Nope, others have been unable to reproduce their results. As for Eagle Works ... their data is crap. The paper consists of 18 data points and large amounts of variance. The largest thrust measurement comes from the middle power setting.
Furthermore, they are measuring (at most!) 120 micro-newtons of thrust. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but that's ~1/100 the weight of a penny[0]. Even if they can produce these tiny amounts of of thrust reliably, they still need to eliminate other sources of error.
Other false-positive results of similar devices have either generated thrust in the null condition or were later retracted after correcting for measurement error.
>I think most people are excited about this not because they think we just proved 2 to be wrong, but instead because we know 2 must be true, so what the hell is going on with 1???
The EM drive literally entails perpetual motion. We know that's impossible, yet someone always manages to sell a new version of it every few years.
>Most likely we will find out that we are NOT violating the known laws of the universe, but we're "not violating" them in a very interesting way.
There is a reason this is in a journal dedicated to publishing experimental results from aerospace engineers and not a physics journal. Peer review isn't magic, it just means two out of three people signed off on a paper being published.
[0]: Seems crazy small, math may be wacky off due to lack of sleep.
