-
#2400 by sanman on 24 Oct, 2017 01:41
-
Somebody put this up on Youtube - has it been posted here before?
-
#2401 by TheTraveller on 24 Oct, 2017 02:13
-
Hi TheTraveller. I think I recall someone or Roger himself saying Roger thinks that before the end of 2017 he expects to have a superconducting Emdrive to demonstrate. If that recollection was right, have you heard any news relating to it?
Hi Mark,
I know Roger is working with Gilo Industries on a wingless and propless drone. Have confirmed with Gilo Cardozo that Roger is working with Gilo Industries. Gilo Industries now owns a controlling shareholding in Universal Propulsion, the JV created by Roger and Gilo. Roger has been working with Gilo Industries since 2015. Plus there is a world patent application on the cryo thruster with Gilo Cardozo as the co-inventor.
So there is movement at the station.
Uh, now I'm wondering how, a document dating back to February 2017 (I mean THIS document) may indicate that as of today there's "movement at the station"
Hi TOG,
What I shared clearly shows there is activity occurring, based on SPR statements and changes in the effective ownership of the Universal Propulsion JV. I mean why would Gilo Industries Group acquire the controlling shares in the JV, if there was not value in doing so?
Likewise why would Gilo Cardozo be listed as the co-inventor on the world patent application?
TT,
I hope you are right that their work is ongoing. My question is, is Gilo the right type of company to maximize the progress made or are they just the only ones with enough courage to give it a try?
Nevil Shute wanted to develop a new aircraft with retractable wheels (then thought to complex to be made functional). He could not find the right one so he started one himself. He was able to do this because it made sense to the bank that it could be a winner if the company was tailored to the job.
Hi Spurpeng,
Roger and Gilo have a similar mindset and don't have an issue with paddling against the current, plus both want to build flying cars.
As I understand it, Gilo approached Roger.
They then formed the Universal Propulsion JV, of which Gilo held 60% of the shares and SPR the other 40%.
Next event was Gilo being listed as the co-inventor on the world patent application.
Next Roger outed his work with Gilo Industries in the Shrivenham Presentation and in an interview with Mary Ann on IBT.
Then Gilo Industries received $40m in investment funds from a Chinese partner.
Next Gilo Industries took control of the Universal Propulsion JV.
Should point out that Gilo Industries CEO is a UAE citizen and resident, who runs a Abu Dhabi royal family investment fund that has more shares in Gilo Industries than do the Chinese.
So we have a major declared Chinese investment in Gilo Industries plus probably some off book investment by the Adu Dhabi royal family, with the company CEO being the guy who runs that fund.
So ask yourself if all this has happened because these 2 major shareholders have an interest in powered hang gliders or small rotary engines?
I suggest this all happened because of Roger's work with Gilo, plus Gilo has brought money to the table to fund the superconducting EmDrive R&D.
Also interesting is the UAE has established a NASA like and better funded space agency tasked with building UAE satellites, sending them to Mars, training UAE astronauts, building a test Mars city in the UAE desert and planing to build a UAE city on Mars. I suggest there is a place for a 1g EmDrive propelled UAE built space ship in those plans. -
#2402 by sanman on 24 Oct, 2017 02:19
-
Now here's another good one
Heh, so now you just have to picture a huge number of drops bouncing around inside a giant frustrum-shaped pool
(And reprogram COMSOL to calculate that way too) -
#2403 by meberbs on 24 Oct, 2017 02:44
-
Meberbs -
The math does not specify cause and effect, only correlation.
The reverse implication time dilation gradient -> gravity-like force is just straight from the maths.I don't know how to address a suggestion that it isn't just fact, since we are generally quite happy to allow mathematics to do our deductions for us.
I think there is some miscommunication between us on this. The fact is the math shows a correlation. It does not tell us whether gravity causes time dilation or time dilation causes gravity. You keep making statements that "time dilation causes gravity" without any words like "possibly." In other statements you seem to be acknowledging the reverse interpretation as being valid. These 2 types of statements are contradictory. If gravity causes time dilation is a valid view (and it is) then you cannot make correctly make unqualified statements that time dilation causes gravity. (Note that I qualified "gravity causes time dilation" in that sentence by calling it a "valid view" rather than just stating it as a fact)
I have arguments that gravity causes time dilation is the more useful perspective (and more likely to be correct if there is a practical difference) but they aren't 100% conclusive, so I don't think there is value in going any further into them now.Correct, there is no time dilation in Newtonian gravity. But if you replace Newtonian gravity with a very simplified form of GR where particles move on geodesics in a metric space where the only feature is a spatially varying 'time dilation field' you can recover the forces of Newtonian gravity. Plus, you have a theory with no 'action at a distance', which I believe is preferable.
Thank you, we are on the same page with this then. -
#2404 by WarpTech on 24 Oct, 2017 04:29
-
Meberbs -
The math does not specify cause and effect, only correlation.
The reverse implication time dilation gradient -> gravity-like force is just straight from the maths.I don't know how to address a suggestion that it isn't just fact, since we are generally quite happy to allow mathematics to do our deductions for us.
I think there is some miscommunication between us on this. The fact is the math shows a correlation. It does not tell us whether gravity causes time dilation or time dilation causes gravity. You keep making statements that "time dilation causes gravity" without any words like "possibly." In other statements you seem to be acknowledging the reverse interpretation as being valid. These 2 types of statements are contradictory. If gravity causes time dilation is a valid view (and it is) then you cannot make correctly make unqualified statements that time dilation causes gravity. (Note that I qualified "gravity causes time dilation" in that sentence by calling it a "valid view" rather than just stating it as a fact)
I have arguments that gravity causes time dilation is the more useful perspective (and more likely to be correct if there is a practical difference) but they aren't 100% conclusive, so I don't think there is value in going any further into them now.
RERT brought up the idea of a Transducer. I can give you a few examples.
1. Electricity causes a motor to turn a fan that pushes the air, vs Wind causing a propeller to turn, which turns a generator to produce electricity.
2. A loud speaker uses electricity to cause a membrane to vibrate and produce sound waves in the air, vs a Microphone where sound waves cause vibrations of a membrane that generates electricity.
3. Power transformers...
4. Peltier junctions...
and dozens, if not hundreds of other examples.
We also know gravitational (gravito-magnetic) induction exists similar to EM, (frame dragging, gravity waves, etc.)
Just saying; if gravity causes a gradient in the time dilation, then a gradient in the time dilation also causes gravity. It would be VERY unusual, not to mention inconsistent, with the many, many things we know that work this way, if it didn't. Granted, if it didn't work this way, it would be interesting to know why.
-
#2405 by WarpTech on 24 Oct, 2017 04:41
-
But, besides the theoretical reasons, there is not a single reproducible experiment where someone has been able to extract energy from the Quantum Vacuum.
Consider the following thought experiment:
In the reference frame of a distant observer, outside of a gravity well, looking "down" into it. He sees an atom falling from height h1 to height h2 < h1. In doing so, the atom's oscillation transitions to and from the ground state becomes red-shifted, due to gravitational red shift.
Since the frequency of the atomic oscillations decreased, in the frame of the distant observer, the energy of the oscillator was also decreased;
h*f1 > h*f2
E1 > E2
In falling from h1 to h2, the atom lost energy. In this distant observer's frame, the atom's ground state energy is lower at h2 than it was at h1.
Given this example, and the fact that the ZPF sets the ground state energy of the atom. All Hydro-electric power is essentially extracting energy from the Quantum Vacuum.
-
#2406 by tleach on 24 Oct, 2017 05:24
-
RERT brought up the idea of a Transducer. I can give you a few examples.
1. Electricity causes a motor to turn a fan that pushes the air, vs Wind causing a propeller to turn, which turns a generator to produce electricity.
2. A loud speaker uses electricity to cause a membrane to vibrate and produce sound waves in the air, vs a Microphone where sound waves cause vibrations of a membrane that generates electricity.
3. Power transformers...
4. Peltier junctions...
and dozens, if not hundreds of other examples.
We also know gravitational (gravito-magnetic) induction exists similar to EM, (frame dragging, gravity waves, etc.)
Just saying; if gravity causes a gradient in the time dilation, then a gradient in the time dilation also causes gravity. It would be VERY unusual, not to mention inconsistent, with the many, many things we know that work this way, if it didn't. Granted, if it didn't work this way, it would be interesting to know why.
Kind of like Calabi–Yau manifold mirror symmetry calculations? The equations work both ways and you just use whichever set makes it easier to find the answer to the question you're asking.
Oh, and while I'm logged in, I thought maybe I'd throw another crazy idea into the ring...
What if the EM drive is a type of Szilard engine? I know it sounds crazy, but think about it... The signal emitted into the frustum would need to be constantly varied during acceleration to keep resonance locked. That signal must be modulated in such a way that it accounts for changes in the position of the frustum in relation to the mass/energy distribution of the entire universe (if Mach was right). But, all of that information is radiated away as (pretty much) random IR noise, right? So what happened to the information?
Unfortunately, I came up with 0.00000000000011378659 Joules worth of acceleration when I tried to do the math... Maybe I'm off by a couple of orders of magnitude. I never was vary good at math.
-
#2407 by OnlyMe on 24 Oct, 2017 06:14
-
Is there some possibility of a Maxwell's Demon here?
If the Quantum Vacuum is the zero energy point, that means that you should not be able to extract momentum or energy from it, because the momentum/energy gained by the EM Drive would be subtracted from the QV, which contradicts its zero point nature, so what you thought was "zero point energy" really wasn't.
ie. some kind of Quantum Feedback Loop whereby you're able to push off the Vacuum fluctuations in a directionally biased way
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_feedback
(so the Dynamic Vacuum would be the external field)
The quantum vacuum cannot be just zero point energy, other than within hypothetical contexts. Zero point energy would be the lowest possible “potential”, but reality is that the vacuum and thus even the quantum vacuum is filled with a very real broad spectrum EM background at the least. An EM background potential that varies over time and with location. The real question is whether there is a component of the QV that is something more than a zero point and real EM background potential. And how (or if) the boundary conditions between matter and the QV can be manipulated, in an asymmetric manner. Both the Casimir effect and Unruh radiation involve an asymmetry in boundary conditions between matter and the QV (if one accepts the associated theoretical explanations)... which suggests that if one could artificially manipulate the boundary conditions of matter, the interaction might result in an apparently propellentless acceleration.
Not that I believe that is what is happening with the EmDrive. -
#2408 by OnlyMe on 24 Oct, 2017 06:21
-
But, besides the theoretical reasons, there is not a single reproducible experiment where someone has been able to extract energy from the Quantum Vacuum.Is there some possibility of a Maxwell's Demon here?
If the Quantum Vacuum is the zero energy point, that means that you should not be able to extract momentum or energy from it, because the momentum/energy gained by the EM Drive would be subtracted from the QV, which contradicts its zero point nature.
ie. some kind of Quantum Feedback Loop whereby you're able to push off the Vacuum fluctuations in a directionally biased way
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_feedback
(so the Dynamic Vacuum would be the external field)
But you are pumping up the Vacuum inside the cavity with RF/microwaves. So the state of the Vacuum inside the cavity is not the same as outside the cavity (the true zero point)
So regarding stealing momentum (asymmetrically), if you're stealing it from a pumped-up vacuum, that's not the same as stealing it from regular zero-point vacuum.
Even if one were to set aside the concerns about the experimental claims (i.e. Shawyer has never performed a single experiment in vacuum), and the theoretical problems (with the concept of extracting energy from the QV) explaining the EM Drive with an explanation that itself is the only experiment where someone has been able to extract energy from the Quantum Vacuum sounds like a circular argument. Not compelling
Something has always bothered me about the emphasis on proving thrust in a hard vacuum. While it would certainly be preferable, if it turned out that thrust could only be generated with a frustum in atmosphere, you could just put a drive inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space. You could even optimize the atmosphere for optimum thrust... -
#2409 by Slyver on 24 Oct, 2017 06:58
-
Something has always bothered me about the emphasis on proving thrust in a hard vacuum. While it would certainly be preferable, if it turned out that thrust could only be generated with a frustum in atmosphere, you could just put a drive inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space. You could even optimize the atmosphere for optimum thrust...
I have been a proponent of a hermetically sealed EMDrive test since around the beginning of thread 1, what was it, 3 or 4 years ago?
Of course, the first step is to get it working in air with best (and collaborative) efforts at eliminating spurious forces, as our illustrious experimenters are doing. But step 2, is imo, a sealed test with an otherwise "working" EMDrive. Since we do not know the method of operation (if there is one) I consider it at least as important as a vacuum test, and probably easier to pull off (assuming of course step 1 shows unaccountable forces). Step 3 would be to test a frustum that passed test 2, both naked in vacuum, and in a sealed air filled container in vacuum. -
#2410 by RERT on 24 Oct, 2017 07:11
-
Meberbs - if there is a 'time dilation gradient' there will be gravity-like forces acting. In this case, maybe unusually, I only mean exactly what I say. Plug the assumptions into the maths of GR, turn the handle, and the conclusion follows. The sentence beginning 'If' is therefore unambiguously correct within accepted physics.
To hold otherwise is to suggest that if the 'time dilation gradient' arises in the 'wrong' way, no forces will act. Maybe so - but if so physics just got a lot more complicated, with no particular evidence to suggest that it should. -
#2411 by TheTraveller on 24 Oct, 2017 07:49
-
But, besides the theoretical reasons, there is not a single reproducible experiment where someone has been able to extract energy from the Quantum Vacuum.Is there some possibility of a Maxwell's Demon here?
If the Quantum Vacuum is the zero energy point, that means that you should not be able to extract momentum or energy from it, because the momentum/energy gained by the EM Drive would be subtracted from the QV, which contradicts its zero point nature.
ie. some kind of Quantum Feedback Loop whereby you're able to push off the Vacuum fluctuations in a directionally biased way
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_feedback
(so the Dynamic Vacuum would be the external field)
But you are pumping up the Vacuum inside the cavity with RF/microwaves. So the state of the Vacuum inside the cavity is not the same as outside the cavity (the true zero point)
So regarding stealing momentum (asymmetrically), if you're stealing it from a pumped-up vacuum, that's not the same as stealing it from regular zero-point vacuum.
Even if one were to set aside the concerns about the experimental claims (i.e. Shawyer has never performed a single experiment in vacuum), and the theoretical problems (with the concept of extracting energy from the QV) explaining the EM Drive with an explanation that itself is the only experiment where someone has been able to extract energy from the Quantum Vacuum sounds like a circular argument. Not compelling
Something has always bothered me about the emphasis on proving thrust in a hard vacuum. While it would certainly be preferable, if it turned out that thrust could only be generated with a frustum in atmosphere, you could just put a drive inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space. You could even optimize the atmosphere for optimum thrust...
Hi OnlyMe,
The NASA Eagleworks data showed the same 1.2mN/kW specific force generation in atmo and vacuum. All that changed was the vac resonant freq increased approx 600kHz.
About time to stop the talk about vac vs atmo tests altering EmDrive thrust results. There is no thrust alteration. Atmo test results will be the same in vac, assuming the driving freq is adjusted upward a bit by the electronics. -
#2412 by TheTraveller on 24 Oct, 2017 07:54
-
Given this example, and the fact that the ZPF sets the ground state energy of the atom. All Hydro-electric power is essentially extracting energy from the Quantum Vacuum.
Hi WT,
The water molecules are lifted up the gravity well via solar energy. The Hydro plant is extracting solar energy and not ZPF energy. -
#2413 by Chrochne on 24 Oct, 2017 08:29
-
Hi TheTraveller. I think I recall someone or Roger himself saying Roger thinks that before the end of 2017 he expects to have a superconducting Emdrive to demonstrate. If that recollection was right, have you heard any news relating to it?
Hi Mark,
I know Roger is working with Gilo Industries on a wingless and propless drone. Have confirmed with Gilo Cardozo that Roger is working with Gilo Industries. Gilo Industries now owns a controlling shareholding in Universal Propulsion, the JV created by Roger and Gilo. Roger has been working with Gilo Industries since 2015. Plus there is a world patent application on the cryo thruster with Gilo Cardozo as the co-inventor.
So there is movement at the station.
Uh, now I'm wondering how, a document dating back to February 2017 (I mean THIS document) may indicate that as of today there's "movement at the station"
Hi TOG,
What I shared clearly shows there is activity occurring, based on SPR statements and changes in the effective ownership of the Universal Propulsion JV. I mean why would Gilo Industries Group acquire the controlling shares in the JV, if there was not value in doing so?
Likewise why would Gilo Cardozo be listed as the co-inventor on the world patent application?
TT,
I hope you are right that their work is ongoing. My question is, is Gilo the right type of company to maximize the progress made or are they just the only ones with enough courage to give it a try?
Nevil Shute wanted to develop a new aircraft with retractable wheels (then thought to complex to be made functional). He could not find the right one so he started one himself. He was able to do this because it made sense to the bank that it could be a winner if the company was tailored to the job.
Hi Spurpeng,
Roger and Gilo have a similar mindset and don't have an issue with paddling against the current, plus both want to build flying cars.
As I understand it, Gilo approached Roger.
They then formed the Universal Propulsion JV, of which Gilo held 60% of the shares and SPR the other 40%.
Next event was Gilo being listed as the co-inventor on the world patent application.
Next Roger outed his work with Gilo Industries in the Shrivenham Presentation and in an interview with Mary Ann on IBT.
Then Gilo Industries received $40m in investment funds from a Chinese partner.
Next Gilo Industries took control of the Universal Propulsion JV.
Should point out that Gilo Industries CEO is a UAE citizen and resident, who runs a Abu Dhabi royal family investment fund that has more shares in Gilo Industries than do the Chinese.
So we have a major declared Chinese investment in Gilo Industries plus probably some off book investment by the Adu Dhabi royal family, with the company CEO being the guy who runs that fund.
So ask yourself if all this has happened because these 2 major shareholders have an interest in powered hang gliders or small rotary engines?
I suggest this all happened because of Roger's work with Gilo, plus Gilo has brought money to the table to fund the superconducting EmDrive R&D.
Also interesting is the UAE has established a NASA like and better funded space agency tasked with building UAE satellites, sending them to Mars, training UAE astronauts, building a test Mars city in the UAE desert and planing to build a UAE city on Mars. I suggest there is a place for a 1g EmDrive propelled UAE built space ship in those plans.
TT is right. That UAE investor is really interesting. They keep very quite, but pour in a lot of funds. I would add that some of the dates UAE put forward when they want to make their space plans a reality is impossible with the current rocket engine technology. There are dates like 2020.
I encourage others to look around on more information about this investor from UAE. -
#2414 by WarpTech on 24 Oct, 2017 13:52
-
Given this example, and the fact that the ZPF sets the ground state energy of the atom. All Hydro-electric power is essentially extracting energy from the Quantum Vacuum.
Hi WT,
The water molecules are lifted up the gravity well via solar energy. The Hydro plant is extracting solar energy and not ZPF energy.
The gravity well is not solar energy, it is vacuum energy. Lifting mass in a gravity well requires solar energy to overcome the change in vacuum energy. Letting it fall extracts the difference in vacuum energy.
-
#2415 by Rodal on 24 Oct, 2017 13:52
-
...
That does not necessarily follow
Something has always bothered me about the emphasis on proving thrust in a hard vacuum. While it would certainly be preferable, if it turned out that thrust could only be generated with a frustum in atmosphere, you could just put a drive inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space. You could even optimize the atmosphere for optimum thrust...
. It would be like someone saying that the way to get around the fact that air breathing engines (like jet engines) can only generate thrust in atmosphere is to put the air breathing engine " inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space".
No, a jet engine inside a shell filled with atmosphere will not produce any thrust to the center of mass of the space vehicle, whatsoever, in space.
Similarly, you cannot produce thrust of a space vehicle by using a propeller inside a shell filled with atmosphere.
Similarly, if the reason why Roger Shawyer never performed a single experiment in vacuum is because the tiny thrust he claims in his experiments is due to the EM Drive working as a very inefficient heater (thus producing convection of the air around it), putting the EM Drive inside a shell filled with air in space will not produce any thrust whatsoever either.
For a drive to accelerate a vehicle in space it needs to either obtain its acceleration from the ejection of propellants, or otherwise it needs to attain such acceleration from an external field. -
#2416 by Rodal on 24 Oct, 2017 14:28
-
The problem with the example above is that there is one single type of energy that is precluded from entering the stress-energy-momentum tensor: gravitational potential energy.But, besides the theoretical reasons, there is not a single reproducible experiment where someone has been able to extract energy from the Quantum Vacuum.
Consider the following thought experiment:
In the reference frame of a distant observer, outside of a gravity well, looking "down" into it. He sees an atom falling from height h1 to height h2 < h1. In doing so, the atom's oscillation transitions to and from the ground state becomes red-shifted, due to gravitational red shift.
Since the frequency of the atomic oscillations decreased, in the frame of the distant observer, the energy of the oscillator was also decreased;
h*f1 > h*f2
E1 > E2
In falling from h1 to h2, the atom lost energy. In this distant observer's frame, the atom's ground state energy is lower at h2 than it was at h1.
Given this example, and the fact that the ZPF sets the ground state energy of the atom. All Hydro-electric power is essentially extracting energy from the Quantum Vacuum.
Thus, from the point of view of General Relativity, if only the gravitational potential energy changed, then the stress-energy-momentum tensor T did not change in the example.
See: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/45145/potential-energy-in-general-relativityQuoteGravitational energy cannot be explicitly included in the Einstein field equations because the equivalence principle --there is always a local inertial frame(the free-falling one) in which spacetime looks like the ordinary, flat, special-relativistic one. Hence if there was a frame-independent local notion of gravitational energy, i.e., a tensor, that tensor is zero in some local frame, and hence zero in every frame.
Repeat: that tensor is zero in every frame !
and I think that very few people will agree that "All Hydro-electric power is essentially extracting energy from the Quantum Vacuum."
instead it is essentially extracting energy from the Sun, because it is the Sun ultimately responsible for the weather process responsible for replenishing the high water reservoir thus enabling a continuous process of hydroelectric power generation. -
#2417 by OnlyMe on 24 Oct, 2017 15:07
-
...
That does not necessarily follow
Something has always bothered me about the emphasis on proving thrust in a hard vacuum. While it would certainly be preferable, if it turned out that thrust could only be generated with a frustum in atmosphere, you could just put a drive inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space. You could even optimize the atmosphere for optimum thrust.... It would be like someone saying that the way to get around the fact that air breathing engines (like jet engines) can only generate thrust in atmosphere is to put the air breathing engine " inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space".
No, a jet engine inside a shell filled with atmosphere will not produce any thrust to the center of mass of the space vehicle, whatsoever, in space.
Similarly, you cannot produce thrust of a space vehicle by using a propeller inside a shell filled with atmosphere.
Similarly, if the reason why Roger Shawyer never performed a single experiment in vacuum is because the tiny thrust he claims in his experiments is due to the EM Drive working as a very inefficient heater (thus producing convection of the air around it), putting the EM Drive inside a shell filled with air in space will not produce any thrust whatsoever either.
For a drive to accelerate a vehicle in space it needs to either obtain its acceleration from the ejection of propellants, or otherwise it needs to attain such acceleration from an external field.
This last sentence is once again an arrogant statement suggesting that we already know everything there is to know. It is completely consistent with what we have observed and past experience. However...
Right now if and when an anomalous thrust is reliably demonstrated/proven it appears that it will require at the least, a re-evaluation of what we have come to think we know, rather than an insistence that our conclusions based on past experience represents everything there is to know about the universe and physics.
As example, If what is now being explored incorporates some interaction with the vacuum/quantum vacuum, most of our past classical interpretations of CoE and CoM cannot be expected to define or limit, the underlying mechanism(s). We cannot know that it is not possible to generate acceleration solely through an interaction between the frustum and internal fields or internal asymetric boundary conditions when we cannot today with certainty, agree on the composition of the QV or even that it exists and interacts with matter.
You jet engine example would only apply if the operation of an EmDrive consumes in some manner the atmosphere within and around it...
-
#2418 by Monomorphic on 24 Oct, 2017 15:21
-
Pictures of the flexure bearings that arrived last week. Since the noise problem seems to have been solved for now, I will keep these for a potential future test stand and not worry about using them now.
The larger one is the E-10 bearing, which is the same used by Woodward/Fearn in the USC/ARC style thrust balance. The other two are the D-10.
-
#2419 by Rodal on 24 Oct, 2017 15:26
-
...
No, it does not have to do with "consumption of air," [definition: consumption: the using up of a resource] on the contrary, it has to do with compression of air and ensuing higher velocity ejection of air, as the jets of gas shoots backward, the engine and the aircraft are thrust forward in order to conserve momentum (in the jet engine example)
You jet engine example would only apply if the operation of an EmDrive consumes in some manner the atmosphere within and around it...
Putting such a jet engine inside a shell in a spacecraft will result in zero thrust for the spacecraft.
Concerning the EM Drive experiments in air, you will have asymmetric convection of air (as an inefficient asymmetric heater in experiments performed under ambient conditions) [as a possible source of anomalous thrust in EM Drive experiments under ambient conditons] and thus preserving conservation of momentum. Addressing conservation of momentum is not "arrogance."
. It would be like someone saying that the way to get around the fact that air breathing engines (like jet engines) can only generate thrust in atmosphere is to put the air breathing engine " inside a shell filled with atmosphere, in space".