New Cinese Space Drive

This could be big -


blog.wired.com...

Chinese researchers claim they've confirmed the theory behind an "impossible" space drive, and are proceeding to build a demonstration version. If they're right, this might transform the economics of satellites, open up new possibilities for space exploration –- and give the Chinese a decisive military advantage in space.

-----------------

IF this works, they'll be able to run rings around everyone else in space, knock down other satelllites etc. Not to mention getting to Mars first!

I hope this leads to something!

The Chinese are at a stage the US and Russia were at in the 60's where they want to develop and flaunt their own space technology - except that they are starting 50 years ahead technology wise.

A powerful, non combustion engine would mean huge and rapid changes in top end transport.

All the best to them.

Soon there will be a space drive based on monoatomic particles.

By heating up a monoatomic particle you cause it to lose mass.

If this particle impacts at a colder temperature, it will release more energy than was required to propel it.

This sounds impossible but I assure you it is not. This is not a perpetuum mobile - nor is it a 'propulsion' system.

Propulsion is not a requirement for forward motion in space.

I am not talking about solar sails;

Constantly changing the mass of an object can cause that object to be able to appear to violate standard Newtonian physics and the laws of thermodynamics.

This is one of those articles that demonstrates the flaws of western science.... It's rigid INTERPRETATIONS of certain laws of physics makes professors likelly to dismiss something like this. Throw into that professors being forced into a role where potential commercialization of research is a deciding factor in what is pursued is another.

reply to post by roguetechie


I'm sorry, but your understanding of science is severely flawed. All someone would have to do is demonstrate this in a repeatable way and scientists would be all over it figuring out how it works and why our understanding of the laws of physics *appear* to be violated. This is not only how scientists become world-famous, but also how science itself progresses, and it is at the heart of why the scientific method is the most powerful analytical method known to man.

Problems with this particular system include: it appears to violate one of the most consistently useful and accurate predictors in science, it hasn't been independently reproduced, and the concepts haven't stood up to peer review. This is similar to countless other "perpetual motion devices" that have been rightly rejected by the scientific method and exposed as frauds, so I think you can understand why prominent scientists hesitate to accept these results at face value.

Wow, certain members must know something the Chinese Government doesn't know.

Perhaps those members should send them an email telling them their new space-drive won't work.....since they don't 'understand' it, it therefore cannot work

Clearly, National Governments must have access to knowledge and concepts that we do not.


*Rockets would still function, even if we had not the concept of 'thrust'.

*Kites would still fly, regardless of a child 'understanding' the Bernoulli principle.

I believe that such negative comments amount to nothing more than the results of a bad case of jealousy by Americans and British - whose economies are destroyed and whose place in the world becomes less important with each passing day.

reply to post by TruthTellist


All I'm saying is that this does not illustrate a flaw in the scientific method, and it does have a lot in common with countless other fraudulent products that claimed to provide free energy. They could demonstrate it tomorrow and explain it in a way that is in accordance with other observations of how our universe works and I'd be on board 100%. Well, at least 95% because in science nothing is ever strictly proven. However, until more detailed, peer reviewed work is done, I can understand how many scientists can be so dismissive.

It doesn't have anything to do with jealousy, the evidence to support this claim just isn't there. This is the great thing about science though: if they are right, and this phenomenon can be readily demonstrated, then it's only a matter of time before the rest of the scientific community is behind them.

Finally, TruthTellist, don't even get me started on that gobbledygook you were spewing in a previous post in this thread. It's just nonsense. I can tell you for sure that the Chinese government knows something you don't know.

reply to post by mtmaraca


Are you an American?

China clearly has the edge now that America cannot even build it's own spacecraft and is forced to purchase soyuz craft from Russia in order to fulfill the role on the ISS.

The Soviet Union established m-theory as valid in the 1970's - monoatomic particles can be utilized in the aforementioned manner - This has already been determined, there is no debate.

The americans built an ion drive - no one believed that was possible in any way but theoretically. Now look at them, they have a new space drive, but cannot launch it.

China doesn't need the acceptance of the rest of the world scientific community - they have their own, and have clearly begun to demonstrate that our academic bureaucracy is holding US back, not them.

Their willingness to explore New concepts is what sets them apart - it is what gives them the edge over America.

[edit on 28-9-2008 by TruthTellist]

reply to post by TruthTellist


Are you an idiot? You sure sound like one.

America's dominance in space exploration has clearly faded in recent decades, but think of all of the milestones it has reached that China has not. I think it's a little premature to declare China the undisputed kings of space.

I don't know what this "m-theory" is that you are referring to. I googled it but it appears it has something to do with string theory and not space propulsion. I don't think the soviets were working on string theory in the 70s, so you must be talking about something else. If this technology has truly been demonstrated, then show me the engine that utilizes it. Or if you want to expand on the monoatomic particle theory from your earlier post, try spelling it out in a way that isn't complete jibberish.

The difference between ion propulsion and this new closed waveguide microwave propulsion is that, as you state, ion propulsion was always recognized as being theoretically possible. Creating a practical ion engine was an engineering challenge, not a theoretical one, but the concept this thread is about appears to be theoretically impossible.