Comments
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcc0luz wrote
If they sent it up for hype knowing it wasn't real, the data would immediately invalidate it, which I'm assuming they know. I do agree that it will either be revolutionary or it simply won't work.
Southern-Trip-1102 t1_jcc9e8q wrote
I think a major warning sign would be if they launch a SPAC while launching this.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jccgchn wrote
I'm more concerned with the data. It will either work or it will not. Everyone was critical of SpaceX before they did what they had done. I see no reason to either doubt or believe a company until I have been given a reason to do so.
jusdisgi t1_jcqccu8 wrote
Well I wouldn't express certainty about it. But you seem to suggest equal aversion to doubt and belief, which I don't think is really right either. Is it possible that this company has created a really remarkable new drive type that somehow needs no fuel but isn't just a solar sail? I suppose so? But it's far enough outside our understanding of the related physics that it requires some explantion. The sheer novelty of their claim, added to their complete unwillingness to say anything at all about how it works should make us pretty darn skeptical.
[deleted] t1_jcqjuwv wrote
[removed]
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcr1s3b wrote
I am skeptical. I see they had an announcement a year ago and offered demos to companies. I would bet that's how they have a launch partner. It is also not surprising that a company with possibly revolutionary tech keeps quiet about how it does what it does it the public space.
jusdisgi t1_jcs84mu wrote
>It is also not surprising that a company with possibly revolutionary tech keeps quiet about how it does what it does it the public space.
The normal approach to that is patenting the technology, which requires explaining exactly how it works. If it's the real deal the secrecy approach might work for us regular folks but isn't likely to keep the likes of ULA or Spacex from figuring it out for long. So I don't think that's really a good explanation.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcsvsq8 wrote
The video on YouTube says it is patent pending, so it is, in fact, a very good explanation. I said it is not surprising that they keep it quiet in the public space, and that is exactly what they seem to be doing. What we know is that they have a patent pending propulsion technology that clearly provided enough data to convince another company to partner with them and send up a satellite with their propulsion on a multi-million dollar rocket launch. They clearly have something more than a simple bold claim. It may not work in space, but it also may.
lumpenpr0le t1_je2a736 wrote
People who knew the technology thought Space X wasn't an engineering problem that would be financially worth it to solve. That jury is still out on that.
​
This would really change modern physics which would be a hell of a lot more unlikely. I'm not saying it won't work, I just think it's a way different situation.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_je2de0c wrote
The jury is not out on SpaceX and the problems they are solving. Affordable launch platforms are the limitation of the space industry. What they have achieved already has opened up the door for many companies that do not have the budgets of the large companies and governments. The hearings on SpaceX had little to do with the budgets proposed. Former astronauts referred to it as unethical and said SpaceX would kill people. We also were completely reliant on Russian launch platforms before SpaceX was successful. Now, 99% of the industry uses Falcon 9. It was 100% worth it to solve the problems they did, and they have advanced the space industry because of it.
I agree with the physics point. I am just happy to see someone actually taking risks in the name of science.
flowirin t1_jcsrfa2 wrote
it works. clever use of physics and existing tech in another field.
Surur t1_jcbqtng wrote
So this is a reactionless drive, right? What's going on?
According to ChatGPT, a 100kg solar panel satellite with 1000w and 1 thruster could get to mars in little more than 1 day.
Does not sound realistic.
Stupid-Idiot-Balls t1_jce5olm wrote
You cannot trust chatGPT with calculations/information you don't understand/don't know how to verify.
It's an amazing tool but that is not how its meant to be used
Surur t1_jcejzu7 wrote
Sure, but is it wrong?
Stupid-Idiot-Balls t1_jcgeb8s wrote
If you can't answer that question yourself, then you shouldn't be using it like that.
It's definitely wrong though. The thruster claims to produce 52mN of thrust using a watt. So even if you assume that this efficiency scales linearly to 1000W (which it certainly doesn't), that equates to 52N of force for a 100kg object, or an acceleration of 0.52m/s^2. Accelerating a 100kg object with an initial velocity of 8km/s at 0.52m/s^2 for two days give a total distance travelled of ~ 9.1 million km. The average distanfe between Earth and Mars is 225 million kilometers, or over 20 times that distance travelled.
But even more importantly, chatGPT failed to capture the complexity of otbital dynamics. You can't just fly straight to Mars, you have to complete complex orbital maneuvers that require precise timing sometimes on the order of days, weeks, or even months. See the Hoffman Transfer Orbit for example.
So please, be careful in the future. ChatGPT shouldn't replace critical thinking.
Surur t1_jcgm3y4 wrote
So how many days then?
Stupid-Idiot-Balls t1_jcgq7jm wrote
Fuck should I know, ask an orbital physicist.
My whole point is that the answer to a question like that is too complicated to just ask chatGPT..
Surur t1_jcgrrtm wrote
ChatGPT says 13 days.
Stupid-Idiot-Balls t1_jch8qit wrote
Why people decide to be idiotic assholes on the internet I'll never know.
Enjoy your bad information my guy.
Evening-Ad-4406 t1_jcspisz wrote
I mean, you cant answer the question, how can you say chatgpt is wrong for sure.
Stupid-Idiot-Balls t1_jcu8k96 wrote
I clearly explained why ChatGPT was wrong the first time. Wtf are you talking about?
All I'm saying is that you can't take GPT answers at face value. Why are you guys being so fucking annoying?
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcbs4kw wrote
I don't think it is reactionless. It sounds like they figured something out in the physics realm using electrons. They haven't said much about how it works for obvious reasons if they are selling it. They clearly figured something out if they got a company to partner with them and scheduled a rocket launch. I can't imagine why someone would waste that much money if they weren't confident.
Southern-Trip-1102 t1_jcbyp6r wrote
They claim no fuel which means it's reactionless.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcbz7g2 wrote
Incorrect. It says no solid, liquid, or gas fuel. They also say it uses solely electricity. I also do not see a claim of it being reactionless, and I have been searching high and low for more information. Apparently, this stems from quantized inertia.
Gigazwiebel t1_jcc7ahf wrote
Yeah this breaks conservation of momentum.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jccfs91 wrote
How can you conclude that when we don't know how it works? I say we wait for the results from space to draw conclusions. I'm still skeptical, but I'm also against damning technology that I don't understand just to sound edgy.
Gigazwiebel t1_jccgc1c wrote
I have a PhD in physics. Extraordinary claims that break physics as we know it require extraordinary evidence. These kind of bullshit pops up regularly and it always amounts nothing.
lazyeyepsycho t1_jcdmvjj wrote
its an expensive hoax though certainly
full commitment
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcibnez wrote
Yes, because small companies buy multi-million dollar launches to go to space and proceed to fake data from extremely sensitive and accurate measurement equipment, all of which are verified by outside sources. I can see them making a claim and never delivering on it, but a launch is a totally different animal. In order to pull off the scam, you would have to be able to fake a mass of data. That scenario is so complex/silly that you can't possibly believe they would go through that much trouble just to fool people momentarily. They and their partner clearly think they have something and have enough data to back up and justify a rocket launch.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcchk9g wrote
Do you have inside information that we do not on how this technology works? No offense, but your degree means you know a certain determined extent of human knowledge of a subject. It does not mean you know the secrets of the universe, including every human invention that can and will exist. If this was the case, your rockets would be landing themselves instead of SpaceX. I'd also like to point out the quantity of PhD holders that stood in the way of SpaceX and many other revolutionary companies that have brought about technological change. Let's see the data first, or did they not teach you the scientific method while you were obtaining that fancy degree?
Southern-Trip-1102 t1_jcc9a1w wrote
Electricity isn't a fuel.
Reactionless typically means that it does not expell mass which it claims to not do.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jccf507 wrote
Actually electricity is fuel. Electrons have mass. If it doesn't expell electrons and is self-contained, we will have to wait for their explanation of exactly how it works.
isleepinahammock t1_jccmmd0 wrote
It's claimed not to expel anything, including electrons. IIRC, it's based on some theories of quantized inertia, and apparently that can be harnessed somehow to create a reaction less drive. I'm skeptical, but I say, go for it if you think it will work.
andrew851138 t1_jcv06lr wrote
It can’t just expel electrons as that would build up a charge - whatever it is, it also has to be charge neutral.
ConfirmedCynic t1_jcm2kod wrote
You're assuming it has nothing to interact with. Maybe it uses the solar wind somehow. Plenty of charged particles in the solar wind. Maybe it can push against the Earth's magnetic field.
MR___SLAVE t1_jd0orqz wrote
I have seen at least three of these types of drives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive
pilotavery t1_jcsmxrh wrote
There's tons of hydrogen ions just floating around in space, not necessarily in deep space but near our solar system. Maybe it's just using that and a magnetic field as propulsion. Kind of funneling in ions and then accelerating them
Zenquin t1_jcs2qaq wrote
At an acceleration of 0.52m/s^2 and a distance of 225*10^9 m:
about 33.8 days.
EDIT: corrected my math.
Surur t1_jcs3gix wrote
So that still does not sound very realistic, right?
Zenquin t1_jcs4d8y wrote
If true, we would definitely be in Nobel Prize territory.
NavierIsStoked t1_jdvdmx1 wrote
It would be the most important Nobel ever awarded.
Djinnanetoniks t1_jculumi wrote
This sounds like a refinement of the QThruster that NASA was investigating a few years back. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20140000067 Basically using a very high voltage field to separate the spontaneous pair particles produced from the quantum foam and accelerating them with respect to the thruster in order to impart motion on the device and attached ship.
AaronElsewhere t1_jczp814 wrote
So layman me wondering where do these particles come from? I.e. if it's accelerating half the pair away, then it needs a steady supply of more pairs. Are these photons?
Djinnanetoniks t1_jczpql5 wrote
No they are "virtual particles" that are spontaneously generated and annihilated within the quantum foam. Any more concrete explanation would need someone who actually understands the math of quantum mechanics in this field, which I am not :P
Safe-Mathematician84 t1_jcppyn7 wrote
The drive is the brainchild of a physicist, Mike McCulloch, who I have been following for a long time: https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcr29yu wrote
I did find a few things where they reference QI. I wonder if he is involved with this?
Safe-Mathematician84 t1_jcr5kci wrote
Mike McCulloch received DARPA funding to develop and test his QI theory. As his blog explains, he knew about this new thruster beforehand but could not talk about it until recently because of an NDA he signed with the company.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcr5v8w wrote
Very interesting. I wonder how he was involved, if at all?
aecarol1 t1_jd2rvps wrote
While defending this idea, some will say "They laughed at Einstein".
I will note however, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
I predict the results will be declared to be murky enough that he says a refined experiment will be required. And again, and again...
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcb6zgr wrote
SS: I remember seeing something about this technology last year. Making a bold claim is one thing, but actually spending millions to go to space is another. I see they have a launch partner, so they must have something because companies don't just send things up on multi-million dollar launches for fun. If this thing actually works as intended, it could change space exploration. It's about time we get excited about space again. I wonder what they intend to do with this besides just Earth orbit missions?
Houston_Here t1_jcb88a9 wrote
Highly verifiable too. If it is large enough the orbital tracking data will show dV quite clearly even if it is over a very long duration. I am excited but quite apprehensive. If the thing actually accelerates this will be very big news.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcb92xs wrote
I agree. The data publicly available is very limited on their technology, but if I had a revolutionary technology, I would be pretty guarded about it, too. It is really cool to see a company actually follow through.
Puzzleheaded_Phase98 t1_jco9hsd wrote
Drive is based on Mike McCulloch's Quantized Inertia (QI) theory. It gets lot of headwind partly because theory removes possibility of dark matter and lot of people in science circles are affraid of losing their funding.
jusdisgi t1_jcs8xny wrote
>It gets lot of headwind partly because theory removes possibility of dark matter and lot of people in science circles are affraid of losing their funding.
Well, it could be getting lots of headwind because lots of people in science circles look at a company promising world-changing results without spelling out in detail how they are to be achieved and not working with anyone else in the scientific community and conclude it's likely not real. Or your conspiracy idea.
Puzzleheaded_Phase98 t1_jct9lhf wrote
I meant QI theory, that it has seen lot of headwind not this IVO company his been working with. I've been following Mike Culloch's journey through his tweets. He is politically on the right so his theory has been getting bit headwinds of because his political views. Which is sad because science so be matter on its merits not how scientists view the world. So if you follow him expect some right wing stuff as well ;) DARPA for example has been funding him as well so they at least they thing something might be there.
Of course company would get headwinds as well because if they prove theory is right then quite likely all that huge funding for dark matter will be gone forever.
jusdisgi t1_jcta7eo wrote
I was trying to get this across before, but so far have been unsuccessful. You seem to come up with every theory you can for why he gets "headwinds" except for the theory that other scientists genuinely think he is wrong in good faith. I see no reason to assume that all the other scientists in this space are either corrupt or blinded by politics. I think it is a much more reasonable explanation that they are simply unimpressed with his work.
Puzzleheaded_Phase98 t1_jctus8n wrote
I understand you believe that but he has had his peer reviewed and already published papers blocked by arXiv for example and stuff like so I don't think good faith applies here at all.
Puzzleheaded_Phase98 t1_jct9q51 wrote
This article about his first DARPA funding https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/news/scientists-receive-13-million-to-study-new-propulsion-idea-for-spacecraft
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcsxfag wrote
Can you point me in the direction of the promising of world changing results? I see a company that is saying they have tested it and verified that it works in a vacuum chamber, and now they are going to space to test it. Why are people so afraid of the scientific method? Also, do you have communication with every one of these circles? You must if you know they haven't shared anything with anyone. It is refreshing to see a company not just make a bold claim but actually do something.
jusdisgi t1_jct7gqc wrote
>Can you point me in the direction of the promising of world changing results?
The banner at the top of the front page of their website literally says "Imagine a discovery with the power to change the world of propulsion" and "it exceeds our imagination."
>Also, do you have communication with every one of these circles?
Not at all. The comment I replied to asserted without evidence that all the skeptics in the scientific community were skeptical of the idea because it would make them lose funding. I'm pointing out that there is an alternative theory that they might simply not believe the hype.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jctag3u wrote
That is not promising a result. It's simply making a statement. A propulsion device that uses only electricity would have the power to do exactly that. That would also clearly exceed our imagination, considering what we believe is possible does not align with what they are claiming their propulsion might do. None of that is a promise of results. Their most recent news also says, "after demonstration and baselining of the IVO Quantum Drive’s performance specifications," which means it is going to prove that it can work and to what extent. Obviously, they think it will work if they are willing to put up rocket launch money.
jusdisgi t1_jctb6t9 wrote
>That is not promising a result. It's simply making a statement. A propulsion device that uses only electricity would have the power to do exactly that. That would also clearly exceed our imagination...
Well you can't have it both ways. You took issue with me saying they were making world changing claims, and now you say if their claims are borne out they'll be world-changing.
>Obviously, they think it will work if they are willing to put up rocket launch money.
This is far from obvious. They are getting funding. Lots and lots of times companies have made revolutionary claims that eventually turned out to be bunk and kept pushing to the next demonstration until it became untenable because that's how you keep money coming in. I don't know that will happen in this case, but the fact they are proposing a launch does not prove anything.
We will see, eventually. But their behavior up to now does not inspire confidence.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcti6aw wrote
I will just agree to disagree. Skeptics always have a lot to say, but nobody remembers them. Not even the super edgy ones on Reddit. A company willing to publicly try and risk failing has my respect. I look forward to their results, pass or fail. Either way, we learn something we didn't know before.
jusdisgi t1_jefv1cg wrote
This is hilarious. You really try to come off as a completely neutral arbiter with no slant at all. Meanwhile you have tried to slap down literally every person in the thread who voiced any skepticism that this is for real.
There are good reasons to think this is junk. It's not certain, but lots and lots of warning signs are flashing and many of them have been pointed out here. The fact they got somebody to fund them and have now said they are going to launch does not prove anything.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jeh47cb wrote
I have not. I am against people who shout a new technology down when we know almost nothing. I, too, am skeptical, but there is skepticism, and then there is just doubt backed by nothing. Skepticism is part of the scientific method. Claiming something won't work because you don't understand it sounds like a personal problem. I am yet to see anyone bring up a valid reason backed by data and knowledge of the technology in question.
RevolutionaryTwo2631 t1_jcriy8s wrote
If I recall, isn’t this just another rehash of the “EmDrive” thing? The EmDrive was already proven to not work, at all. And now this “Quantum Drive” that supposedly works on the same principle.
ComfortableIntern218 OP t1_jcswl4f wrote
No. The EmDrive and QI have literally nothing in common. QI or some form of it is supposedly how this drive works. Being a pure electric drive to me sounds like they are using electrons to do something. EmDrive used microwaves. So far as I can tell, the people who compare this to the EmDrive don't seem to understand how the EmDrive works (or doesn't work for that matter). If they start mentioning microwaves and a chamber, I will immediately retract this statement, but pure electric and QI have nothing in common with the EmDrive.
Old-Tomorrow-3045 t1_je2lxb8 wrote
>actually spending millions
That launch is carrying micro- and nano- satellites. They could potentially only be spending thousands
FuturologyBot t1_jcbcnqb wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/ComfortableIntern218:
SS: I remember seeing something about this technology last year. Making a bold claim is one thing, but actually spending millions to go to space is another. I see they have a launch partner, so they must have something because companies don't just send things up on multi-million dollar launches for fun. If this thing actually works as intended, it could change space exploration. It's about time we get excited about space again. I wonder what they intend to do with this besides just Earth orbit missions?
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11s12p9/ivo_ltd_to_launch_quantum_drive_pure_electric/jcb6zgr/
flowirin t1_jcsrdvi wrote
gosh darn it, someone else had the idea.
I know how it works, its very clever. I called it the infinite probability drive, which should now be a giveaway
booktoop t1_jdtcg8t wrote
There is no fuel on board, but it really isn’t reaction-less, just highly efficient use of the fuel burned in the sun and collected by the satellite in the form of solar radiation that then powers this device. But there is nothing on how it is supposed to work. Maybe a more efficient version of the spiral drive?
AutoModerator t1_jcb6cmq wrote
This appears to be a post about Elon Musk or one of his companies. Please keep discussion focused on the actual topic / technology and not praising / condemning Elon. Off topic flamewars will be removed and participants may be banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Southern-Trip-1102 t1_jcbz3o4 wrote
This is either going to be revolutionary or one of the most expensive hype campaigns ever.