[AR] Re: arocket Digest V2 #147
- From: John Schilling <John.Schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Michael Clive <clive@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 08:45:29 -0700
On 8/6/2014 10:08 PM, FreeLists Mailing List Manager wrote:
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 01:31:27 -0700
Subject: [AR] Re: NASA test of quantum vacuum plasma thruster
From: Michael Clive<clive@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks so much for this review. I was very excited, obviously, about this,
but upon reflection and the wisdom of people such as you, I have gained a
better handle on the experiment.
As someone who runs a test facility and often sees people screw up data
because they are not familiar with the equipment, your review rings very
true.
Dang.
Too bad.
Now I feel silly for getting all enthusiastic about this.
No reason to feel silly about that. The paper came from a reputable
organization, and the conclusions (which were the only part reported
outside the AIAA paywall) were entirely worthy of enthusiasm. And a
healthy dose of "this looks too good to be true...", but if that ever
completely overrides the enthusiasm, you may be in the wrong business.
Also, the bit where a medium-independent "propellantless thruster" is
inherently also a perpetual motion machine, never gets the press it
deserves. But if you do know about it, it's a good early check on
this sort of thing. If there's talk of a propellantless thruster,
look for the explicit discussion of why it is or is not also a
perpetual motion machine. If it's missing, then either A: they are
hiding something, or B: they don't understand what they are talking
about, or C: their work is being filtered through reporters who don't
understand what they are talking about.
In this case, apparently B and C both, which added to the confusion
for a while.
John Schilling
john.schilling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(661) 718-0955
Other related posts:
- » [AR] Re: arocket Digest V2 #147 - John Schilling