NASA engineer creates propulsion system that defies the laws of physics

Is this an example of Reverse Engineering of NHI technology?

Perhaps it is…..just maaaaaybe

Source: NASA engineer creates propulsion system that defies the laws of physics


Linked Article Excerpts….

A NASA engineer and co-founder of Exodus Propulsion Technologies has claimed that his company's propellantless propulsion drive system has generated enough thrust to counteract Earth's gravity.

This discovery, which appears to defy the known laws of physics, could potentially revolutionize space travel for the next millennium.

"The most important message to convey to the public is that a major discovery occurred," Buhler told The Debrief.

"This discovery of a New Force is fundamental in that electric fields alone can generate a sustainable force onto an object and allow center-of-mass translation of said object without expelling mass."

The concept of a propellantless drive, also known as the "impossible drive," was first introduced in 2001 by British Electrical Engineer Roger Shawyer. The EmDrive, as it was called, claimed to be reactionless, requiring no propellant and defying the known laws of physics, specifically the conservation of momentum. Despite two decades of testing, the EmDrive was ultimately deemed bunk in 2021.

However, the dream of a propellantless machine persisted, and now, a new challenger has emerged with the backing of a former NASA scientist. Buhler, who helped establish the Electrostatics and Surface Physics Laboratory at Kennedy Space Center in Florida, claims that his team at Exodus Propulsion Technologies has created a drive powered by a "New Force" outside our current known laws of physics.

How the EmDrive supposedly works

The EmDrive consists of a conical cavity filled with microwaves. The device's inventor, British engineer Roger Shawyer, proposes that the microwaves bouncing inside the cavity can create a difference in radiation pressure, resulting in a net thrust towards the narrow end of the cone.

This concept challenges our understanding of physics, as it suggests that a closed system can generate propulsion without any external reaction mass.

Interesting article all the way through….

👽☕️🍩

"proposes that the microwaves bouncing inside the cavity can
create a difference in radiation pressure, resulting in
a net thrust towards the narrow end of the cone."
"requiring no propellant and defying the known laws of physics"

No propellant?
what about the electricity & high whats?
"Microwaves, a type of electromagnetic radiation akin to radio waves"!

Even Light can PUSH some thing!
look up the Crookes radiometer.
en.wikipedia.org...
I did Not say how it pushes it!
This would Still work in space.
it is not a true vacuum in space!

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1

Is this an example of Reverse Engineering of NHI technology?

I know you like your Batteridge headlines- but surely the fact you also highlighted Shawyer came up with a similar principle (years before) had you hesitating?

Oh and its the Debrief....they are having a propulsion revolution - whether you like it or not.

One from last week.....at least this has some workings.

thedebrief.org...

a reply to: Jukiodone

Are you keeping up with Jack Juki. He is busy playing with Simon presently.

@Ophi. 😎.

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
Is this an example of Reverse Engineering of NHI technology?

Perhaps it is…..just maaaaaybe


👽☕️🍩

Sounds like it.

Wonder if this is the tech they were testing in Peru pretending to be aliens.

originally posted by: Jukiodone

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1

Is this an example of Reverse Engineering of NHI technology?

I know you like your Batteridge headlines- but surely the fact you also highlighted Shawyer came up with a similar principle (years before) had you hesitating?

Oh and its the Debrief....they are having a propulsion revolution - whether you like it or not.

One from last week.....at least this has some workings.

thedebrief.org...

Thanks for Enlightening me…..

Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." It is named after Ian Betteridge, a British technology journalist who wrote about it in 2009, although the principle is much older.

It is based on the assumption that if the publishers were confident that the answer was yes, they would have presented it as an assertion; by presenting it as a question, they are not accountable for whether it is correct or not. The adage does not apply to questions that are more open-ended than strict yes–no questions

By the way…the “headline” does not have a question mark ….as it comes verbatim from the article headline itself..

🍻

Sure …..there’s all types of propulsion theories being researched from all sorts of angles. However of my interest to post this thread ….is anything that purportedly claims in the vain of “defies the laws of physics” which as we all know are the buzz words for associating it to UFO/UAP’s although the article does not make that association whatsoever.

But in the context of UFOlogy …..much is said about reverse engineering and what may have come to fruition from it……i.e. the purported IC chip, Fiber Optics, etc.

So I’m merely asking the forum….is it possible that NIH technology has been passed off to other entities to research and develop…..and now we have a NASA backed company “ A NASA engineer and co-founder of Exodus Propulsion Technologies”…that now claims it has a possible solution that “defies the laws of physics”.

For me that’s mind boggling because essentially what’s being said in my own mind..is that some type of NIH propulsion may have been figured out…purportedly.

My thought here is that …we humans can’t have gone from combustion propulsion to defying the laws of physics propulsion….without some external help. You know…like the NAZI’s Aerospace developments with the possible help of NHI theory.

But then that’s my opinion now, isn’t it?....

👽🍺

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

To answer the question, I'd say it's reversed engineering... they've finally figured it out after all the years of testing!

Seems a rather mixed bag of testing results:
Nat Geo reports
"When they turned on the system but dampened the power going to the actual drive so essentially no microwaves were bouncing around, the EmDrive still managed to produce thrust—something it should not have done if it works the way the NASA team claims.

The researchers have tentatively concluded that the effect they measured is the result of Earth’s magnetic field interacting with power cables in the chamber, a result that other experts agree with."

Googling it shows that basically they had not accounted for magnetic fields created by the power cables and when isolated, the thrust disappeared.

Newton still wins.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I remember way back when I was working in a photo lab with a friend, and we were building very powerful xenon strobe lights. While testing them, we had an interesting idea to attempt to knock over tiny little aluminum foil figures that we had delicately balanced on a table. It took so long to get them balanced because the slightest movement of air would topple them.

We set them up 3 inches from the strobe in a dark room and got them to topple over when we triggered a flash a few times, however it certainly was not definitive because we had many cases where they had fallen over before we fired the flashes.

We also wondered if it was a sudden heat effect that could topple them instead of being hit by light. We did notice that the closer the foil objects were to the xenon lamp, the louder the "crack" we heard from the strobe.

We could have done this a lot more scientifically , but were basically fooling around on company time while board.

I wonder if anyone else had tried something like this, attempting to use light to move an object.
This was before we ever had access to lasers, which of course had the capability to do much more!

a reply to: charlyv

The Light Sail Project has launched 2 into space as proof of concept projects:
www.planetary.org...

Great tech for exploring the Solar System.

Not so much for interstellar travel.

Cheers!

a reply to: LetsGoViking

That is cool and thanks for the link.
I remember hearing about it. The scale is huge and powered by solar wind and I guess light as well. There was also a version that would use lasers fired from the Atacama desert to see if they could get it really moving fast. I do not think that ever got funded.

Hopefully this guy won't disappear like everyone else who's created/discovered/invented revolutionary systems that totally go against the accepted norm.

A recent Why Files covers this in some detail.

Our civilization is completely #ed as far as progress and advancement goes because everything, yes Everything is run by the oil cabal (another topic for another time)

a reply to: Raptured

Yes, the Why Files has put out some really relevant content lately and some of it has been really eye opening.
Some of the things that have gone on in the dark corners of the government are disturbing at best.

The thoughts of how they ruined the lives of some really serious inventors and scientists is more disturbing.

a reply to: charlyv

Yes, the Why Files has put out some really relevant content lately and some of it has been really eye opening.

That's a terrific show. And now that they have it on Amazon Prime I can watch it on the big screen instead of just on the computer screen.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Headline later this month"

NASA engineer found dead. 12 gunshots to back of his head was apparent suicide according to coroner. This comes just days after his company was raided by the FBI and erupted into flames less than an hour later.

originally posted by: SchrodingersRat
a reply to: charlyv

Yes, the Why Files has put out some really relevant content lately and some of it has been really eye opening.

That's a terrific show. And now that they have it on Amazon Prime I can watch it on the big screen instead of just on the computer screen.

Putting the Why Files on Amazon is just a way to gain control of the production. They will not allow some stories to be told now that it is going more mainstream.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

It won't be possible if it violates conservation of momentum and conservation of energy. The article is a little sensationalist.

Maybe worth pondering....

Defies the laws of physics?



Don't make me laugh out loud...I am at a gig.

What Laws of physics are defied?

It wasn't until about 100+ years ago that we figured out how to fly. That defied the physics then...until it became common place and better understood.

The hubris of humanity to think we have figured it out and we are the most knowledgeable ever.

In another 100 years, they will laugh at our actions today...that is one thing science proves over and over.

I really think this we are it attitude is the sign we are devolving, most have closed their mind to thinking for themselves and accepting whatever they are told.

The way ya'll are eating up the whistleblowers and disclosure and reverse engineering, you will buy anything. (From those who you claim have been lying for the last 100 years)

I would bet my next paycheck that when NASA puts out a deep fake of the aliens you will just buy it.

If the aliens then said the earth is flat, would you buy it?

What if these aliens ya'll believe are more advanced than us, tell the world that abortion is a sin against the creator. Would you all yell to outlaw it?

a reply to: theatreboy

Weird. It doesn't say which laws are violated and it makes me think it's the author of the article who has come up with a sensationalist title.