Pilot Wave Theory Proposed by Researchers to Explain EM Drive

There’a an interesting thread on the Vortex-l mailing list which is discussing an article published in the Journal of Applied Physical Science International titled “A Possible Explanation for the EM Drive Based on a Pilot Wave Theory.”

The authors are J. R. Croca, P. Castro, M. Gatta AND L. Gurriana, all from Portugal.

Scientific literature refers to a strange observed phenomenon, “impossible” according to traditional physics, looking at the experimental feasibility of the so called “EM Drive”. The authors have called it an Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio-Frequency Cavity in Vacuum. Here we present a possible explanation for the observed thrust based on the conceptual framework of Eurhythmic Physics, a kind of pilot-wave theory aiming at bridging the gap between quantum and macroscopic systems. Applied to the present system, a generalized guidance condition could explain the claimed absence of reaction of the material of the drive on the enclosed fields.


The full text is not available for free.

The Science Alert website published this article about the paper, and one of the authors, Paulo Castro is quoted as saying:

“We have found that applying a pilot wave theory to NASA’s EM drive frustum [or cone], we could explain its thrust without involving any external action applied to the system, as Newton’s third law would require.”

Pilot wave theory is not widely accepted within physics. It differs from conventional quantum mechanics in that is posits that instead of the random location of particles, particles have actual predictable locations, and they exist along tracks cause by physical waves. The video below provides a more detailed explanation.

  • Zephir

    I’m not sure how the pilot wave theory (microscopic quantum effect) applies to EMDrive (macroscopic device), because the article is paywalled. International Knowledge Press, which publishes The Journal of Applied Physical Science International, where the article referenced is published, is on Jeffrey Beall‘s list of predatory publishers: This ViXra preprint is most close to above article subject. Authors of study promote their own theory: so called the "Eurhythmic Physics", which reportedly utilizes this model – but it may lead to another results at the end. It’s worth to note, that Louis de Broglie himself abandoned his Pilot Wave Theory on behalf of so-called Double solution theory . He also opposed the Bohmian mechanics. It’s worth to note, that Pilot wave theory is based on aether model, which is the main reason, why it was ignored with mainstream physics. Le Broglie was aetherist and he developed his theory with using of fluid model He believed, that "Any particle, ever isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous "energetic contact" with a hidden medium." Pilot wave is analogy of wake wave which is forming above objects moving beneath surface of fluid.
    See also: Is Space-Time Fluid? Physicists have gathered evidence that space-time can behave like a fluid. and Quantum Mysteries Dissolve if Possibilities Are Real .

  • Zephir

    Pilot wave theory just handles quantum uncertainty like the consequence of another phenomena: pilot wave. Briefly speaking, the pilot wave is an analogy of wake wave around objects moving through fluids. Its realism is disputable though, as it can be observed only indirectly (the
    waves cannot be observed with waves). Therefore contemporary mainstream interpretations of quantum mechanics (based on Copenhagen interpretation of Niels Bohr) don’t utilize this layer of reality as being unfalsifiable. It turns out though that the existence of pilot wave –
    despite being principally unobservable – could explain many quantum phenomena better, than solely abstract quantum theories.
    For lightweight particles like the photons the difference between pilot wave theory and Copenhagen model is merely at the gnoseologic level, because Copenhagen model utilizes so-called wave function, which is conceptually very similar to wave function in Pilot wave theory. The Copenhagen model just handles it like abstract mathematical object.nFor heavier particles though the predictions of both interpretations differ, because Copenhagen model essentially substitutes the particle existence with wave function and it assumes, that the particle will get widespread (so-called "delocalized") across the whole area of wave function. Once the particle behaves like the pin-point object, then the wave function must somehow collapse in rather esoteric process.
    Whereas the Pilot wave theory considers, that the particle remains pin-point object all the time, all observable quantum effects are generated by pilot wave formed around it. This removes both the concept of delocalization, both requirement of wave function collapse (between
    others). After all, it’s somehow difficult to imagine, how the heavy particles like the proton could get widespread across larger area during subtle quantum processes. Inside boson condensates the individual atoms can be still observed
    like the individual glowing points, despite they’re moving in unison like single wave. Therefore the pilot wave model has direct observational background already.
    See also dot/wave.org and Hydrodynamic quantum analogs.

  • Zephir

    /* Through modeling, the team showed that a sufficiently strong and asymmetrical electromagnetic field could act as a pilot wave. And that’s exactly what the EM drive generates. Because the cone, or frustum, of the EM drive is asymmetrical, it would also generate an asymmetrical wave field. As a result, the walls of the EM drive would move towards the areas of higher intensity, creating thrust. */

    In my opinion the above study is only partially correct. The correct aspect is the quantum mechanic changes the speed of photons within EMDrive resonator by local deform of space-time. This aspect is contained even in another models, in particular Shawyer own theory and McCulloch’s MiHsC theory.

    With compare to it, another studies (in particular with usage of Juday-White’s interferometer) detected these changes also OUTSIDE the resonator, where the intensity of wave field is zero. Such an explanation would follow the conservation of momentum better, as it suggests, that the EMDrive doesn’t differ from normal rocket so much – it just ejects stream of invisible subtle particles, which aren’t detectable (scalar waves, axions or dark matter particles) and as such evade the detection. They could be detected by another device similar to EMDrive or detectors of scalar waves.

    I don’t see any reason, why both explanations couldn’t be correct at the same moment at the end. The scalar waves which are responsible for transferring the momentum OUTSIDE the EMDrive could also modify the space-time and speed of photons INSIDE the EMDrive.

  • Dave Lawton

    All I know is that David Bohm had a brilliant sense of humour.

    • Zephir

      Except that Pilot wave is theory of Louis de Broglie, who was quite unhappy from Bohm’s esoteric extensions of it (implicate order and similar BS).

      • Dave Lawton

        What would I know I just worked as an engineer I just build the stuff.Then tweek it to get results.

  • Martin Lund

    Whatever the theory behind it, the EM drive holds exciting prospects for the future. The same goes for the E-cat. That is, if they are all working as claimed.

    • Zephir

      IMO the EMDrive suffers with similar problem, like the LENR: being dependent on multiple factors, it’s difficult to improve it (or just replicate) without having robust theory. The pilot wave theory model IMO says very little about actual function of EMDrive and photon processes, which lead into its thrust. Despite it’s seemingly simple construction it works like complex recipe, which requires to have all ingredients in proper ration to work.

      • Warthog

        “, it’s difficult to improve it (or just replicate) without having robust theory.”

        Sorry…no. Theory has very little to do with either improving OR replicating. The steam engine was raised to high technical proficiency with no theory at all. I’m far more interested in replicated experimental results than another controversy about “theory”.

        • Zephir

          I don’t think your analogy fits. The steam engine is way simpler and the principle of its function was understood from its very beginning.

          • Warthog

            Doing a bunch of speculating about theories is a waste of time without the fundamental scientific proof that the phenomenon exists. And the ONLY way to obtain that proof is by replicated measurements. Frankly, I think physics has lost its way as a science and is overly enamored with pretty math models. SHOW ME THE DATA!!!

          • Zephir

            The data fit theory nicely. Of course more data would be welcomed – but isn’t it problem of mainstream physicists?

          • Warthog

            Good information….much thanks. And yes, I very much consider it a “problem with mainstream physicists”. As a chemist, it appears to me that many very detrimental notions have crept into their practice of the science….ideas like “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof” and “there is no theoretical explanation” therefore the phenomenon just cannot exist in spite of concrete experimental data saying otherwise. Even this nice graph is touched by it. I’d be happier just with a table of the measured forces along with the experimental limits of detection of the apparatus making the measurement(s).

  • Zephir

    In dense aether model the vacuum behaves like the density fluctuations of very dense gas (interior of black hole comes on mind here). The more dense gas is, the more it’s density fluctuations resemble thin filaments, membranes and strings (similar to ones, which we can observe inside supercritical fluid at the very beginning of its condensation). Therefore the particles inside vacuum propagate in similar way, like the boats along water surface, not like the bullets through the air. The displacement wake wave makes the vacuum foam undulating and thicker temporarily at the place, where the particle is just moving – and this is the pilot wave. This is IMO the reason why the motion of droplets at the water surface describes the quantum mechanics so well it’s just 2D analogy of 3D reality around us.

  • Alan DeAngelis
  • Zephir

    Being skeptical about fast neutrinos doesn’t bring any harm – but being skeptical about let say cancel cure, cold fusion or EMDrive could delay future progress of human civilization significantly.

    Frankly I don’t quite understand, why just the naysayers – who wouldn’t do any experiments anyway – get most skeptical: their guess doesn’t actually matter: it only discourages people, who could do some useful work, replication and deeper check.

    Ironically just the doubters like Matthew O’Dowd will fill their pockets by public presentations in media, once it will turn out, that the EMDrive really work. Here he for example promotes the warp drive without actually realizing, that the EMDrive could also work as a warp drive of sort. It’s sorta disgusting conjecturalist attitude combined with dumbness. After wit is every body’s wit..

  • I disagree. He used that same example of neutrinos. Being skeptical of the EM drive is NOT the right stance. Most of the evidence is pointing towards something truly anomalous actually happening.

  • Omega Z

    Apparently, China has enough evidence that they intend to launch a rocket into space that contains an EM drive device for testing. So for them it is no longer skepticism, but guarded enthusiasm.

  • Andreas Moraitis

    To me, the principle of the EM drive looks rather simple: Since the photons at the front plate are more energetic than the photons at the back end, they cause a slightly higher radiation pressure than the latter. The resulting force pushes the device forward. Because the photon beam is reflected between the plates, the effect is multiplied many times. This part would require a more detailed explanation, but I do not see the need for any ‘new physics’ in this regard.

    • Zephir

      This is quite relevant and it resonates in most of theories of EMDrive (Shawyer, McCulloch). But IMO it may be only half of the truth. IMO the photons gain inertia inside EMDrive like vortex rings within water by their repeated reflection, which introduces a spin into them. But each reflection is followed by emitting of another supersymmetric particle of imaginary rest mass, which leaves the EMDrive as it passes the conductor freely and the stream of these particles which are otherwise absorbed with vacuum fast (scalar waves, dark matter anapoles, i.e. magnetic vortices in essence) also contributes to thrust.

      For to understand it this model we could imagine the water surface analogy of EMDrive like the bottomless washtub floating at the water surface, which we would attempt to move forward by doing waves and splashes inside it. The portion of surface wave energy will convert itself into underground sound waves, which would leave the washtub through the underwater and which would contribute to the thrust by their reactive force.

      Also, you should be able to explain, how the photons gain their inertia by introducing additional energy (i.e. the energy which travels together with their reference frame). This is just the place, where the pilot wave and quantum mechanics enters the game – nowhere else. It’s consequence of the Higgs field, i.e. the tiny space-time fluctuations of the vacuum, which are withheld with swirling vacuum inside the polarized photons.

    • vibrator !

      ..if your hypothesis were correct, then whatever’s responsible for raising the energy of the “photons at the back end” should also experience an equal opposing counterforce, whether via Lenz’s law or radiation pressure or whatever. You can’t just arbitrarily assign an energy change without a corresponding momentum change, and equal opposing counter-momentum.

      However the energy of photons is a function of their wavelength times C – are you suggesting that the frustum passively raises the energy of photons by shortening their wavelength, or else raising the value of C, or what, exactly?

      The only way to dismiss a genuine classical symmetry break is to invoke some other, equally if not more contentious symmetry break, further downstream… it’s basically page 1 of the pseudoskeptic handbook, and a teeny tiny weeny bit disingenuous..

      ..besides, rationalising the unilateral force is only half the puzzle – the real controversy is that the energy cost of generating that thrust would remain constant, irrespective of velocity, whereas the kinetic energy value of the accelerating system is evolving per 1/2mV^2 – so there’s also a symmetry break between the amount of work / energy being expended on-board the accelerating system, vs its rise in KE as measured from a stationary reference frame… in short, any working EM drive is also over-unity, and moreso the faster it goes..

      For example assume a perfectly efficient (ie. no thermal losses) superconducting frustum – the absolute minimum energy cost of 1 kg-m/s of momentum is 1/2 a Joule. But normally, due to Newton’s 3rd, the energy value of momentum scales via the 1/2mV^2 term, so a second, identical 1 kg-m/s of momentum, on top of the first, now costs 2 Joules; a fourfold inflation. A third kg-m/s costs 4.5 Joules, and so on – by the time our 1 kg mass is up to 10 meters / sec, the 11th m/s costs a whopping 10.5 J – twenty times the cost of the initial kg-m/s!

      At this point, you can also consider this as another angle on the inanities of accelerating a mass up to lightspeed – if we could somehow get our 1 kg mass up to 1 meter / sec below C – that’s 299,792,457 meters / sec, then the final kg-m/s up to lightspeed at 299,792,458 m/s would cost 299,792,500 Joules:

      KE = 1/2 m * V^2

      C = 299792458 meters / sec

      C – 1 m/s = 299792457 m/s

      1/2 * 1 kg * 299792458^2 = 44937758936840900 Joules

      1/2 * 1 kg * 299792457^2 = 44937758637048400 Joules

      44937758936840900 – 44937758637048400 = 299,792,500 Joules…

      So whereas the first kg-m/s of momentum only cost 1/2 a Joule, the final kg-m/s up to lightspeed costs almost 300 megajoules – a six-hundred-million-fold hike in cost for the same quantity rise in momentum..

      ..note also that this figure of 299,792,500 Joules divides into the actual speed of light at 299,792,458 m/s by close to 1, at 1.0000001400969199832238608217422, with a remainder of precisely 42. In other words, 1 J for every kg-m/s accrued… plus 42, the ultimate answer to everything, whatever the question was… but i digress..

      ,,point is, the cost of that final kg-m/s of momentum to an EM drive is whatever it payed for the first kg-m/s – in principle, as little as 1/2 a Joule.

      So in principle, a superconducting EM drive could pay just 1/2 a Joule for every one of its 299,792,458 meters per second up to lightspeed. Easy sum then, we just divide 299792458 by half and get 149,896,229 J as the total cost of accelerating a 1 kg EM drive up to lightspeed – a speed at which it actually possesses 44,937,758,936,840,900 Joules… and so the system energy has risen by 44,937,758,936,840,900 – 149,896,229 = 44,937,758,786,944,671 J more than we’ve actually spent; or, to put it another way, we have an output energy of 44,937,758,936,840,900 J, divided by an input energy of 149,896,229 J, which equals precisely 299792458.00000012008307427133474. Trim off that infinitesimal and we have 299792458x over-unity.. notice that’s the same figure as the speed of light in meters / sec?

      The speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second. And, if we could accelerate a 1 kg superconducting EM drive up to that velocity, its optimum efficiency or coefficient of performance would be 1:299,792,458…

      ..the same number of times over-unity as the speed of light in meters per second… or at least, within a .00000012008307427133474 whisker.

      And yet all these mathematical quirks and strange symmetries pale into insignificance when we just consider the basic ramifications of a classical break in Newton’s 3rd law – momentum would not be conserved! At least, not within the classical framework. Instead, raw momentum would be induced, ex-nihilo, directly from the vacuum – the virtual photonsphere mediating the EM force expressing the unbalanced, N3-violating, unidirectional radiation pressure supposedly responsible for the thrust..

      An effective N3 symmetry break would be creating or channeling momentum from nowhere, along with energy from nowhere. An EM drive could in principle be used for geo-engineering – attached to Earth, it could change day lengths, axial tilt, solar orbit trajectory, or that of the Moon etc. Might take a while, but it’s scalable and cheap (massively OU). But what of the reduced vacuum potential – surely if momentum is ultimately still conserved, then the value of the EM constant – the so called fine-structure constant, alpha – would be reduced, if only by a teeny amount, but in a local surrounding bubble, expanding outwards at the speed of light..

      One little EM drive probably wouldn’t do any harm, but a global, nay, inter-galactic economy exploiting such techs – both for energy generation as well as transport, and possibly even including terraforming.. eventually, anything mediated by the EM constant would start to reflect its depreciation.. the atomic ‘island of stability’ could shift, for instance. The same goes for any other field sharing the same substrate of this ambient quantum momentum – perhaps the strength of the Higgs interaction. If that happened, then everything inside that expanding bubble becomes lighter than everything else outside in the rest of the universe..

      Then there’s just the conceptual implications of a runaway momentum – it would be its own unique reference frame, or else hold the frame of the sphere of fixed stars, like a gyroscope. But cosmologically, the universe would now have a preferential reference frame, since there would now be very slightly more momentum aligned in a particular direction – that of our self-accelerating system. This might seem a pedantic detail, but nonetheless if there’s a net momentum in one direction, however small, then the laws of physics are no longer the same in all directions. The universe would posses a net momentum, the values of rest mass and thus inertia and momentum, via attenuation of the Higgs field, and nuclear stability and chemical properties via the EM field, would no longer be the same everywhere. The fundaments would doubtless be impelled to move to re-equilibrium in a cataclysmic global phase transition, destroying the universe as we know it. Or else, maybe energy and momentum really can be plucked from nowhere, with absolutely no source nor repercussion anywhere.. somehow.

      Either way, there is nothing at all trivial or superficial about this tech, if validated. It is truly Promethian in its implications, from quantum to classical to cosmological. There is nothing less at stake than infinite momentum and energy, our fate in the universe, and possibly its too..

      • Andreas Moraitis

        Perhaps one could go without the assumption that all photons undergo a red-shift when travelling from the front towards the back end of the drive. (Indeed, it would be difficult to explain why this would work only, or mainly, in one direction.)

        But certainly, the whole photon beam will lose energy by collisions with the side walls of the drive. This effect will be (longitudinally) asymmetric due to the specific form of the chamber. Momentum would be conserved by thermalization in the side walls (after all, heat is nothing but average kinetic energy – therefore, no problem with N3). Actually, there will also result a longitudinal force component that is directed backwards, but this component would be smaller than a force that is generated by hitting a surface in a right angle.

        Since the mentioned component is fractional and because the back plate will now be hit by fewer photons than the front plate, the resulting force on the longitudinal axis should be non-zero. Thus, we get thrust.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Well, a foil pie plate with a light bulb in the center also produces a force – even in a vacuum. So not at all convinced we seeing anything new beyond that of a light bulb focused on a 50 cent pie plate at this point in time.

  • Oh I would definitely not recognize my paper from your description. In contrast, it is just followup on MERW ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximal_entropy_random_walk ) explaining why standard diffusion models are wrong (e.g. predicting that semiconductor is conductor) and that there is no longer disagreement with QM (e.g. Anderson localization) if really maximizing entropy as required from statistical physics models.

    • Zephir

      Ironically the EMDrive operates in microwave regime, where the Pilot wave theory gives the same predictions like the Copenhagen interpretations (microwave photons are solely formed by their own pilot wave in similar way, like the Copenhagen interpretation assumes for wave function of photon).

      Therefore the introduction of Pilot wave model doesn’t bring any deeper understanding of EMDrive, than another interpretations would do. The similar results could be derived from Copenhagen QM, which also allows time reversal and breaking of symmetries and momentum conservation (up to certain level). The mainstream physicists come to the same conclusion: even the classical quantum mechanics leads to anomalous phenomena in its very consequences (1,
      2). These consequences were just neglected long time.

      In this moment it’s merely political synergy of two concepts (Pilot Wave and EMDrive) which are ostracized by mainstream, which brings them together rather than actual underlying physics.

  • Zephir

    The more times the photons will bounce inside the resonator, the more times their pilot wave could apply, so I don’t see any reason, why it shouldn’t work so. But IMO the pilot wave is only part of the whole picture.

  • Preston

    Somehow I missed the mach effect thruster, but it sounds pretty cool. It’s similar to the EMDrive and claims to generate reactionless propulsion.

    The idea is a capacitor changes mass when you charge it up. So if you push on the capacitor when it’s heavy and pull on it when it’s light – then you can get a net positive thrust. Not really from a classic Newtonian analysis, you would lose any thrust moving the energy in and out. And the effect would be tiny with the mass change equal to the energy change divided by the speed of light squared.

    BUT, they claim if you do the full general relativity equations it does generate a net force and not all the terms are tiny. Anyway, here is a nice video with NASA’s plans for an Interstellar Mission…

    Mach Effects for In Space Propulsion: Interstellar Mission


    Some claim the EMDrive actually works via the Mach effect also.

    • Zephir

      Yes, Mach thruster operate like the capacitor inside the electromagnet loaded with AC current. But such a lumped circuit can be simplified to an open resonator with distributed inductance and capacity


      Once the inductor will surround whole the capacitor, then the open resonator will change into a closed one, i.e. the EMDrive. I also presume, that Mach/Woodward drive emanates the scalar waves in similar way, like the EMDrive.

  • Zephir

    It’s not so bad, but the consensus about how EMDrive works is the same, like at the case of cold fusion, i.e. zero http://emdrive.wiki/Experimental_Results

  • Speaking of exotic flight technology, Tom DeLonge is claiming that his big announcement is tomorrow, and some are saying that it has something to do with alien technology and flight technology. tothestarsacademy.com will have the live stream at 12 noon Eastern time. Until then, though, you can read Leslie Kean’s article about it on The Huffington Post by clicking the link, just below:


  • Toussaint françois


    I mean “Top Secret” Military

  • ElectronPositronSea

    To understand the idea of Pilot Wave Theory, I think it helps if you have read Don Hotson’s series of articles on electron positron pairs as the fundamental unit of the vacuum of space — and all matter.


    Basically, according to this extremely logical and rational theory (far more sane than the non-realistic propositions of quantum physics) the universe is composed, at the root level, of electron positron pairs that do not annihilate but have sunken to a “negative energy” level in which they encircle each other, spinning. This creates a sea of negative energy.

    So what does this mean when it comes to all the concepts and forces of nature we like to discuss, such as gravity, mass, inertia, the speed of light, etc?

    If you combine his theory with what has already been learned about the fundamentally real “magnetic vector potential” (which shouldn’t be called a potential at all because it is the prime driver of electromagnetism) you can piece together a guide to how all these forces operate.

    To explain the magnetic vector potential, consider an electron moving along a vector, a single direction, through a copper wire. This moving electron has a charge that interacts with the electron positron sea or “aether” (which could also be called by other more modern slightly less abominable names such as zero point energy field). This interaction (imagine an object moving through a volume of water or an eighteen wheeler zipping past you as you walk along the side of a highway) creates two related forces. One, is the magnetic vector potential (again the term potential is horrible and totally inappropriate) which is a portion of the surrounding electron positron pairs moving in the same direction as the electron. The magnetic field is the swirling pattern that is created, sorta like smoke rings. In reality, there is no magnetic field but simply whirlwind in the magnetic vector potential.

    Originally, Maxwell and the earliest electrodynamicists considered the Magnetic Vector Potential to literally be the “MVP” (Most Valuable Player) in electromagnetic. It was the prime mover and totally real. However, about the same time some of these same scientists began to dismiss the existence of an aether, the MVP was mostly dismissed as well, allowed to exist only as a mathematical abstraction that could make some equations easier. They claimed it had no physical reality.

    Now we know beyond any doubt it has physical reality. If you run current through a wire or solenoid surrounded by a super conducting tube which completely shields any magnetic field, an induced voltage and current can still be detected in a secondary winding or wire. This is impossible according to the standard view of the magnetic vector potential, but has been tested repeatedly. Also, a charged particle can be deflected by a similar setup when no magnetic field should exist outside the super conductor.

    So we have this mysterious force that can operate when there should be NOTHING. So we have NOTHING doing SOMETHING. But this nothing is real. What is it?

    Obviously, it is a flow or movement of the aether — of electron positron pairs.

    Since all matter contains “ordinary” electrons that orbit protons, when matter moves in space a vector potential is created. The vector potential of the charged particles in moving matter is what interacts somehow with the electron positron pairs to limit the motion of matter to the speed of light, produce the effect called inertia, etc. Also, vector potential is also responsible for gravity wells as well.

    Podkletnov’s impulse generator is really a magnetic vector potential beam generator. It is producing a focused and powerful beam of magnetic vector potential that is alleged to be capable of punching through brick walls. This is literally a gravity beam because in reality gravity is a push and not a pull.

    However, we don’t need an expensive setup like Podkletnov’s to play around with the MVP at lower power levels. There are various method of producing transmitters that can emit longitnudinal waves (impulses of magnetic vector potential in the aether) with round spheres or flat plates. These systems are more or less based on Nikola Tesla’s work. Additionally, a well made toroid will isolate all the magnetic field into the ferromagnetic material in the ring while only the vector potential will go through the hole in the middle. There are several ways to make this magnetic vector potential going through the hole stronger and perhaps focused enough to turn into a beam for communications.

    The cool thing about communicating with magnetic vector potential is that it doesn’t interact much at all with ordinary matter, except to transiently push electrons around in metals or to produce physical force at higher power levels. This means they penetrate metal plates almost as easily as pieces of wood or plastic. They can sometimes travel faster than the speed of light (read the article by Don Hotson about how the electron sea of electron positron pairs creates one massive bose einstein condensate that spans the entire universe) and this may be especially true when the signals are concentrated and unidirectional as in Podkletnov’s system which is alleged to produce impulses that can travel at or above 64C.

    The EM Drive probably has multiple modes of operation. The simplest and easiest to harness is probably bouncing microwaves or radiowaves off highly polished mirrors on each side while maintaining a very high Q factor by controlling the input and placement of the antenna. In other modes, I have to think that “Pilot Wave Theory” like propulsion modes may be in operation.

    Of course the extraterrestrials zipping around our solar system and the top secret govt craft that have been flying in our skies for many decades already utilize this technology. Even if the humans who have built these craft didn’t fully understand the physics and were just copying alien hardware, they were manipulating inertia, mass, and gravity by inducing changes in the electron positron sea or aether. For example, they may have been focusing a huge quantity of magnetic vector potential into one point to create a density gradient that would make the craft move in one direction.

    I could go on and on but I won’t. I know this post isn’t exceptionally well written. But I feel horrible today. I’m having some health issues. But I urge you to check out Don Hotson’s articles and study the magnetic vector potential. Until the existence of the aether and the magnetic vector potential is accepted, the non-classified world will never be able to fully harness the wheelwork of nature to produce unlimited energy or travel the stars. Some interesting devices may be built without such a fundamental understanding, but the keys mastering our universe will not be ours.

    Have a great day.

    • Zephir

      /* according to this extremely logical and rational theory (far more sane than the non-realistic propositions of quantum physics) the universe is composed, at the root level, of electron positron pairs that do not annihilate but have sunken to a “negative energy” level in which they encircle each other, spinning */

      How electrons can exist within space formed by another electrons? Why they wouldn’t annihilate with its positrons? Why do you think, this theory is “sane”, not to say “extremely logical and rational”?

  • https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/59de56cb200000f515086458.jpeg?ops=scalefit_820_noupscale

    I’m wondering if this Pilot Wave Theory has something to do with what Tom DeLonge and his friends were talking about when they talked about “engineering space-time” to make a craft that can take us all around this planet almost instantaneously. The drawing of what it is supposed to look like is above. For now, here’s the announcement – a little over forty minutes – below, in case you missed it.


  • Zephir

    This is old Dirac’s ether hypothesis of sort. In dense aether model the vacuum behaves like the water surface. All kinds of fluctuations emerge in it (analogy of Brownian noise). Occasionally these fluctuations can get charge (weak leptonic or even electromagnetic for a while) but they’re not formed by any distinguished particles, by electrons and positrons (which would annihilate immediately) the less. So that your/Hotson’s model contains grains of truth – but nothing less, nothing more. It’s like to say, that water surface is formed with vortices, which emerge on it. But the space cannot be formed BY the artifacts, which emerge IN it – it would be confusion of intrinsic and extrinsic perspectives. The vacuum looks way more like the ocean of neutrinos of both kinds, btw. Such an idea also exists and it’s equally naive. http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sylwesters-everlasting-theory.110340/

  • Brent Buckner

    There is *some* actual evidence of a real effect (e.g. https://www.space.com/34797-impossible-space-engine-emdrive-study-published.html , Tajmar at Dresden University of Technology ).

  • Preston

    Pilot wave theory is interesting and may explain some of the strange effects seen in the quantum world. This includes the double slit interference patterns and even tunneling. But, it can’t explain entanglement “spokey action at a distance”. Here is an interesting experiment described by the same space time series which illustrates the problem.


    Maybe pilot wave with some kind of other extension. I don’t know, but maybe micro worm holes between entangled particles allowing them to interact across time and space.

  • Zephir

    Jakub Jędrzejewski and Michał Zwierz from Poland claim to have replicated Roger Shawyer’s Demonstrator EmDrive with using a KISS balance beam to measure the thrust. The engine is supposed to produce a string of hundreds of millinewtons (mN), which on Earth is not a significant value, but in space can be successfully used to correct the motion of the satellites." If the measured thrust is in range 100mN, this will be very interesting.

    EMDrive replication from Poland