cognizant of this. We talked about quantum influences and our humankind baby steps in regard to that portion of physics. Mark was a unifier, and thought that basic physics (Newtonian/Einstein) was correct, and that the Dark Matter conundrum would possibly be explained eventually by string theory and our adopting a holographic view of the origin of universe prior to our 3d (+6 dark) dimensions which we are currently (barely) perceiving. One of the things he was interested in was the effects of spinning a body at ultra-high rotational speeds and it's electro-chemical effects on the spinning mass with regards to gravity, time and consequently space, anyways...
You are correct sidekahr, only through hardships will we attain the stars.
Having said that, I believe that we should be farther down the road than are with what we know.
Seriously sir; we have a patented Starship design that expires in the US in two years and no work as far as we know has been done in a serious way with regard to it, and it's genius inventor is mysteriously dead.
You postulated this: "...This has been around for a few years. You would think we'd have a definitive answer by now on whether it's a dead end. If this really works, such a reaction-less drive would revolutionize space travel, as well as physics itself. The inventor says it does not violate newtonian physics, but I think Newton would disagree..."
I responded to this with what I know and can prove to be true and I am asking this: if we have had this much for so long, why has nothing essentially been done in advancement of the science?
Just saying... :vs_stars:
Yes, @Maol9 why aren't we further along. Is it our short sighted approach to space related research, the 'this is a waste of taxpayer money' syndrome? Is it the innocent resistance of academia to new ideas? Who said that "The way to get new a idea accepted is to present it and wait for the old men to die off"? Is it fear of losing the respect of peers or tenure by working on something so wacky? Or is it something more sinister? I hesitate to go down that tinfoil hat path.
Humanity will not move into space in a big way until someone can make a profit doing it. Evidenced by the analog of the discovery of the new world by Europe. Then we will need efficient space drives, and institute a crises program to develop one.
It is nice to see that we now have a new standard for scientific rebuttal: a voiced over youtube video...
NASA is still studying it and that isn't a version 2 optimized example as far as we know. Reported here:
It's official: NASA's peer-reviewed EM Drive paper has finally been published - ScienceAlert
and here is the actual NASA paper published here:
Ir youtube is where it's at these days then there is:
Or we could just go with the rumor mill:
Rumours the US military is testing an EM Drive on the X-37B space plane just won't die - ScienceAlert
So far it has been studied by the Brits, Germans, Chinese and US. Nobody has called BS yet. Instead they (Real Physicists) are scrambling to explain it in our Quantum wrinkled Newtonian/Einstein physics with several theories being put forward.
I agree sidekahr 100%! Let's take a quick look at the proof of that...
Asteroids are rich in minerals and relatively easy to mine. Also we first went to the moon nearly 50 fifty years ago and it is a mineral resource beyond imagination has gravity and has always been since the early 70's easily within our grasp.
Here is one that almost nobody knows about:
We have known about a way to increase rocket thrust by spinning the fuel vessel since our first rockets, which were so equipped and unexpectedly were documented to produced 20% more thrust than conventional physics predicted as it was understood at the time allowed for. Our response? Stop spinning the fuel vessel on future rockets once we figured it out. BTW this is empirical science and proven from records .
You may be right, maybe it is only entrenchment. However I think is also more than that...
Well exuse da hell out of me for pissing in your scientific Wheaties there Caitlyn...Something that produces thrust in space the equivalent of a fly pushing a car down the road, although not needing combustion, doesn't get me het full of enthusiasm when we cant afford to even keep the damn country running without bumming a few bucks a month from China...ain't got me least damn excited. And the ony damn good thing to come out of Nasa is Tang. Can't even put a damn telescope in space right for under a Billion dollars.
So no offense meant...none taken....and phuk you right back buddy
So no offense meant...none taken....and phuk you right back buddy
Just about says it all...
Latest rumor has it the Chinese are using the interest we give them on the money we borrow to finance Obama Care (and can't pay back) to develop their space program. No worries though cause they are gonna use the carbon dollars we give them though the Paris Agreement to build a Moon-base so that they can piss in all of our Wheaties scientific or not.
Many in the USA and the world at large believe that American exceptionalism is dead. Not me. Though it maybe on life support because of the traitors we have allowed to drive our once great nation to rack and ruin. There are choices in front of us. We can either cowboy up, or continue down the road to becoming another France.
As far as mining asteroids, well, we've been doing that for years. The rich mining district of the Sudbury Basin in Ontario is a crater left by an asteroid. Just joking, I know what you mean. We probably will mine the asteroids eventually, some are conveniently close in similiar orbits to Earth, and not at the bottom of a gravity well like the moon or Mars. The cost of mining metal on Earth will have to rise a lot to make it necessary.
If it's true that our government is suppressing advanced space techniques, then all those exciting things will be done by the Chinese or the Russians. A shame.
Regarding the moon. It is admittedly a little more complicated. It's chief advantage is to supply material for off earth construction. We should already have a base there. Especially after emergence of the shuttle program. Beyond Helium 3, it is platinum deposited by asteroids and water from comets and or solar wind which are more immediately useful and may prove more valuable.
International Space Law is a little shaky but in the end I believe possession will prove to be 9/10 of the argument as it always has. Our leaders have sold us short as usual, left the barn door unlocked and China is about kick it open.