So your argument continues to be that the aircraft that is provable, and AS YOU ADMIT, is less efficient, is somehow "more efficient" because "reasons".
Again, that's not my argument. I will continue to assume good faith one last time.
Drag is proportional to density times velocity squared
flying through air with 30% the density at 2.5 times the speed thus produces (.3)x(2.5^2) = 1.875 times the drag.
Using 1.875 times the power for 1/2.5 = 0.4 times as long requires (0.4)x(1.875) = 0.75 times as much energy.
This is before you consider that jet engines moving at higher speeds and higher altitudes are more fuel efficient.
The 737 uses turbofans which are much more efficient than the concorde's turbojets. Trying to compare their fuel consumption is meaningless unless you account for this. If you compare the concorde to a subsonic turbojet of its era, like the 727, the concorde burns significantly less fuel per passenger mile.
