- [1.] A detection of thrust that scaled with input power: the greater the power, the greater the thrust, in a predictable relationship.
- [2.] A thrust that was at least many standard deviations above the measurement error.
- [3.] An isolated environment, where atmospheric, gravitational and electromagnetic effects were all removed.
- [4.] A reproducible setup and a transparent device design, so that other, independent teams can further test and validate the device/investigate the mechanism.
- [5.] And finally, a detailed results report with the submission of an accompanying paper to peer review, and acceptance by the journal in question.
Your caveats generally cover it for me. IANAS. Perhaps I see the world through too much of a programmer perspective but #4 is the only one that I care about.
If the results are consistent and repeatable by independent groups, does anything else matter?
It depends on what you mean by "...that this is real".
If you mean, "Can I build a propulsion drive based on this principle alone?", then I would need more.
If you mean, "This demonstrates that there is a something we don't currently understand that requires further investigation", just #4.
If you mean, "Can we use this to calculate the exact improbability of this being real?" then we could feed this into a finite improbability generator (still working on it) and use it to create an Infinite Improbability Drive. Then we wouldn't need all that tedious mucking about in hyperspace.