yeah sure...unequal distribution of droplets...bubble formation and also capillary action means the thing has to be reaal thin.
We cannot achieve faster-than-light speeds. This can only be left for ethereal cocepts, like information... But it [might] be possible to create a quantum tunnelling effect for macroscopic objects, but the power required for this is astronomical.
I've been applying for a job at national labs lately (MIT Lincoln Lab, Lawrence Livermore, Sandia, etc) and in the literature provided about one they spoke about a new initiative they've had in recent years. They created a budget to specifically fund high risk research ideas that wouldn't normally receive funding through traditional means. Though the budget for this is only a small fraction of the total research dollars spent, that risky research ends up accounting for something like half iirc of the patents and papers the lab produces. In my last few years of working in university labs I've found that because their's so much competition for a limited and decreasing amount of funding, for the most part only the safe, conservative research proposals receive grants. This research doesn't produce anything actually new. It only produces a better understanding of what we already know. From what I've read, in the good old days (70's and earlier) there was a lot more ambitious, risky stuff being researched. Not surprisingly, just about all of the really sweet technology and theory we have now (as far as I can think of) is really just refined discoveries and inventions from that time period. So in my opinion..... research money should be spent partially on conservative and partially on risky research--even under a limited budget. This should include FTL research for NASA and I'm rather disappointed that they dropped funding for BPP several years ago.
I think, there is a book on this called The Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. I am involved in the management of Clinical Trials of new drugs. What I find is that people are rehashing the same formula through Combinatorial Chemistry than making leaps and bounds... A split in research money is the ideal way to go.
