>
Carney to force young Canadians to stay in Canada?
October 7th Foresight, Netanyahu's Funding of Hamas, and the Settlers Murdering Palestinians
Kushner & Witkoff SABOTAGED Iran Negotiations FOR ISRAEL!
Who's Blocking Who In the Strait Of Hormuz?
The Most Dangerous Race on Earth Isn't Nuclear - It's Quantum.
This Plasma Stove Cooks Hotter Than The Sun
Energy storage breakthrough traps sunlight in a molecule
Steel rebar may have met its match – in the form of wavy plastic
Video: Semicircular wings give Cyclone VTOL a different kind of lift
After 20 Years, Wave Energy Finally Works
FCC Set To "Supercharge" Starlink Space Internet With "Seven-Fold More Capacity"
'World's First' Humanoid Robot For Real Household Chores Launched With 16-Hour Battery
XAI Training 10 Trillion Parameter Model – Likely Out in Mid 2026

Combustion engines are tried and true, and however angry they might look and sound in a top-fuel dragster or space rocket booster, the combustion process of oxidizing fuel in air is relatively slow and predictable. Detonation, on the other hand, is as chaotic and destructive as it sounds. It's how most bombs work; you take an explosive fuel and hit it with a jolt of energy, and the chemical bonds holding each molecule together break apart, releasing wild amounts of energy in a shockwave that expands at supersonic speed.
NASA, along with many other groups, wants to harness these explosions for a couple of key reasons. Firstly, detonation engines have a considerably higher theoretical level of efficiency than combustion engines, perhaps as much as 25%; they should be able to produce more thrust using less fuel and a smaller rocket. In the engineering and economics of space flight, that means cheaper launches, more billable payload, and greater distances.