new propellantless drive company

[coppercone2]

Like the EM drive,

https://thedebrief.org/nasa-veterans-propellantless-propulsion-drive-that-physics-says-shouldnt-work-just-produced-enough-thrust-to-defeat-earths-gravity/

this one uses a capacitor. Instead of piezo (not that a piezo is not a capacitor) , but it sounds similar. That is that there is some unequal force in a polarizing material which leads to thrust. Not a (weak) photon drive.

[BrianHG]

Do you have a link to the article where it's not on a webpage with 40-50 Java Scripts with over 200 ads which need blocking?  Maybe a simple .pdf with specs and measurements, or some kind of brochure.

[tom66]

So far every propellantless drive has failed when tested in space.  Why not add another to the mix, I guess.

[antenna]

I knew a guy who claimed to have something similar, even did some modelling, but he ended up having a heart attack.  I never took him seriously, but now I am starting to hear very similar approaches to what he described.  I wish he was still around.  RIP J.R.

[Gyro]

Asymetric capacitor sounds like an ionic lifter. I thought they needed something to ionize though (I didn't want to unblock that great mass of scripts on that page either!).

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/ionic-lifters-has-anyone-else-around-here-build-one/

[coppercone2]

No its related to gravity and mass. they mean in a vacuum. maybe some nebula in space allow for the 'lifter' (electric ion thrust engine) to work on a space ship. If there is alot of gas its like a plane


Only way you can move things without propellant is by changing mass or getting attracted to something (i.e. magnetic 'laser' to aim at moon to pull you up). But using anything in the solar system as a 'target' leads to inverse law problems of basically getting zilch force of attraction.......

or I guess if vacuum is not a vacuum and its ether and you can pump that

both the EM drive and this postulate that a electric field can cause a dielectric to do something new. With this its some thin film stuff and with EM drive its piezo, which is really just a dielectric that happens to respond mechanically to electric field in a strong way.

In EM drive the 'imbalance' is caused by phase shifting the stimulus signals. in this it seems to do with the geometry.  Previous eevblog discussion said it basically has to do with high order solutions to GR field equations. so good luck with that one

[coppercone2]

https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/nasa-veterans-propellantless-propulsion-drive-defies-laws-of-physics

I noticed something though, when you have high power levels, everything is hard to measure. marginal effects that have low energy transfer efficency must be diabolically hard to find

[PlainName]

Do you have a link to the article where it's not on a webpage with 40-50 Java Scripts with over 200 ads which need blocking?  Maybe a simple .pdf with specs and measurements, or some kind of brochure.

edit: patent (granted)

[SiliconWizard]

Electrostatic propulsion is nothing new, so I don't know yet exactly what's new here. Have had a quick look at the patent, which was not too helpful. I'll watch the video if it gives any more detailed info when I get the time.

Nice website anyway: https://www.exoduspropulsion.space/

[woofy]

Sounds like pseudo science looking for grant money, to me.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Where's the video showing it working ?

[wraper]

AFAIK EmDrive was repeatedly tested by different teams. Those which were able to produce any detectable force later turned out to be measurement flaws.

[iMo]

I had a quick look at the patent, and frankly the patent clerk AlbertE would laugh.
In the patent they state the stuff works in an enclosed system. So you have got something generatig a force inside a closed box and it should propell somewhere? That is against the fundamental laws of physics, imho.
They should apply for the Nobel prize as well..

[Sal Ammoniac]

This thread belongs in the Dodgy Technology forum...

[tom66]

I had a quick look at the patent, and frankly the patent clerk AlbertE would laugh.
In the patent they state the stuff works in an enclosed system. So you have got something generatig a force inside a closed box and it should propell somewhere? That is against the fundamental laws of physics, imho.
They should apply for the Nobel prize as well..

All propellantless drives violent fundamental physics laws (if they are to operate in space).

There are two possibilites:
- 100+ years of physics understanding is in error somehow with an effect not yet studied or understood allowing a propellantless drive to function
- They don't actually work

So far no one has made a true propellantless drive function in true space environments.  They have only shown some effect when tested in a lab, but so far this effect has been accounted for as a magnetic bias, thermal air currents, or an experimental error.

Perhaps it is possible, but I have my doubts.

[woofy]

Professor Eric Laithwaite came up with similar nonsense, suggesting that the behaviour of gyroscopes violated the law of conservation of energy. He said there was a device which could displace itself outside of its own center of mass. It ultimately destroyed his reputation and career.

[coppercone2]

that is sad that you can get your reputation and career destroyed for challenging some assumption most people don't even understand. Because you know there is some zealot with no clue what center of gravity even is getting mad because "he challenged alot of smart people!!!' . bit of a religious thing IMO


they might lead the youth astray!!

[Alex Eisenhut]

Buttered toast strapped to a cat?