In this case one G means that the thruster can lift its own mass. At this point the thruster is pretty light and this doesn't take high voltage generator's mass into consideration. Still pretty impressive.
We need a meta-material that is resistant enough to extreme high voltage, and that reduces the gape between charges to an atomic level, like Electrets. Then we can dramatically increase the thrust vector of this kind of propulsion and use it to get off the earth and accelerate to godly speeds. The current applications are only usable in space for not a long time before failure, we need far better materials.
Hey everyone! I'm on a journey to reach 1,000 subscribers, and I need your help to get there! If you enjoy my content, please hit that Subscribe button and give this video a thumbs up. Your support means the world to me. Also, I'd love to hear your thoughts-drop a comment below and let's chat! Thank you so much for being part of this community.
Why are they meausuring thrusters force in “g”s Is it a field or a force by a thruster? So, if you count it on a vehicle it is ,5 milli Newtons? This makes no sense..
They're talking about g in terms of 9.81 metres per second squared (gravity) force that the device is producing and one of the scientists hopes to produce 1 kg of force (so that the force can support 1 kg of weight on top of it, for example)
@@Insight121 kilograms is a unit of mass not force. No such thing as a kilogram of force. Newtons is a unit of force. Before you write to “clarify” something, make sure you understand it. I am an aerospace engineer. You dont need to explain elementary stuff to me which you didnt since you confuse mass and force as if they were the same thing. The problem with stating the thruster performance in terms of “g’s” is that if I were to calculate an acceleration on a spacecraft, I can’t. G’s do not tell me anything.
The possibility of this technology is endless, it could replace cars, boats, planes and rockets.
Hopefully you can make your whole house float and don't have to buy land.
So this is basically antigravity? Or am I wrong
Yes antigravity
Buhler's rig should rotate at an accelerated rate, but doesn't!
The video is at a X2 speed and the force being generated is so small the best results should be in a vacuum.
Is net thrust (vector) being generated or not? Sounds fancy: where's the beef?
Yes it's been generated
One G of thrust on average sounds a little bit optimistic for a new propulsion technology.
It sounds too good to be true but it is happening. We need to get a lot of qualified people working on this and making improvement.
We need to keep Dr Charles safe
In this case one G means that the thruster can lift its own mass. At this point the thruster is pretty light and this doesn't take high voltage generator's mass into consideration. Still pretty impressive.
We need a meta-material that is resistant enough to extreme high voltage, and that reduces the gape between charges to an atomic level, like Electrets. Then we can dramatically increase the thrust vector of this kind of propulsion and use it to get off the earth and accelerate to godly speeds. The current applications are only usable in space for not a long time before failure, we need far better materials.
Hey everyone! I'm on a journey to reach 1,000 subscribers, and I need your help to get there! If you enjoy my content, please hit that Subscribe button and give this video a thumbs up. Your support means the world to me. Also, I'd love to hear your thoughts-drop a comment below and let's chat! Thank you so much for being part of this community.
Why are they meausuring thrusters force in “g”s Is it a field or a force by a thruster? So, if you count it on a vehicle it is ,5 milli Newtons? This makes no sense..
The force is minuscule at the moment they need to refine the technology
They're talking about g in terms of 9.81 metres per second squared (gravity) force that the device is producing and one of the scientists hopes to produce 1 kg of force (so that the force can support 1 kg of weight on top of it, for example)
Please subscribe 👍
@@Insight121 kilograms is a unit of mass not force. No such thing as a kilogram of force. Newtons is a unit of force. Before you write to “clarify” something, make sure you understand it. I am an aerospace engineer. You dont need to explain elementary stuff to me which you didnt since you confuse mass and force as if they were the same thing.
The problem with stating the thruster performance in terms of “g’s” is that if I were to calculate an acceleration on a spacecraft, I can’t. G’s do not tell me anything.
@@Insight121 I did
Fake
Don't just say it's fake, do some research into it.
@@Insight121 .......... not fake? ok just fly to the mon. Grants.
@@arhon5681 have you seen the video?