Comments by "kazedcat" (@kazedcat) on "Two Scientists Are Building a Real Star Trek 'Impulse Engine'" video.

  1. There is a peer reviewed paper of it search for Woodwards Mach effect paper. The problem that is why it is not accepted by mainstream science is because it rejects the equivalence principle. But the equivalence principle is axiomatic meaning we just accept it to be true because we found no evidence that it is not true. This is why the young guy was talking about the pink elephant and how you cannot prove that the pink elephant does not exist. You cannot prove that the equivalence principle is true just that so far no one has proven it wrong. Their theory says the equivalence principle is wrong. If this was mathematics then mathematicians will just declare a different axiom and place the theory to a different branch of mathematics. But science needs one set of truth and their theory is obviously in conflict with the accepted model of the universe.
    3
  2. They have a theory it is just not accepted by mainstream science because it involves gravitational enertia and momentum enertia being two different things. So you are giving up the equivalence principle of general relativity. But just like Relativity is a slight alteration of Newtonian physics their theory is also a slight alteration of general relativity. Meaning most of the time the two enertia is the same but there are situation where they are different and that is why you gain momentum on an oscillating mass but the effect is very tiny so it is very hard to measure by experiment.
    2
  3. They are not borrowing energy they are borrowing momentum. Basically their device produce a gravitational wave with negative momentum so that their device gain positive momentum but their device consume energy.
    2
  4. Energy has mass so charging the crystal changes it's mass. Also the effect they expect is very tiny that it is very difficult to measure. So it is not like rowing a boat more like manually blowing away a fully loaded tanker ship with the air from your lungs.
    1
  5. The controversy is because their theory rejects the equivalence principle. We have not proven that the equivalence principle is true just that so far no one has proven that the equivalence principle is wrong. And this is the problem they need to prove that the equivalence principle is wrong before their theory can be accepted by mainstream science. But it does not mean that the theory is wrong just that there is no proof that it is correct. Their experiment of course is the pathway for them to prove that they are correct they just need to convince everyone that they did the experiment correctly.
    1
  6. Flugschüler Fluglehrer I barely understand it but there needs to be difference between gravitational inertia and momentum inertia for their device to work. If you assume that their description of how their device actually works is correct. I think there can be another way to explain the device if it works but it requires violation of some other important principles.
    1
  7. Their set up is restricted to one axis of freedom and it is align precisely to isolate it from the earths gravity. They want to make sure that the effect they are measuring is not a localize phenomenon.
    1