Fascinating!
The first thing that came to mind is if this device could be weaponized. What effects would occur if this was used against an enemy spaceship? Could clashing fields have a catastrophic effect? What if it were aimed at a planet, or operated on the surface?
Considering game and real life possibilities...
Considering that the EMDrive is, at present, being tested in multiple labs on earth.
The problems it faces are fourfoldfold
- Religiosity of the scientific community
- effects barely above the margin of error of the instruments
- Lack of viable explanation in the standard model
- the gatekeepers of the peer reviewed publications system
Point 1 is the huge stumbling block. Many so-called scientists have forgotten that the purpose of science is to understand why things work, not to dictate a model by which the universe operates. Their world view is at risk of shattering if this new technology actually works, and so they refuse to even look at it, declaring it error without ever even reviewing the data.
Point 2 is problematic, but it's worth noting that more recent tests use both more power and more sensitive instrumentation, and ARE detecting changes above error margins.
Point 3 isn't a problem for many Engineers, but tend to be a major stumbling block for both the guys in point 1 and point 4... See, we've been able to make use of many technologies since before they were actually well understood, and anyone with a history of engineering class knows that kinds don't need to understand light propagation nor refraction to discover that you can pop ants with a magnifying glass, and also scorch wood, and light paper on fire...
Point 4 is related to point 1, but not the same problem. The gatekeepers generally are looking for things which will have a strong theory which is then tested, and the theory is upheld (the Null fails), and which has a basis for said theory. The EMDrive has no strong theory firmly based in the standard model, and the standard model is largely the baseline for the gatekeepers. They have a vested interest in that which can be made into textbooks. Exceptions that are not readily explained, even tho' replicated, are not good fodder for textbooks, and are not good fodder for publication. Add that some of them are part of group 1, and will not admit anything which actually threatens their worldview...
I've actually read 4 of the papers published. the EM drive produces the same thrust without regard to direction when rotated at test site. It produces the same deflection when in vacuum. It does not produce the same deflection when a resistor of same impedance is substituted for the magnetron. It does appear to lengthen the path light takes when crossing the operating chamber versus when it's not operating (Sonny White, not replicated by others; one of his assistants suggested it might be generating a warp field, and Dr White tried to null that, but couldn't).
- We can't rule out that it's altering local spacetime.
- We can't rule out that it's using an alternate theory of light impact.
- We can't rule out that it is some undiscovered property of interaction with massive objects - and until we put one deep in the interplanetary medium, we won't be able to.
- Even if it still works in orbit, it might not work in the interplanetary medium.
- Even if it still works in the interplanetary medium, it might not work in the interstellar medium.
About the only thing we can say is that it's not getting a chance to be properly peer reviewed (Dr. White and Mr. Shawyer both have complained of the rejection at the gate), and that 6 labs have independently built and tested models that produced anomalous thrust not explicable by current understanding within the standard model.
