EmDrives - One of the Most Controversial Devices to Ever Exist
Rarely has a piece of technology ever been the source of as much controversy as the EmDrive.
The EmDrive - a technology that seems "magical"(read: unscientific) to many scientists and experts across disciplines, but still is something that governments,companies and universities pour money into, more than a decade after it was initially proposed by its inventor.
The EmDrive was first proposed in 2001 by Roger Shawyer as an engine that uses no propellant. The idea, is to bounce microwaves in a frustum(which is a cone with the pointy end cut off. So it has 2 flat sides). The microwaves bounce of the flat sides of the frustum,producing force. But one side produces less force than the other, resulting in an overall positive thrust.
Now, when you read about this thing, it sounds deceptively simple.And most scientists do believe it to be an unscientific idea. The problem is, such a thruster would violate the law of conservation of momentum, which states that you cannot have net force in any phenomenon. That's why we have the concept of an "equal and opposite force", from which Newton's Third Law is derived. Basically, the EmDrive is like trying to push your car while sitting inside it.
And yet, a lot of governments, and other organisations continue to fund research on the EmDrive.Both the US and China have projects for testing the EmDrive. People speculate that China may already be testing it in Space. It's even speculated that Boeing's X-37B was being used for testing the EmDrive. What's even more surprising, is that in test after test, it seems to work. Although to be fair, most current experiments produce very small, practically negligible amounts of thrust, that are well within the range of error of the experiments. But this year, a research paper by NASA was actually peer reviewed and it passed. According to the paper, the thruster appears to work, and in fact, produces more thrust than a light sail.
Perhaps the reason there still is research happening on EmDrives is because if it was proven to be functional, it would lead to some big changes in our understanding of the world.
So what could happen if EmDrives were real and practical?
It would revolutionize Space Travel
The problem with current rockets is that most of their thrust is actually wasted on carrying fuel that will be used later in the journey. The weight of the usable payload isn't a lot. This is what makes SpaceX's reusable rockets possible and useful. A mostly empty booster with no payload requires very little fuel to decelerate and land.
But an EmDrive would have no propellant. Which means you can devote all that thrust towards actually useful payload. This would bring prices of satellites and other spacecraft down immensely. This would actually make it practical for a middle-class person to go to space or even Mars.
Another thing that EmDrives would improve upon is performance. EmDrives could take us to mars in days, and not months, which would reduce a lot of other complications related to keeping astronauts alive in deep space.
It would revolutionize our understanding of physics
A functioning EmDrive would be like a giant, thick figurative middle finger to our understanding of physics.
Something like the EmDrive functioning would go either against Newton's Third Law. Or, it could lead to the discovery of other quantum effects, that either way would be a big thing in our understanding of physics. The reason so many scientists oppose it is the amount of stuff that would be proven wrong if the EmDrive were to be proven true.
So as you can see, both of these are Big ThingsTM. And of course, everyone wants to be the person/organisation that achieved this first.And that is why, even after being written off by a lot of scientists, EmDrive research continues to get funded.
Thanks for reading this post. If you liked it and want more content like this, please follow me :-)
This sounds like the idea of using a solar parachute, only in a more compact size.
Do you mean like a solar sail? Yeah it actually produces 10x the thrust of a solar sail, but there is a lot of controversy over whether the thrust being observed is real or not.
Yes I stand corrected, it is called a solar sail. It makes sense that the thrust would be increased because you are forcing it though a smaller orifice. But I don't know if it would be 10x. Isn't that the venturi principle? I also wonder if a sterling engine with a fresnel lens would work.
I wrote that incorrectly. I meant that they actually measured it producing 10x the thrust per kwatt of input power that they got from a solar sail test.
No problem, I make mistakes all the time. I guess that's plausible as the venturi effect should multiple the power as it concentrates the (plasma) flow. Similar to a laser concentrating light energy. This is also the principle behind the fresnel lens. It has been a pleasure conversing with you, I can appreciate people who think on different levels it's like playing chess. I hope to find you on other posts.
This might be a stupid question, but would that "engine" or "thruster" be able to compensate for traveling light years away? With manned crew onboard making it alive to their destination? And how long away do you think this is?
I don't quite understand what you mean by 'able to compensate for traveling ...'? What would the engine have to compensate for?
Seejng that space travel is measured in light years, will it be able to travel 1 light year faster than today's technology? Otherwise it wont really make a difference
I understand your question now. I am too stupid to answer, I mean I don't know. It would seem unlikely because a light year is some where around 6 trillion miles. As you most likely know a light year is the distant light will travel in a year. So I guess it won't make a difference. I have read that they are working with cryogenics to enable the astronauts to survive.
Ah i see, because the engine might last longer but we humans dont hey xD but if they are working on it shap shap Thnx bud
Thanks, I truly appreciate your insight. Two heads are better than one.