Roger Shawyer's EmDrive Validated: Debunking or Proving it Works?

[sanman]

Roger Shawyer's EmDrive is claimed to have been validated by a university in China:


http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_11_05_2012_p84-495380.xml

http://wulixb.iphy.ac.cn/EN/abstract/abstract47295.shtml


These claims seem to fly in the face of skeptics who have pointed out that the EmDrive violates the conservation of momentum. What would be the most effective way to de-bunk EmDrive, or definitively prove whether it works or not?

 

[berkeman]

I don't understand what's controversial. Photons carry momentum, don't they? That's how a solar sail works...

Is the controversial part not that they are claiming some net thrust, but that they are claiming too much?

a thrust of 85 milliNewtons (mN) with a 300-watt input.

 

[marcus]

I don't understand what's controversial. Photons carry momentum, don't they? That's how a solar sail works...

Is the controversial part not that they are claiming some net thrust, but that they are claiming too much?

300 watts of light represents 1.0007 microNewtons of thrust. As you quote, they claim 85 milliNewtons of thrust. Fishy.
Maybe belongs in the debunking forum.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Now we know why Acta Physica Sinica has an impact factor of 0.3.

 

[ZapperZ]

This is also not a BTSM topic.

Zz.