Usually parts break off from concrete when there was a small crack to begin, then either one of the next cases happens:
1. water enters the hole-> freezes (expands) -> crack gets bigger -> more water enters -> freezes-> crack gets bigger -> etc -> part breaks off.
2. Dirt and water enters the crack -> plant grows in crack -> roots crack the concrete further -> part breaks off.

This self healing concrete prevents both scenarios as it heals the initial small crack, preventing water and dirt from entering. It stops the crack in it's early stages.

TFA has pictures. The cracks are very visible, they have a different color.
Open cracks are almost always structural weak points as water, dirt and plants get in them, further cracking the concrete and rusting the reinforcement (which, incidentally, cracks the concrete). If cracks form to make the reinforcing take a normal load then there should have been (more) pre-tension on the reinforcing. It is a clear cut case of bad building practice.
If the and all similar bad building practices have been removed then there are still loads the concrete was not designed for. For example an unusually strong storm or mechanical damage (a truck crashing into the bridge). These events are not frequent and can only to some extent be accounted for. The cracks formed by these could be healed by this self healing concrete.

Those "cracks" (technically they are expansion joints) are not made by mechanically cracking hardened concrete. They are made before pouring, by placing spacers that are poured in. Therefore the process should not crack the outer shell of the "healing agent" capsules. Thus the bacteria will not fix the expansion joints.

More likely one of those vibrating eggs.

Shot from a shotgun and epoxy. Mix well and insert. Let harden for about 24 hours. Epoxy gains relatively high strength when cured at body temperature.

(warning: this is even less wise than the self-castration solution)

"No cut out speed" is bullshit. "Will survive all earth storms since recorded history" is more logical, although I wouldn't guess it would pass that bar. Supersonic storms will kill it.

On the contrary: beating is usually a reciprocal motion.

No. First you filter for similar weather and road conditions. Self driving cars may only have been deployed in optimum conditions.

They require more cleaning than I am willing to do and for those 5 cups of coffee a week I drink at home they are quite expensive.
Dunno about Keurig but Nespresso is easy and cheap for my use case.

Yes really. I don't have a car, so the only ones are my phone and my bike satnav. For those without a bike satnav substitute car satnav.
Not everyone has a tablet & a phone & a car satnav & a separate satnav & a second phone & a laptop. Some people limit their purchases.

Granted, I was a bit semantic. You overstated things and I called you upon it. If you want to cal that semantics I can't nor do I want to stop you.

It is physics defying because the current theories do not allow for the drive to work. If it does that means our current theory of physics is wrong, which is not a major problem because we know our current understanding is not complete.
It is however, very interesting. If it works.
The theory of how the EM drive works is simply wrong, relativistic effects don't allow you to ignore conservation of momentum.

They exist because most people need that feeling of belonging. Belonging to mankind doesn't seem to be enough. Belonging to a group is what people want.
Now why there are silly things like handshakes and mandatory dress colors is beyond me.

Filtered for
a. better than "can be assumed to be a hoax"
b. "really reactionless"
Woodward: I wouldn't call it plausible because many experiments have failed to produce thrust and the thrust produced is in the range of measurement error.
EM and Cannae drive: EM is the drive we are talking about. Cannae is similar.
So in fact we have 2 similar methods. One of them is what this discussion about so it doesn't count. The other is similar to that one.
My conclusion: the word "several" is pulled out of your ass.

A tennis ball in a car is reactionless and moves. That doesn't make it a drive. By definition if it doesn't produce trust it is not a drive in the sense of an engine.
However I shall comment on the devices mentioned:
The Alcubierre drive is very far beyond our current technology and is not really an engine as the EM drive is. It is more of a way to help an engine cheat the laws of physics.
I say this because the Alcubierre drive doesn't move you from A to B. It makes the distance from A to B shorter so a normal engine (be it rocket, orion or reactionless) can get there in a reasonable amount of time.

"Swimming in spacetime" is not a drive because it's not a device. It is an interesting theory and if proven correct it may eventually be possible to build a drive based on it but for now it's not a drive.

My VCR works fine. It always blinks neatly how many times I have used it since plugging it in.