It does not belong to the spectators to prove that the cord can help.Īlso, I can understand the 2 following proofs.ġ : If an emdrive is put out of resonance, like in Stansell experiment.
It is of course the man that make move the spoon attached by a cord to his finger to prove that he does not use the cord. But we are not there yet.Ībout the spoon and the cord at the finger.
Once it is shown that this is a real thrust force that can be used in space, and that the cord makes no difference of course at that point people would not object to the use of the cord. The first problem is showing that the anomalous force is real thrust that can be used in space. The controversy with the EM Drive is whether the anomalous force is real. When testing the F-1, there was no question that it would be able to achieve lift-off. Precisely ! I like the way you bring this back to reality.ĮM Drive experimenters like to quote early experimenters like Goddard, Von Braun, the Wright Brothers.Ī huge difference is that all of them: the Wright Brothers, Goddard, Von Braun, and even Project Orion (explosive driven spacecrafts) achieved FLIGHT or LIFT-OFF, while EM Drive experiments are giving microNewtons or milliNewtons, hence they cannot be compared to the Wright Brothers, Goddard, von Braun or Project Orion, because there is no flight and no lift-off in the experiments.
, well, then it is on your shoulders to show the audience that your cord is not moving the spoon (not on the shoulders of the audience that are asked to disregard that there is a cord attached to the spoon) Somebody will say, but, but, but I cannot use the same testing method because. Same story as in the tests that were nullified by Yang: when Yang did not use batteries and no polymer insert, she also obtained "thrust", when she used batteries, she obtained no thrust. Hence, the purported "no need for polymer inserts" for Cannae's superconducting "tests" is due to the different testing method.ĭifferent testing methods => different results. In other words the same testing method is not used for Cannae's superconducting "tests" which purport to use no polymer insert as the tests with normal conductors that use polymer inserts. I look forward to reading your replies or alternative suggestions.1) the torsional pendulum is not used for Cannae's superconducting "tests"Ģ) batteries are not used for Cannae's superconducting "tests"ģ) vacuum chamber is not used for Cannae's superconducting "tests" Here us a You Tube Video of this gadget: My main use would be for heating up things like baked beans, peas, tinned tomatoes, gravy, making scrambled eggs or cooking ready meals and prepared vegetables etc.
#Wavebox microwave used portable#
Hubby says it's not essential, which it isn't but I like having the option.Īnyway, during my search for a solution I cane across this Portable Microwave and wondered if anyone has one of these or has seen one in operation and if so, what is their opinion of them? As it us lightweight and portable I could easily store it away either in a cupboard or the garage and it would be a lot less bulky than a traditional domestic style microwave. We are the proud new owners of the new 2010 Burstner Elegance and we love everything about it but unfortunately due to the new kitchen layout, there is no suitable cupboard for a small microwave and I just know I will miss not having one.
0 kommentar(er)
