Black out (Fusione Fredda, Andrea Rossi....)

@Franco. Biberian, direi. Chissà chi è che paga l'attrezzatura.

Bombola dietro la spalla dx e patronimico accademico. In Svezia, invece, il patronimico non si adopera. Direi, comunque, che la FF fa male alla salute.

Terza foto, sulla sx mi sembra Alan Smith... http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Alan_Smith_(U.K.)

Finalmente qualche foto che mi intriga, e senza fotoritocco. Link?

@AlainCo In the first reference, explaining eq. (2) the author says: #i#Interpreting the first term on the right hand side as the force (mass times acceleration) that must be exerted on the light to conserve its momentum, leads to#/i# So we have just learnt that it is possible to accelerate photons in the vacuum. I think it is the best theory since Einstein; I hope someone will propose the author for a special edition of the Nobel prize a minute after the experiment that confirms his theory. At 850W they are sending a huge amount of photons per second inside the cavity. Where the hell they go after a while?

@AlainCo Voglio solo esprimere la mia opinione su questo EmDrive vs. Cannae Drive From https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/ The Inventors Claims Both inventors claim that their devices do not actually violate any physics, and instead take advantage of very particular but speculative aspects of existing physics. It is important to note that while both theories are being tested, Eagleworks is testing whether or not the devices work as a SEPARATE thing from why they work. Shawyer claims that the EmDrive works only on radiation pressure. Light is both wave-like and particle-like. Though it has no mass, it does have momentum, and the fact that light exerts a very small force on the objects it interacts with is well documented. Shawyer claims that the pressure exerted by light is a result of the group velocity of the wave, not the singular velocity of the the photon that interacts. He then uses this to contend that radiation pressure is actually a Lorentz force. As scientists understand it now, the momentum of a photon is related to phase velocity, while group velocity measures the propagation of information. Fetta contends that the Cannae Drive creates a bias in the quantum vacuum and pushes against it. Basically, physicists think that at very, very small scales, much smaller than atoms or even protons, space bubbles with quantum fluctuations. This bubbling is represented in the math as sort of imaginary particles that are spawned in pairs, and then very, very quickly the pairs come back together and destroy each other. Fetta contends that the Cannae Drive creates a bias where some of these particles never come back together, and then "pushes" against them. Mia opinione: entrambi i dispositivi violano il principio di azione e reazione conservando la quantità di moto http://www.asps.it/azione.htm http://www.asps.it/contesto.htm http://www.calmagorod.org ma non sanno come e non sarò “ora” certo io a spiegarlo 

Mike McCulloch "MiHsC": Can the Emdrive Be Explained by Quantised Inertia? (PROGRESS IN PHYSICS) http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2015/PP-40-15.PDF Emdrive: whence motion? http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/emdrive-whence-motion.html MIHSC and 29 anomalies : http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/mihsc-vs-29-anomalies.html MiHsC intro: http://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/mihsc-101.html Beside, synthesis: https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/34cq1b/the_facts_as_we_currently_know_them_about_the/ hope this helps. just hope. ;-)

@Barney @Pagnini Visto che questo blog è usato pure (e viceversa) per rispondere alle questioni su quello di Passerini approfitto >Un articolo del 2006 che stronca immediatamente l'EmDrive di Shawyer, >quello che "la NASA dice che funziona", e invece no. >E' notevole, perche' tutto quello che Costella scrive si puo' applicare pari pari >al 95% delle scoperte breakthrough che funzionano solo dopodomani. >Eccovelo: >http://web.archive.org/web/20070928075504/http://www.assassinationscience.com/johncostella/shawyerfraud.pdf E chissà come Costella si ricava il dato quantitativo 95% :-) E siccome mi sono fatto dos big marrones a ridire le stesse cose riincollo from IDM from : http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140006052 "...potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma ... " e come no :-) .. tutto si risolve nel capire IN PARTENZA il principio di spinta ... siccome lo ignorano il problema Emdrive è identico a costruire un razzo o un motore a ioni ignorando il principio di azione e reazione :-) .... conclusione arrancando nel buio più fitto i fan dell'Emdrive potranno trovare qualcosa in cui la spinta è più accentuata in alcuni test ... in altri no .... ovvero un caos teorico da pip*e ai somari sui machu picciu lunari per cui cui noio potremmo forse anco dire : uno solo resterà! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKnDfSjJXTg :-)) ps: …. e beati voi che non avete tanto tempo e che non avete a che fare con la sperimentazione pnn :-)

lui

>diretta su youtube Evvaiii!!!

:)