• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Reply to thread

They are both about "effective mass", as can be seen in the first bullet of your screenshot already.


Actual negative mass is just a hypothetical idea at the moment and has never been observed. No matter how Thomas tries to embellish the story, for obvious reasons, it's quite clear that the vast majority of experts regard its existence highly unlikely, and even if it existed, it may not actually work for space travel.


Tajmar makes it clear how Zeilinger obtained just negative effective mass here:


http://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/J-Advanced-Phys-V4-p77-82(2015).pdf




Those don't really make actual negative masses any more likely, as is already evident from the news articles about those findings, including that you linked from NewScientist:


Light can break Newton’s third law – by cheating



https://www.fau.eu/2013/10/22/news/research/the-negative-mass-effect/



Researchers break Newton's third law - with lasers - ExtremeTech


Back
Top