http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive
U vezi NASA eksperimenta:
Citat:
Thrust was observed on both test articles, even though one of the test articles was designed with the expectation that it would not produce thrust. Specifically, one test article contained internal physical modifications that were designed to produce thrust, while the other did not (with the latter being referred to as the "null" test article).
As for the Cannae drive test article, Nova reported that "In the paper, NASA seemed reluctant to dive into the drive’s mysterious physics. They wrote nothing to suggest how, exactly, the force was produced. In fact, the mysterious drive actually worked even when they modified it in such a way it shouldn’t have produced any thrust, suggesting the mechanics of the system are hazily understood.
Najverovatnije objasnjenje za sve ovo je da trenutno ne postoji zadovoljavajuce razumevanje (objasnjenje) funkcionisanja tog uredjaja.
To ne znaci da je u pitanju nekakav perpetuum mobile (niti da je uredjaj koristan za bilo sta), vec samo da ocigledno jos nije ulozeno dovoljno truda da se utvrdi sta se tacno desava mehanicki.
Ako uredjaj ima upotrebnu vrednost tj. nesto radi bolje od stanja nauke, nece imati problem da nadje prakticnu primenu.
Sa druge strane, informacije o "NASA testiranju" deluju malo "napumpane". Objektivno radi se o jednom naucnom radu prezentovanom na konferenciji, gde su autori (iz NASA-e) prezentovali rezultate. Dakle, ne radi se o nekakvom NASA konkretnom projektu. Ovo je par internet medija prenelo sa akcentom na rec "NASA", davajuci celoj stvari prizvuk kakav, bar za sada, ne zasluzuje.
DigiCortex (ex. SpikeFun) - Cortical Neural Network Simulator:
http://www.digicortex.net/node/1 Videos:
http://www.digicortex.net/node/17 Gallery:
http://www.digicortex.net/node/25
PowerMonkey - Redyce CPU Power Waste and gain performance! -
https://github.com/psyq321/PowerMonkey