NASA veteran’s propellantless propulsion drive defies laws of physics
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 июн 2024
- NASA veteran’s propellantless propulsion drive defies laws of physics
👇👇 Buy something and support The Electric Viking Store 👇👇
shop.theelectricviking.com/
Size guide and other help for the store 👇
theelectricviking.com/the-ele...
🔔 Subscribe and hit the notification bell! ► / @electricviking
Join me on Patreon ► / theelectricviking
Join as a member in The Electric Viking RUclips►
/ @electricviking
Members-only videos (see videos before anyone else)►
• Members-only videos
👇 Please donate here for Shanna (Viking's wife) if you can 👇
gofund.me/ef6650d7
See what happened to Shanna:
• Stage 4 can go to hell...
The Electric Viking on other platforms:
Rumble ► rumble.com/c/TheElectricViking
Facebook page ► / theelectricvikingfb
Facebook group ► / theevfbgroup
Twitter ► / theevking
Instagram ► / theelectricvking
Pinterest ► / theelectricviking
Telegram ► t.me/theelectricviking
TikTok ► / theelectricviking
👇 See more about me 👇
• You've been asking; he...
👇 My Bali trip 👇
• I went to Indonesia an...
👇 Video about My Skateboard 👇
• EASIEST & cheapest way...
👇 Subscribe to my kids channel 👇
tinyurl.com/subscribetojackan...
See more videos:
SpaceX reveal Starlink for cell phones is only months away
• SpaceX reveal Starlink...
Nuclear fusion rockets will launch a new era of super-fast space travel
• Nuclear fusion rockets...
NASA’s Spaceship breaks speed record as it approaches the sun in Solar Swoop
• NASA’s Spaceship break...
NASA space radars discover that parts of New York are sinking into the ocean
• NASA space radars disc...
NASA has cracked the code for replacing lithium batteries: ‘triple the energy’
• NASA has cracked the c...
NASA builds powerful solar electric propulsion thrusters for space travel
• NASA builds powerful s...
Germany cries foul over China EV subsidies - subsidises its own EVs $20 billion
• Germany cries foul ove...
EVs hit new RECORD marketshare in Germany - sales up 169%
• EVs hit new RECORD mar...
U.S. Republicans demand Tesla reveal ties with Chinese battery maker CATL
• U.S. Republicans deman...
BYD patents CATL's new M3P battery in the United States
• BYD patents CATL's new...
Chery’s iCar 03 all-electric offroad SUV has solar and CATL's new battery
• Chery’s iCar 03 all-el...
CATL reveal new batteries for Tesla EVs that will KILL the competition
• CATL reveal new batter...
Ford's Battery Deal with CATL Faces Resistance: China & U.S. Congress Alarmed
• Ford's Battery Deal wi...
CATL & BYD's sodium lithium batteries to be in these models this year
• CATL & BYD's sodium li...
VW appears to end production of ID3 in Germany in favour of Chinese imports
• VW appears to end prod...
Germany says VW is struggling to find answers for Tesla & BYD's pricing and tech
• Germany says VW is str...
VW will Slash Development Times for New Models by 2 years to save costs
• VW will Slash Developm...
VW CEO says Chinese cars not a threat for Europe because their price doubles
• VW CEO says Chinese ca...
VW has created an electric Tesla Semi clone that looks nearly identical
• VW has created an elec...
The REAL reason VW bought Xpeng & will sell EVs made by Chinese Gov
• The REAL reason VW bou...
The VW group are spending billions on next-gen ICE powertrains for 7 brands
• The VW group are spend...
The “Roof is on FIRE;” VW tells Managers to immediately find $11 Billion
• The “Roof is on FIRE;”...
Some VW EV model sales “fall to zero” - VW says customers don't want EV's
• Some VW EV model sales...
VW says NO DISCOUNTS on EV's in China - then slashes prices
• VW says NO DISCOUNTS o...
#spacex #nasa #mars #satellite
👇Reference to the news/charts & videos used in this video:
This channel may use some copyrighted materials without specific authorization of the owner; but content used here falls under the “Fair Use” Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976.
Allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Contact us for any copyright issues. If you want a credit of any footage we are using, please let us know.
Website: theelectricviking.com/contact/
Email: contact@theelectricviking.com
Whenever one hears the words “defies the laws of physics”, you can be certain someone is looking for capital from other people…
Yes. It in fact doesn't defy laws of physics. That is a headline grabber, as is the false claim at 00:11 suggesting it doesn't require an energy source. EP (Electrostatic Propulsion ) , like any other propulsion system, relies on energy input to generate the necessary electrostatic fields that create thrust. Without an energy source to power the generation and maintenance of these fields, EP would not be able to function.
If you’d actually listened you would know that it does not work with what we know of the laws of physics. You could also google and learn more if you were curious.
"Defies the laws of physics" could also mean "defies the laws of physics as we know them today". I really doubt that we've discovered all of physics at this point.
It could, but I doubt it. If it works, it will almost certainly be complicit with physics. Let’s wait and see, shall we? Until then it's just another "magnet car" theory.
And ‘discovery of a new force’ a definite tell of bogus.
If you break the laws of physics you will be sent to prism. But it'll probably only be a light sentence.
prism? prison?
@@hans-martinadorf3834 Yes. It's called a pun.
hilarious 🙂
@@hippodackl1521 And that's called sarcasm. I know it's just a stupid old dad joke.
Don't believe claims, don't believe slick graphics, don't believe respectability, just believe it when it's demonstrated.
I have actually looked at their data, and it looks very close to measurement error.
They have "scaled up" their thrust, by scaling down the engine, so the ratio of the measured thrust and the weight of engine looks better.
- So their measured thrust is almost constant regardless their engine size.
- While they could reach thrust to weight ratio of 1, which looks impressive initially, they could not demonstrate macroscopically relevant thrust.
This all points to the same thing: they are measuring something else, a consistent error in the measurement in the thrust.
I would really like to believe that they have made something useful, but their data does not show anything convincing.
Hope it's not cold fusion all over again. 😢
Like the 'Thunderstorm Generator' is being demonstrated?
@@adamrak7560 Good comment, if it turns out to be the case. We are stalling on advancement due to all the negatives stalling investment, and diverting to trying to share up accepted things (like string theory) despite his much they do not work and things are not proven. If the money spent on paying people to do string theory had been invested on open asymmetrical force drive research, maybe we would have something by now. The thing about scaling reminds me of gold standard double blind study drug research, where statistics and generalisation of the tested groups, can mask things, and a small desired signal is regarded as a victory. They need to prove a clearly measurable force, even if they have to put a million of these things in an array. I haven't read the paper, but I can hazard a guess at the scale likely you are talking about, it could be some uneven interaction with vacuum energy. Something I was proposing in the 1980's, ot 90's, but not being a physicist, it didn't go anywhere. But was a quantum sail proposal. Anyway, once you go small enough, there is all sorts of environmental factors that can interfere. Did they have it in a vacuum and measure it moving up or defying gravity at least.
Anyway, giving the benefit of the doubt. Maybe the guy has put enough time in, and is reporting on something potentially interesting (by your description of how minute the affect is) or is seeking real interest and finding to push things to a new level?
Great claims require great investment to prove them. We can't just wait for things to be verified on the cheap before we accept that we should invest, that stalls out research. Great working out does matter. But here, as described above, it seems the demonstration of the magnitude of the effect is not as great as we would like.
Sounds like a space ship pulling itself up by its own bootstraps. Perhaps it should be called Bootstrap Ship - or BS for short 😉
wr
Every stupid negative comment always gets first place; congratulations.
Science fiction story I once read had a drive that "projected" a strong gravity well in front of a spaceship so that the spaceship continually fell forward. Because it was projection, the ship never reached it, but it moved forward all the same. Another BS ship :) I think that was the same author that wrote about spacefaring big cats that could carry people on their back.
Lmao
Its basically like putting a boom on your car thst holds an electromagnet out in front of it to pull the car forward
I don't think it's fraud, rather it's self-delusion.
Not at all, however the statement at 00:11 is in error. It would indeed require an energy source. The rest fits with physics principles.
@@JoeyBlogs007 it does not align with physics (see conservation of momentum). The only way to do so is with massless particles like photons, and we are nowhere near photonic drive.
Okay so he has NASA cred doesn't mean he didn't hit his head.😅😅
One suspects it's not deyfying laws of physics at all. Rather, it operates within the known frameworks of classical mechanics, electromagnetism, and other established physical principles. Electrostatic Actuators: Use electrostatic forces to move or control objects without ejecting mass. These are commonly used in micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS). Solar Sails: Utilize the pressure exerted by photons from the Sun to propel spacecraft. No mass is ejected; instead, the momentum of the photons is transferred to the sail. Gyroscopes and Reaction Wheels: Used in spacecraft for orientation and stabilization. They operate by changing the orientation of rotating masses within the system, producing a force without ejecting mass.
00:11 Not requiring an energy source I suggest is not the case. It would definately require an energy source.
electrostatic forces, they also push off of another object, not in the vacuum of space. get it?
apparently some people have not learned that what was taught in physics 101, that there is a big difference between force and work. Guess what, you need to do work to accelerate an object.
sounds like a theranos
Very much so.
Pons and Fleischmann.
Woodward MACH drive
Which is?
a scam
Interesting new term for perpetual motion.
Powered by cold fusion and phlogiston.
My tinfoil hat is tingling with this one… I’d love it to be true, but skepticism is the best approach at this point I think.
it's in alignment with the principles of physics. No laws of physics are broken.
There is a false claim at 00:11 suggesting it doesn't require an energy source. EP (Electrostatic Propulsion ) , like any other propulsion system, relies on energy input to generate the necessary electrostatic fields that create thrust. Without an energy source to power the generation and maintenance of these fields, EP would not be able to function.
I watched the original video months ago he didn't claim that it didn't require energy just that it didn't require propellant. Casimir Effect
I’ve not been able to locate the original paper. If anyone can supply a link to it, I’d be greatly appreciative…
@@JoeyBlogs007Newton's 3rd Law is broken, so it's definitely a hoax.
This isn't free energy or propulsion without energy. This is propulsion without 'propellant'. Nuclear or other propulsion means always need something to throw out the back to get forward thrust. With nuclear fuel lasting hundreds of years, the limiting factor is the mass you throw out the back. You can get more efficient by lowering the mass of the particles ejected and increasing the speed to near light, but eventually you run out (ion drive). This new drive somehow bends spacetime or some other means using power to provide thrust. Now we just need a way to generate power to move the spacecraft. In the inner solar system solar power may be enough, and you don't need to worry about where the back of your spacecraft is facing. A powerful ion drive unit is essentially a particle beam weapon by another name.
You really need to actually read the patent. It's simple and remarkable
"Without expelling mass" is not equivalent to no energy source or violating the laws of physics. Photons are massless but not momentumless for example, so existing physics permits a body to accelerate without expelling mass. I don't know what established law of physics this propulsion is supposed to violate. I'll be surprised if it violates any, but "laws of physics" can and do change over time.
His statement at 00:11 about not requiring energy was in error and presumably a false assumption.
Casimir Effect
For the record, Exodus Propulsion Technologies has not claimed to have broken any 'laws of physics'. The company has claimed to have achieved some degree of technical control/isolation of what it is calling an 'exodus effect'. Like normal, the Viking has been reading the commentary of the purveyors in pseudo-science rather than the source material (of which there isn't that much).
Yeah - it was crazy and disproved.
Where? Do tell us your source.
Not at all crazy. 0:11 was a statement of error, as it does requrie energy source. The rest fits with physics.
Casimir Effect
I agree that a claim without a demonstration is useless. We do have videos of UAPs that propel themselves without ejecting mass. Perhaps an object can propel itself by exerting a force on distant objects. It’s important to avoid terms like “unlimited energy.”
NASA sounds like na·suh.
Thank you.
I'm aussie and I agree he is saying it wrong!
Nazi run program nazi aero space administration??
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", also known as the Sagan standard, is an aphorism popularized by science communicator Carl Sagan. He used the phrase in his 1979 book Broca's Brain and the 1980 television program Cosmos. It has been described as fundamental to the scientific method and is regarded as encapsulating the basic principles of scientific skepticism.
Fortunately the claims in the theory itself are not extraordinary. However the false embellishment by the vlogger is extraordinary, and probably based on lack of understanding. It in fact doesn't defy laws of physics. That is a headline grabber, as is the false claim at 00:11 suggesting it doesn't require an energy source. EP (Electrostatic Propulsion ) , like any other propulsion system, relies on energy input to generate the necessary electrostatic fields that create thrust. Without an energy source to power the generation and maintenance of these fields, EP would not be able to function.
This clearly violates Newton's 3rd Law, so it's definitely a hoax. The other possibility being that we live in the Matrix, and this guy is Neo.
Sagan really, really regretted his homily.
It is absurd.
"Extraordinary" claims require evidence, just like any other claim.
Nothing is extraordinary.
It is either true or it is not.
The "demonstration in space" requirement is an obvious delay tactic. If it csn reduce the weight of something on the ground it can clearly propell something in space. :/
Cavorite was invented in 1901
he has just discovered the "Force"
One commenter had to say this about the math in the underlying patent: "Lol the math is so bad. He "derives" the formula mv=t*dU/dx, but U switches from the total potential energy in the first equation to something like the potential energy density in that equation. The total potential energy U is not a function of x so dU/dx is zero and his whole argument falls apart."
Dr Buhler claims to have generated a "force equivalent to one Earth gravity". Impressive, but gravity isn't a *force;* it's an acceleration. How many Newtons does his equipment generate, and how much mass does it have? And their claim to have increased the generated force by five orders of magnitude in only four years' time is pretty incredible, too. "Incredible", as in, "I don't believe it".
It does require energy; what it doesnt' require if it works ; is a propeller or exit gasses. This would present the possibilty of linear movement without a major loss of mass or needing an atmosphere. However you'd need an energy source that doesn't expel gasses for this to be an advantage. Nuclear is about the only such source. You could have solar cells in space because there isn't an air resistence so they could be large arrays. It would make space travel easier, and faster. Assuming it works.
Any actual paper published? Peer reviewed? Published test procedure / results ?
Bueller? Bueller?
The peerless have no peers.
Peer review serves only to confine the discussion to the Overton window.
@@arthurrobey4945 maybe… But if you can’t demonstrate the phenomenological results, and you can’t provide data, or get anyone else to reproduce your results, what have you actually accomplished?
@@vantongerent What you have accomplished is a Kuhnian revolution.
Did Kepler have his discoveries peer reviewed?
Galileo?
The inventor of the wheel?
Bessemer?
Faraday?
The effect of peer review is to defend the jobs of the professors.
The Professors prayer, "Please Lord, let there be no Kuhnian revolution on my watch."
The good news is that we are in the midst of a Kuhnian revolution as I type these words.
"It is not what you don't know that will get you into trouble; it's what you know fer sure, but it just ain't so." Samuel Clements.
@@arthurrobey4945 I think we are basically agreeing. And revolution would be fantastic… But it only happens if other people can reproduce your work.
I would be extremely surprised and delighted but anything that produced 1g of thrust would be amazing. 1g is obviously a difficult concept to explain if the mass of the vehicle is unstated. I await clarification of how it could be applied. Magnetic monopoles perhaps.
If true this would be the biggest breakthrough EVER in science. As you say let it be true!
If the aliens can do it, why not humans?
wrr
Because humans have developed a "scientific community" who are a bunch of Debbie Downers
who says the aliens can do it? LOL
I've seen an interview of Buhler. ("Buhler. Buhler. Buhler....") and I'm smart, but I'm not smart enough to poke holes in his explanation. I hope someone a little sharper than me will peer review this work and either validate or debunk it. In any case, we're grateful for the reporting of it, because it really should be investigated.
This is not a new force, it was discovered in Germany and it is called Münchhausen-Force since centuries..
The biggest problem is where to hide the battery
It seems that eectrostatic propulsion (EP) generally produces lower thrust compared to ion thrusters that expel ionized gas. This is primarily because EP systems rely on the acceleration of charged particles (typically electrons or ions) to genrate an electric field, which generally result in lower thrust levels compared to the high-speed expulsion of ionized gas in conventional ion thrusters. In electrostatic propulsion systems, achieving higher voltages can help compensate for the lower thrust generated by accelerating charged particles. The force exerted on charged particles is proportional to the electric field strength, which in turn is related to the voltage applied across the electrodes or grids in the propulsion system. With EP the ions are not ejected, it's the EM field it creates that interacts with space that contains the charged particles with which the EM field interacts.
Essentially, it's more like the EM field interaction with the charged particles in space results in space pushing against the spacecraft to move it forward, similar to a solar sail, however operates differently, as unlike a solar sail method of propulsion, EP doesn't eject photons, but instead an EM field. It's opposing em fields that result in the massless propulsion. i.e. that em field generated by the space craft and those em fields that exist in space due to particulate matter.
Electrostatic propulsion (EP) works by generating an electromagnetic (EM) field around the spacecraft. This EM field interacts with the EM fields present in space, which are generated by various charged particles and other sources. These interactions between the spacecraft's EM field and the ambient EM fields in space create forces that propel the spacecraft forward. Importantly, this method of propulsion does not involve expelling mass from the spacecraft, hence it is often referred to as "massless" propulsion.
They could either use Solar PV system or a nuclear battery to generate an em field in space, to use as a propulsion system without expelling mass. Nuclear batteries, such as Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs), can generate more power per unit size compared to solar panels in certain scenarios. A nuclear reactor might be overkill, however in essence, while both buclear battery and nuclear reactor could utilize nuclear processes for electricity generation through thermoelectric conversion, nuclear reactors and nuclear batteries (RTGs) differ significantly in scale, purpose, operation, and application.
Cooling a nuclear reactor in space presents significant engineering challenges, primarily due to the absence of an atmosphere for convective cooling and the need to radiate heat effectively into space. Thus nuclear batteries might be a preferred option. Nuclear reactors generally have the potential to generate more power per unit mass compared to nuclear batteries (radioisotope thermoelectric generators, or RTGs).
I guess if they can master the safety aspect of nuclear reactors in space, this could be a massive advantage in operation of EP ( Electrostatic Propulsion ) systems, as the voltage generated would also be massive compared to nuclear batteries, thus resulting in a greater compensatory thrust potential when compared to ion genrators that rely on ionization of gas for propulsion.
IT IS propellantless BUT DOES USE ENERGY...propellantless propulsion refers to a type of propulsion technology that doesn't rely on expelling mass (like traditional rockets do with propellants such as fuel and oxidizer). Instead, these technologies typically involve generating thrust without ejecting any material from the spacecraft.
However, it's important to note that even propellantless propulsion systems require energy input to function. They often utilize various principles such as electromagnetic forces, ion acceleration, or interaction with the surrounding space environment to generate thrust. This means they still need energy to operate, typically in the form of electrical power from onboard sources such as solar panels or nuclear reactors.
NASA and other research institutions have explored various concepts for propellantless propulsion, such as electromagnetic propulsion systems like ion drives or more speculative ideas involving interactions with space-time metrics (like warp drives, which remain highly theoretical).
In summary, while propellantless propulsion doesn't use traditional propellants, it does require energy input to generate thrust and propel a spacecraft.
I had an air filter that worked on these principles. Got it from sharper image. 30 years ago. This is pure bs.
Buhler is actually not the first to "discover" the emergent effect of specially shaped Asymmetrical Metallic Structures. It started in the 1930's/1940's? with Thomas Townsend Brown. There is a side-branch of the technology used to create lift with "ionic wind" the Ionic thrusters you find on youtube,. this is NOT the avenue/effect that Brown continued to research, it was the apparent impact of his device on the space-time construct, somehow similar/related to the effect we call gravitation. His effect was not antigravity( that word was created by the popular press trying to define some mystical misunderstood effect), it is more an interfering with the action/reaction of the gravitational field, by creating its own localized distortion field. The effect is real and has been measured in the lab. It does not break the laws of physics, it introduces another methodology with which we can utilize high density energy to interact with localized matter and spacetime.
If it sounds too good to be true then it usually is not true. I have seen these sorts of claims pop up many times over the past 60 years that I have followed space flight. There is this little thing called physics that always gets in the way and these people who develop things like this usually need to invent or discover a "new force" or something that holds their idea together. Eventually one figures out that the inventor has the physics all wrong and nothing ever comes of it.
However it's in alignment with the principles of physics. No laws of physics are broken.
@@JoeyBlogs007 it's the part about "discovering a new force" that bothers me. That sounds very suspicious to me and indicates one of three things:
1. They are observing the effects of a known force in a way they don't understand (most likely)
2. They needed to invent a new force to make their claims viable but they haven't proven this new force really exists (likely)
3. They actually did discover a new force (highly unlikely)
We see these sorts of fantastic claims quite often and they always seem to be #1 or #2. Think Cold Fusion.
Then again, maybe I am too skeptical being a grumpy old fart so to speak😊 Have a great weekend!
This concept relies on the assumption that space has an electrostatic field of sufficient strength to push against. If there is a field, it may be very weak. This sounds like a micro-phenomenon (e.g. Brownian motion) that may not apply at a macro scale.
We need independent veriification of these claims ASAP.
Just when I thought I'd seen it all, Cyberopolis comes along. This project is on another level.
So how many frauds or incompetents have claimed to make perpetual motion machine devices over the centuries? These types of claims really annoy me so I have to say that's what's going on here. Ahh, now I feel better!
I invented a vehicle that uses no energy nor propellant. It currently can only go down. With enough investment I will start working on up.
Yes, it is a very bold claim. See if you can guess why. Here's a hint: it starts with a "B" and ends with a "T".
i have to say im still scarred by the m drive on nsf advanced propulsion pages, lets wait and see what Sabine says first
Sabine will cut through the bullshit and expose this scam.
I doubt Sabine will bite at this, better BS to debunk
I believe it - the tooth fairy told me it was true!
And it is true. The thing that's not true, is the claim that it breaks the laws of physics, when in fact it doesn't. It's in alignment with the principles of physics. No laws of physics are broken.
I'm not giving up on building my antigravity device.
Yes, I predict there will be a lot of customers for them. They will literally fly off the shelf.
.....maybe, could be, should be....yeah we been here a lot...yeah the only plausible propulsion lately is to take advantage of the mass gaining effects of near light speed particles in ONE direction but slowed (with less mass) elsewhere in the loop.... and it's solar powered...
I don't believe for a second that this works. but, it doesn't break all the laws of physics. it is conceivable that a rocket could push against virtual particles, their entanglement, or against the fabric of space, among other ideas. problem is, we have no idea how to do that at the moment.
Well, standing by wth a bottle of excitement.
Prof. Alec Laithwaite claimed to have discovered/developed a reactionless drive back in the 70s.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Once inventors take the electric universe on board they can easily create a drive
Cyberopolis's team is comprised of industry veterans. Their experience speaks volumes about the project's potential.
Did I hear someone mutter "perpetual motion"? I'm sure that if it had anything to offer that Elon would be all over it like a rash.
Couldn't resist and grabbed a slice of cyberopolis. Let's see where this goes!
I dont know why they are struggling so much with this tech, All they got to do is go down to the basement and pull out classified alien tech and we are good to go..
If this were really true, why use it for propulsion? Use it to drive a turbine and produce electricity without using fuel. This really sounds like nonsense.
Sure, let's see some peer reviewed papers and someone else with solid credentials who can replicate this phenomenon. There is just so much fantasy and lies these days with fantastic claims. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence!
Nothing new, the Battlestar Galactica (Adam’s Ark) already used it in the Seventies. My God, I am getting old 😢
40 days to Mars /. 20 days fast forward and 20 days in reverse to land softly on Mars
Decided to jump in on cyberopolis with a small position myself!
I don't know whether this is genuine or not, but something similar is needed to develop space and even airplane travel. Burning hydrocarbons or gases is not good
It is genuine and make sense. The thing that's not true, is the claim that it breaks the laws of physics, when in fact it doesn't. However it's in alignment with the principles of physics. No laws of physics are broken.
Look up Townsend Brown. He has a lot of patents on the subject.
I'll take 2 of them, one go to the far side of the universe and the other to bring me home.
We know so little. Think outside of the box. Propellants move things. But what is movement? What is up? What is down?
Speak for yourself
Cyberopolis definitely caught wind of the buzz in a couple of forums.
Last I heard, they shared their design with other independent teams that will try to replicate their results. We will see. If this is just a measurement error or something that can potentially change world remains to be seen. As we have seen in the past, from humble beginnings paradigm shifts can happen. The reason I think it is unlikely to succeed is pretty cynical, but also reasonable: because we are still hearing about it. If it was actually working, Im pretty sure those who actually control things on this planet like the oil industry would have shut/shot these people down a long time ago.
Sounds like some force is bouncing of the positive and negative charges and natural pressures.
How many cats are needed to create enough electrostatic thrust to escape Earth's gravity?
I don't know, but I've heard that if you tie a piece of buttered toast to a cat's back and drop it, the cat winds up hovering because nature doesn't know whether to land on the cat's paws or the buttr, so gravity.exe crashes.
phasers ? thanks great video !
Noticed some influencers hyping cyberopolis up.
Check out the work of Dr. T. T. Brown.
Why on earth do you report on obvious fraud and bullshit?
Seems like cyberopolis gaining traction with the big names.
Where are the peer confirmed tests? It doesn't need to be done in space to prove it. "Hey, I've perfected cold fusion, but I won't show it to you until I can set up my lab on the moon. Send money please."🙄
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Of course, the ET technology will be touted as a new discovery.
Once they reversed engineered what they had recovered.
This is one of those areas that is so embarrassingly full of bunko that you don't "announce" it without tangible evidence you can show us right now. It belongs in the same bucket of crap that is reserved for cold fusion. PROOVE IT or don't bother. This ruins your credibility.
it makes me think of flying saucers. you never see a thrust jet stream come out of a flying saucer. Pitty, they are only fiction.
A hit by Bueler - Bueler’s hit.
تكلم عن الاندماج النووي الصيني ❤
The hyping here is regrettable. Mostly, we use the terms propellant and fuel interchangeably. There is nothing novel about a form of propulsion or 'drive' being propellantless. An EV is propellantless. It has a) an electromagnetic motor and b) a source of energy - a rechargeable battery. And, similarly, the only questions here are a) what is the drive mechanism and b) what is the source of energy.
Whether generated from solar collectors or some form of nuclear decay this drive must surely run on electrical power. So, in the unlikely event that this thing works, electrical energy is consumed in the creation of some electrostatic drive force - the novelty here attaches to these claims of electrostatic propulsion - but propellantless drive does not imply free energy.
Granting, for the sake of argument, that this could work, does this mean we now have anti-gravity machines? Technically, perhaps, but it doesn't mean these machines can move freely in our atmosphere. In space such an electrostatic force might amount to something but not near earth. And, that assumes that this thing works.
I can see promotional links - I can't links to the science - wheres the white paper?
It must be true, I saw it on the Internet.
Lots of claims, no references. Yet another person who thinks they can violate conservation of momentum. I can just tell that this will go well.
No matter what happens, no matter if this force is true, this decade will be game changing.
How so?
I remember how excited I was when I heard about EM drive, I was literally giddy telling my housemates what had just been discovered and the implications. And it went no where, or at least there has been no revolution in space flight because of it. The world was a lot simpiler back then, all I had to consider was whether the idea had merit and if it did then it would burst onto the scene and change the world. However, my biggest realisation since then, is that the world doesn't work that way and there is active supression of all sorts of ideas that could revolutionise the world. So, I don't think this will make any impact, because all the ideas that came before it changed nothing either.
BS science is just hard for you.
NARSA @ 4:03 not NASA
LOL
It’s an Aussie pronunciation of A
Noticed cyberopolis popping up in conversations on Discord.
Na-suh, not Nar-suh
Also, don't be a mug.
Hmmm. This type of propulsion, if legit, would explain the numerous UAP sightings of late. This guy could be using new alien tech. 👽
Yep and I bet these alien space ships use nuclear reactors generating massive voltage to generate the electrostatic thrust via the EM field it creates that pushes off the opposing EM fields in space and the atmosphere. You know it makes sense.
How do UFOs fly without expeling anything ? We have lots o discoverys to do yet 😂
UFOs don't exist
Entanglement
It is well known that they use a forced quantum singularity coupled to a magnetoreluctor on a framus.
@@kensmith5694 I thought they used invisible and well-trained flying pigs.
@@simongross3122 That is obsolete technology
Sounds like the 3 propulsion systems work, but they aren't being used or exploited.
I'm beyond skeptical and will go ahead and call this BS. I believe this concept will produce extremely small amounts of force or propulsion. But hey, it's so exciting!
It will likely end up being some sort of subtle interaction with the Earth's magnetic field, air-currents, thermal effects or some combination of these and other stuff.
Could it lift objects into space? This is more difficult; the energy source would have to be lighter than liquid fuels currently used. Maybe if poweredby - say laser beams or micro waves from ground sources it could be used to lift through the atmosphere; or maybe some sort of other lightweight energy source. A demonstration of a real such system would be rather more important than a claim based on theory.
I suspect that heavy lift is not remotely in the cards. If it's real, it will probably find use in nudging satellites about and driving space probes in situations where we would presently use an ion drive.
You jumped right past "is it even real"
@@kensmith5694 right i gave this NASA guy some credibility that he figured out something but I think I also noted lots of people like to get grants for research from the government based on questionable facts - so it could be a fraud. I was not going to claim that just pointing out the fellow doesn't say it produces energy, it does use energy; just not combustion... assuming it works.
New Zealand is way ahead. Patenting is publishing.
I would need to see that it works in a vacuum.
For all the nah sayers you may be right but remember as Rumsfeld said "....there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”
He also said he know where the WMDs were.
Saw the cyberopolis hype train leaving the station in a few chats.
Sam, It's pronounced NASSA not Nah Sir. You know like the teacher asked the kids if they'd been smoking behind the bike shed, and they said "Nah Sir".
I know what you mean, I don't use Sam's pronunciation either, but that's his way, to which he is entitled. I had it explained to me by strangers that I was pronouncing the name of my birthplace incorrectly. G'die mate.
@@rbdogwood Totally! It just makes me laugh sometimes.
NASA mentioned , raise alerts. Show the paper
👍👍
if it sounds too good to be true then probably it's not true
Fortunately it doesn't sound too good to be true. And it likely is true. The thing that's not true, is the claim that it breaks the laws of physics, when in fact it doesn't.