NASA’s EmDrive would violate well established scientific theories
NASA’s peer-reviewed paper on the revolutionary Electromagnetic Drive often know as the EM Drive—has finally arrived, and it’s created quite a stir in the scientific community.
The journey to EmDrive was begun by British scientist Roger Shawyer about 15 years ago. NASA’s Eagleworks Laboratory, the group that tested the EM Drive, released evidence claiming the EM Drive really does work, which is challenging Newton’s third law.
There’s just one little issue: The EmDrive shouldn’t work, if you put any stock in Newton’s Third Law of Motion (every action have an equal and opposite reaction). The EmDrive doesn’t blast anything out the back, so just how it produces thrust (the equal and opposite reaction) is a mystery.
The EmDrive is a propulsion system which produces 1.2 millinewtons of force for every kilowatt of thrust. Propulsion normally works in concordance with Newton’s third law, The researchers have found is movement without a reaction. But they found that with a particular sort of shape, you get a movement without needing to burn any fuel.
This test was led by physicist Harold sonny white, of NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston. The result was- An EmDrive design generated small amounts of thrust in the lab. The engine works by bouncing micro waves around inside a chamber. It requires no propellant and could therefore usher in a new era of super fast and efficient spaceflight.
In other word the issue with the EmDrive is that a working EmDrive would violate well established scientific theories. So of course now Physicist should be focused on finding possible explanation for why this could occur without violating the laws of physics.
“It’s an interesting story in that it seems to be in inexplicable technology development; nobody can really explain why it works “, said Tom Jones, former NASA astronaut& alumnus.
The drive’s ability to stay on for long periods of time could also open up areas of the outer solar system that were previously out of reach for chemical propelled rockets .
One of the drawbacks of using EmDrive is that it eats a lot of electricity for not a lot of thrust; maybe in near future we will see some improvements in it. Both Torrieri and Jones agree that EmDrive needs to be tested further before its efficacy can be determined