# EMDrive: Newton's Laws can be "bypassed"?

• It is true that when nuclear fusion occurs part of the mass turns into radiation. The rest of your statement is not. Heat will cause cold fusion under very specific conditions; not always. The radiation from cold fusion will clump to itself; neutrinos do not. The radiation from cold fusion and neutrinos are both at very low mass, so as mass they resemble each other. Neutrino are supposed to have no charge. The clumps of mass from cold fusion are dipoles having both positive and negative charges. See Rout et al. Also see Perevozechikov, N. F. et al. http://www.biophys.ru/archive/congress2012/proc-p26-d.pdf

You write: "Heat will cause cold fusion under very specific conditions; not always."

You operate with a vague concept like "heat". There is no such material entity as "heat". Cold nuclear fusion is the movement of matter and can only be caused by the corresponding movement of matter.

• You write: "Heat will cause cold fusion under very specific conditions; not always."

You operate with a vague concept like "heat". There is no such material entity as "heat". Cold nuclear fusion is the movement of matter and can only be caused by the corresponding movement of matter.

Conversion of fuel to mass and energy can cause the movement of matter. Cold fusion can cause the movement of matter. Cold fusion can catalyze more cold fusion but up to this date, no one has shown the energy from cold fusion can be used in such a way that cold fusion becomes self-sustained.

Where would you harvest this movement of matter to get cold fusion to get more movement of matter? From heat? The point is there is no evidence of that.

• You operate with a vague concept like "heat".

Heat is not very vague to those that studied thermodynamics. What is vague is your NNM theory.

• Where would you harvest this movement of matter to get cold fusion to get more movement of matter? From heat? The point is there is no evidence of that.

I adhere to a new physical paradigm, when the movement of matter is primary and absolute, and it (motion) occurs exclusively as a drain-source (convergence-divergence). We cannot change this given absolute movement, but can only direct this movement along the channel we desire.

See my article.

• And how do you define movement itself?

## Files

• You say :-

"3. The materiality of Cosmos lies in its motion, which is a non-mechanical process of transformation of
baryonic matter (BM) through neutrinos as a "displacement current" into "dark matter" (DM) and back,
i.e. material-energy induction. If the electromagnetic part of our world moves as electromagnetic
induction, then it is natural to assume, according to the principle of super -symmetry that its material part
should move according to similar laws?!"

Since you suggest that this cycle takes 10−43 seconds (Planck Time) how could it be detected? Also, since 'dark matter' is itself an undetected mathematical convenience - a hypothesis in fact - you are attempting to construct a hypothesis based upon a hypothesis. This is not a firm basis for a truly scientific theory., it is what is normally described as 'guesswork' or in more polite circles as 'hand-waving'.

There is another problem. Since 85% of the universe's mass is hypothesised to be dark matter are we to assume that there are two kinds of this substance, the here now, gone in 10-43 seconds kind, and the permanent kind? Because if that 85% was cycling into normal matter there is a good possibility that we would notice.

• You are wasting your time Alan. Nikitincan can't be reasoned with. He is sort of "brain dead" in colloquial terms.

• Dear Alan Smith!

You superficially criticize my article and my hypotheses, trying to “catch” me with logical errors and contradictions, instead of trying to take something useful to solve the problem of cold nuclear fusion and a new source of energy. I am not a magician and cannot describe and foresee everything. (if you wish, I can answer your questions in detail)

When imagining, you first need to solve the most general fundamental questions in a philosophical-metaphysical way, and the “details” will be resolved in a logical way.

The most general, the most fundamental, the most fundamental thing that I propose is a new scientific paradigm. (see my article)

I argue that within the framework of the modern orthodox scientific paradigm (matter + fields, the Big Bang, the Standard Model, quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity), it is in principle impossible to solve the problems of cold nuclear fusion, a new source of energy and a new engine, no matter how much they put different experiments and did not develop different theories.

"Plato is my friend but the truth is dearer"

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!