this thing is AMAZING…
Watch this test which may be used in future space missions by NASA. In 2015, NASA has made a lot of internet and magazine headlines with talks and tests of new kinds of propulsion systems. One in particular that they tested you may have seen. it is called an EM Drive propulsion successfully which is a “microwave” based system. And don’t don’t use it to make popcorn 😉
Here is an intro on the XRS-2200:
This engine was designed to be modular and was going to power the long since cancelled X-33 Venture Star. I knew I had seen a video of this before but I couldn’t find it anywhere. Found it finally through a dead hotlink to a Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) news release still on their server but it doesn’t turn up under any Google or NASA site searches for Aerospike. This video is property of NASA so if they request it to be removed I will do so. It was filmed in late 2000 or early 2001 and I believe this is 80% of max thrust.
Let’s check out the test in the video on page 2
Gotta love pessimist…
Pessimists are those who are negative for no reason. Realists can be positive or negative, depending on the situation (or a bit of both). This is a science post, and therefore requiring facts, such as stated…whether you see it negatively or not. It is what it is.
This is 3 years ago.
An aerospike engine?
Your government is making you think like that because its actually not a reality. Not everyone runs around destroying everything, so that makes you sound like a fool
I agree with helium 3, but even that stuff is extremely limited and very unstable. Nasa is just full of bullshit and show anyways. You rub two magnets together and you have anti gravity. Its not really that complicated
The fact that you drive a car running on gasoline means you are damaging. You’re right, there are stronger threats out there by a few. But I try not to follow my government. I don’t watch political news, I do my own research on ecological matters, and reference maps and photos (even from the ISS you can see destruction, especially over time). My government barely acts, and so I do not care for it (USA). Most of the Great Barrier Reef is bleached, the Amazon logging fields are polluted and clay halting future retake by the jungle, and we are the cause of “Chapter 6” of mass extinction events. I’ve done my homework because my government is a worse heap of garbage than “garbage island” in the Pacific when it comes to environmental progress. I don’t see a version of foreign planetary existance where we don’t cause damage and contamination. If we go, we must ensure 0% damage to Planet B. If we can’t do that, then we either stay and fix our current home or die with it. Pandemics require quarantine if a substantial threat exists…what makes us so special to break protocol?
Not limited on the moon. More stable than uranium. Should be able to cool easily in space
To those who think we should quarantine humans to Earth… Who do you want to start killing first. Perhaps your child. Fact is that any environment can handle only so much use and at this point there are far to many people on Earth to be “good for the environment’. So who dies first? Your grandmother? Because I will defend my family until my death so I propose you sacrifice yourself for the “good of humanity”.
Stephen Rother there’s absolutely nothing we can use helium 3 for…
Sure, fusion power, but we haven’t even mastered brute force fusion, let alone the more refined sort that requires helium 3.
Sounds like the plot to a science fiction story.
LOL
Garard, update yourself. http://www.space.com/29363-impossible-em-drive-space-engine-nasa.html
http://www.space.com/29363-impossible-em-drive-space-engine-nasa.html
Science fiction of today is tomorrows future. Check your history.
Cletus Cook I never said for us to die unnaturally. Quarantine means stay-put. Who said sacrifice life? I never said sentence people to death. I said to stay and cleanup our own mess, to be responsible and hold ourselves accountable. Saying “sorry, good luck” to our damaged Earth isn’t enough; we have to make it better. Hard work, new technologies, but all to make life here better for all, not spitting in nature’s face and running away free of blame or requirement for action. Do you think we should wreck Earth without consequences? What makes us so remarkable? Yes, there is much irreparable. Yes, there will be hard and trying times ahead of us and all life for generations to come. We did it, and we happen to be one of the only species of animal NOT going extinct, and in many cases doing the immediate killing of entire species.
No criminal should get of scott free.
With all that we’ve done, are we innocent?
Also, Cletus; If I die myself (were literal death my intention as you seem to think), what difference would that make? <$50 of elemental matter falls off the radar...that all? If human death were my intention, >7,000,000,000 would have to go all at once, clean slate. I do not agree with such an act; too many damaging human institutions would be left to continue the damage. Oil rigs and pipelines left without repair would leak like crazy, nuclear powerplants would seep radiation into the ground and water systems making anything for miles an ecological nightmare…reclamation by nature would occur, but not without a price from a check we decided to bounce.
We don’t die.
We don’t leave.
We do everything in our power to protect what is left in healthy numbers, and repair whatever possible wherever needed for those species left fragile in existance by us.
If a man burns down homes and endangers lives (let alone ending them), should he be set free from responsibility? Or should he not only serve the time (quarantine), but also work his entire life if freed to give back to the society he damaged in return for the damage he caused? The law seems to think only the former, but I believe both to be true.
We are animals. We have higher thought tied to both knowledge and ethics; something few animals have.
We use both.
We use knowledge to make the effort and technologies for environmental renewal.
We use ethics for any future ideas or invention or conflict when handling our own actions with each other, as they regard to the human’s surroundings.
I wish I were a worm sometimes. Simple life, simple needs, simple death.
I am a human, so things are more complex and everyone has their own brain. I spoke my mind freely here in the USA, and the should-be world. You have your thoughts, I have mine.
I have yet to directly or rudely insult a single person, merely express views on a level playing field.
Telling me to be an immediate “sacrifice,” when I never even brought up such an idea…you basically said for me to kill myself.
That is an insult to me and my character.
My ideas are based on facts around us all; whether I have feelings about them or not. From everyday practices (quarantine, repair-work, cleaning up one’s own messes, etc.) to the events that led to them needing to be done.
Yours was simply an opinion fueled by emotion. You don’t like what I said, so instead of providing new ideas, you simply nullify mine in a manner that your parents should be ashamed of.
Keep your cool, Cletus.
Hot heads can’t think straight; all they can do is heat others.
Rational and concise thoughts and educated opinions are good for science posts and pages.
You have the right to say as you wish (other than telling me to commit suicide…that’s actually against Federal Law here)…If insulting me makes your day, go on ahead.
In the end, collaboration and debate on this site makes little difference in the end.
Nick Drummond!!!!!!!!
Pretty impressive i must admit!
They’re just testing a vimana that was described in the ancient vedic scriptures.
I mean, I get your point. But if you’re so passionate about it then why wouldn’t you want more of your tax money put to use by NASA in order to build and improve their tools and equipment at a faster pace?
Mostly because the money won’t only go to fixing the planet with technology. Space exploration will always be a priority, and I do not support it (as stated). I’m okay with spending towards environmental protection and clean-up. Getting off-world? I don’t approve. Thank you for being more respectful than Cletus ^.^
Old news
Benny Palombo Jr.
FUCKING STUPID ! Quit bullshitting the American people with continuous development of$#%&!@*technology while the real masterminds covet Gravity Distortion Tech that could run circles around this p***********t
Old$#%&!@*video from 15 years ago?
Now how do i fit this on my car
Smoke screen.
your an idiot the test was 10 years ago look at the camera quality
Anyone else here thinking “man the intelligence of the people who engineer this must be through the damn roof”
Let’s get to using the fucker already!!!!!!!
Can i have a car with that?
Riio
Well now you don’t get to ride on my spaceship
As intended, haha!
Ur complaining about a engine that will never be used and was developed as part of of the x33 program in the 90s it ran off of liquid oxygen and hydrogen, it spewed 2 things that all plants love c02 and water and all humans love planmts so stfu
Ur complaining on a post about a engine that will never be used and was developed as part of of the x33 program in the 90s it ran off of liquid oxygen and hydrogen, it spewed 2 things that all plants love c02 and water and all humans love, plants!.. so stfu
Ur complaining about a engine that will never be used and was developed as part of of the x33 program in the 90s it ran off of liquid oxygen and hydrogen, it spewed 2 things that all plants love c02 and water and all humans love, PLANTS get outa here
The ion engine part was mostly a joke. You don’t have to reply to me. You replied as if in anger, and you could have just ignored me, or at least be respectful. Dane, you’re an idiot. Get mad all you want. It’s not my problem. I’m blocking notifications to this, so rant all you wish. Enjoy.
P.s.- I thought your parents would have taught you respect for others’ opinions whether you agree with them or not. I guess we can’t all come out polite and accepting ^.^
Oh so you are saying a Tera foaming engine. Nice
This video is of tests conducted back in 1999 and 2000 and the engine was going to be used with the X-33, which was federal backing back in 2001.
So instead of pushing for the survival of our species, we should give up and wait our impending doom on this planet? With all due respect that is not the purpose of life. The purpose of life is to survive and reproduce, so our next step is space. Unfortunately our survival may mean the death of another species, but that’s part of life.
Mike Musgrave The Sun eliminates almost all life on Earth in 500,000,000 years. And the purpose of a species is to survive in an environment it has the means to survive or adapt to, so yes, the raw biology makes sense.
But if a species like humanity, the apex of environmental decimation for the needs of a single species where others exist in cyclical ecosystems benefiting all within, is a wildfire across the prairie; nothing to stop it, nothing to permanently sustain it. The only animals we care about are the ones selectively bred for our own satisfaction. By our means, and the rule of biology you have stated, we would willingly destroy every species of life on the planet that does not directly benefit humanity.
Here’s the problem.
Humanity has left the ecosystem. We have made artificial environments free of natural diversity that we would deem unfit for existence. The fact that we have the mindset and technology to exit our atmosphere or build civilization beyond the woods, plains, and steppes means that we have literally begun to exit the ecosystem itself, rendering the biological-survival argument mute. We are not currently constrained to any particular environment, and we only would be were we absent of the house over your head while you read this.
An organism’s goal is to survive in its ecosystem based on its adaptations to it. We live in cities and towns and villages. Our greatest threat at this very moment as I write this is ourselves. The planets life as a whole is currently under threat from us more than any other means, even including meteors.
If we fix our world, awesome. We live here with whatever we have left of our own species and others.
If we fail to fix our current home, we can only have failed in the process either to fix it or damage it more.
If we leave, and bring our nonsense with us, we will have doomed two planets.
The end to the book/film “Ender’s War” may be fictional, but the effects are all to real. We are not some ferret eating rats out of a hole in the ground. We are humans, capable of higher thought and reasoning, and we have moved past building huts and spears and are currently trying to find new ways to grow crops because we are making deserts out of farmlands world-wide. We have moved beyond barbaric slaughter of anything standing before us. We have ethics and morals now.
Every species evolves adaptations to aid in the existence of a species.
We evolved morality and ethics. Finches use their beaks, we use our ideologies; both to solve problems. We have the power to stop destruction on an interstellar scale, simply by rebuilding a planet here, instead of ruining one elsewhere.
If a fire spreads across the forest, firefighters rally to put it out or to at least contain it to halt further damage to the area.
The fire destroys.
The workers and the water stop the advance of set destruction.
Take a third person perspective (the “higher thinking” ability that humans are supposed to utilize at all times);
As an unbiased observer from above the carnage;
1a. Which causes more damage?
2a. Does it make sense to contain the situation, even if not putting it out?
…
Equivalent situation by the proponents only (comparing two situations based on the common factors only);
Humanity rages as if fire across Earth, and then move to interstellar transfer of embers. Humanity has the means to both contain the fire here, as well as to spread it;
1b. Damage…Is humanity a liability to extra-solar life by virtue of biology/chemistry (the microbes and crops/livestock we heft) ?
2b. If humanity is such a fire, by choice or not, as in the first situation, should we be contained, even if not eradicated?
I’m no scientist comma but wouldn’t it be better to use a power source that is omnipotently abundant, like gravity or magnetism? Couldn’t you just have a system where if you wanted to get some place you just use magnetism towards that object to attract you to it as quickly as possible? And as far as things on this planet go, couldn’t you just use the Earth’s electromagnetic field comma has a source of the levitation and propulsion? Like I said, I’m no mathematician, but magnetism is universal, and abundant. It doesn’t require any fuel necessarily, and you can use electromagnetic fields to charge a battery. We have to start thinking outside the box. Especially when it comes to Interstellar travel. NASA just seems like a bunch of kindergarteners thinking about driving a car. Or a golden retriever thinking about a digital watch.
This would always be the best goal, and I am sure how other worldly beings travel. But the amount of energy to have that effect on magnetism is enormous that is exactly why I suggested somthing close to nuclear.
Jim Allen
This is NOT, I repeat NOT a microwave based engine as stated in the article. It is an “aerospike” engine that uses the visible truncated cone geometry to maintain aerodynamic efficiency at a range of atmospheric pressures.
Dave McIlraith I like the way think.Start testing your ideas you might come up with something great.
Unless they are already using it for$#%&!@*we arent aware of
Enjoy that hearing damage