> Apologies for the edit! No worries > I really don't understand this. Is this some sort of PoMo response to my original challenge, or...? What's PoMo? My i

> Apologies for the edit! No worries > I really don't understand this. Is this some sort of PoMo response to my original challenge, or...? What's PoMo? My interpretation of your first comment was that you were questioning whether this research is worth more time and money based on skepticism rooted in scientific knowledge i.e. these "new physics" needed to explain the EmDrive would conflict with a lot of what we currently think of as scientific "fact". Occam's razor, and so on. My interpretation of your second comment was that you think the "YEAH, BUT WHAT IF?!??!" reactions to this research (generally associated with internet comment sections) are inappropriate and rooted in ignorance of scientific principles (FWIW, I agree with you on that). I see those as separate concerns. The public is wholly ignorant, and their reaction to the results of this research to date (filtered as they are through awful clickbait articles) should have no bearing either way on whether the research continues. That's the point I was trying to make in my second comment. > My contention is that the public interest may not necessarily have much to do with what the public is interested in. I don't think this a particularly controversial PoV...? I don't think so either (and I agree).