By: E.Laureti on Venerdì 29 Maggio 2015 11:55
@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 