Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcbz7g2 wrote

Reply to comment by Southern-Trip-1102 in IVO Ltd. to Launch Quantum Drive Pure Electric Satellite Thruster into Orbit on SpaceX Transporter 8 with partner Rogue Space Systems by ComfortableIntern218

Incorrect. It says no solid, liquid, or gas fuel. They also say it uses solely electricity. I also do not see a claim of it being reactionless, and I have been searching high and low for more information. Apparently, this stems from quantized inertia.

2

Gigazwiebel t1_jcc7ahf wrote

Yeah this breaks conservation of momentum.

4

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jccfs91 wrote

How can you conclude that when we don't know how it works? I say we wait for the results from space to draw conclusions. I'm still skeptical, but I'm also against damning technology that I don't understand just to sound edgy.

2

Gigazwiebel t1_jccgc1c wrote

I have a PhD in physics. Extraordinary claims that break physics as we know it require extraordinary evidence. These kind of bullshit pops up regularly and it always amounts nothing.

9

lazyeyepsycho t1_jcdmvjj wrote

its an expensive hoax though certainly

full commitment

2

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcibnez wrote

Yes, because small companies buy multi-million dollar launches to go to space and proceed to fake data from extremely sensitive and accurate measurement equipment, all of which are verified by outside sources. I can see them making a claim and never delivering on it, but a launch is a totally different animal. In order to pull off the scam, you would have to be able to fake a mass of data. That scenario is so complex/silly that you can't possibly believe they would go through that much trouble just to fool people momentarily. They and their partner clearly think they have something and have enough data to back up and justify a rocket launch.

1

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcchk9g wrote

Do you have inside information that we do not on how this technology works? No offense, but your degree means you know a certain determined extent of human knowledge of a subject. It does not mean you know the secrets of the universe, including every human invention that can and will exist. If this was the case, your rockets would be landing themselves instead of SpaceX. I'd also like to point out the quantity of PhD holders that stood in the way of SpaceX and many other revolutionary companies that have brought about technological change. Let's see the data first, or did they not teach you the scientific method while you were obtaining that fancy degree?

0

Southern-Trip-1102 t1_jcc9a1w wrote

Electricity isn't a fuel.

Reactionless typically means that it does not expell mass which it claims to not do.

4

ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jccf507 wrote

Actually electricity is fuel. Electrons have mass. If it doesn't expell electrons and is self-contained, we will have to wait for their explanation of exactly how it works.

1

isleepinahammock t1_jccmmd0 wrote

It's claimed not to expel anything, including electrons. IIRC, it's based on some theories of quantized inertia, and apparently that can be harnessed somehow to create a reaction less drive. I'm skeptical, but I say, go for it if you think it will work.

4

andrew851138 t1_jcv06lr wrote

It can’t just expel electrons as that would build up a charge - whatever it is, it also has to be charge neutral.

2

ConfirmedCynic t1_jcm2kod wrote

You're assuming it has nothing to interact with. Maybe it uses the solar wind somehow. Plenty of charged particles in the solar wind. Maybe it can push against the Earth's magnetic field.

−1