Comment For a quick glance at the Exec Summary (Score 1) 2
I hope that it informs thoughtful discussion on the point. More training and gun ownership is better.
You really think the moon landing was faked?
Dude, the world is flat. The moon is Commie plot. Just ask Alex Jones.
This country needs a Conservative party, as a kind of hospice, where that philosophy can go while it lives out its dying days here.
Well, that's kind of morose.
It will take a demonstration satellite accelerating through space before the physics community goes into party mode. Until you're in free fall and vacuum, there is too much scope for systematic errors to accept a result of this level of importance.
Looking at this another way:
When LHC were looking for the Higgs boson - a particle entirely expected by modern physics - they required a five sigma signal before they were satisfied that they had really found something.
This is a result not only entirely unexpected, but contradictory to almost all known physics. A two sigma (NASA) and three sigma (Germany) signal is not remotely enough to be convincing. At best it is convincing enough for someone to spend the money to further and better test it.
People are so sceptical of this one because if true the implications are universe-shaking. It would completely overturn not just modern physics but all of physics since Newton. The claim is that the device violates conservation of momentum. Then via Noether's theorem this implies that the laws of physics are not independent of location in space. (Alternatively, the device is creating a beam of hard to detect particles via some completely unknown but low energy mechanism.)
Also, the device was first designed using a provably incorrect analysis - an analysis using standard physics determined that the device would produce thrust without reaction mass, violating conservation of momentum. As all the standard physics used in the analysis conserves momentum, the analysis must be incorrect. If someone adds up many even numbers and comes up with an odd total, we know they have made a mistake, even without examining their calculations to find out where. This case is exactly analogous. So if this device really does violate momentum conservation, it is a complete and utter fluke, and not by design.
A computer scientist is someone who fixes things that aren't broken.