**2003**
>British aerospace engineer Roger J. Shawyer creates his first company, Satellite Propulsion Research Ltd to create a new type of rocket he invented. The device uses a magnetron to produce microwaves which are directed into a metallic, fully enclosed conically tapered high Q resonant cavity with a greater area at the large end of the device, and a dielectric resonator in front of the narrower end. The inventor claims that the device generates a directional thrust toward the narrow end of the tapered cavity. The device (engine) requires an electrical power source to produce its reflecting internal microwaves but does not have any moving parts or require any reaction mass as fuel.[*](http://emdrive.com/background.html)

**2008**
>Chinese researchers claims they’ve confirmed the theory behind an "impossible" space drive, and are proceeding to build a demonstration version. If they’re right, this might transform the economics of satellites.[*](http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-02/06/emdrive-and-cold-fusion)

**2014**
>NASA researchers have reported fresh evidence that an "impossible" space propulsion technology might actually work. A study from NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston says a microwave thruster system that requires no propellant appears to generate a tiny amount of thrust. If the technology pans out, it could make spaceflight far cheaper and speedier, advocates say. They argue that the thruster harnesses subatomic particles that pop into and out of existence in accordance with quantum physics — a hypothesis that's mentioned in the study. [*](http://www.nbcnews.com/science/weird-science/impossible-space-engine-might-work-nasa-test-suggests-n171201)

**2015**
1. [NASA/JSC Eagleworks Warp-Field Interferometer Test](http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=825512;image)

2. [Image of field around engine](http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=825621;image)

3. [Notes from experiment](http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=36313.0;attach=825623;image)

>This visibility threshold is 40 times larger than the predicted effect by air. It is not likely that the measured change in path length is due to transient air heating.