i never said anything about conspiracy. sorry reread plz, ty

dark matter is a controversial topic but quantum theory is pretty much universally accepted. I'm personally trying to punch the table enough times that my hand will go straight through without interacting with the table, because hey, one every 10^1370^1000 is GREAT odds.

then again, they already have a working quantum computer which can totally solve 3*5.

'what the government and politicians and scientists want you to believe' is pretty much conspiracy


e: that video starts with 'what is light? what is this INVISIBLE entity?' good laughs

also, that torsion wave model to explain the speed of light would not work on any distance greater than say 50 meters.

This post was edited by Gurby on Aug 21 2010 04:27pm

quantom is irrational becuase it was created 2 years after the original theory of the nuclear atom was released, and instead of explaining why, it simply ignores everything that falsifies it, making it impossible to win an arguement with a quantom mathmetician.

They cover all their bases by not defining words that they use, or letting them have mutliple definitions.

Real science is based on rigorous defining of every word, and logical theories that have been critically reviewed.
Quantom wasn't accepted until the generation of scientist that were alive when it came out died off, and a new generation grew up and just accepted it as fact and moved on building the theory like it correct




Scientists want you to believe their theories so they can get MONEY for research. pretty fucking basic principle there
Politicians want you to believe them so they can get into office and stay in office to get rich. PRETTY FUCKING OBVIOUS


This post was edited by elitepie on Aug 21 2010 04:29pm

why? any evidence? none, thought so Mr. Quantom, go be in 2 places that the same time, lmk how that works out for u

quantum mechanics only act on very small scale. while it would be possible for me to be in two places at once, the probability of that happening would be infinitely small. subatomic particles can however be in two places at once with reasonable probability.

on another note, scientists don't care wether you believe their theories or not, as long as their results get published they get funded

they need people to believe them or else no one would fund them,

but simpily put, quantom mechanics has found some great things, and has a lot of very good data, but the reasons they give for things is completely hilarious,
basically, with abstract mathematics you can take anything a quantom scientist says litterally, a particle to a quantom scientist is a dynamic event, not a static piece of matter as most people imagine it. even though some findings are based on scientific data, they make erroneous conclusions, like the infinite parralell universes, becuase there math says every possibibility has to happen, when in fact we know things aren't random, and everything happens becuase of physical mechanisms, its just becuase they are dealing with things that are beyond the human scope of measuring. How could a scientist sum up the pull of gravity on an atom from every other atom in the universe with an equation? they can't so you can only use probability, its just another short cut.

I feel bad for you blinding believing this nut bag with out thinking about it yourself. Remember when I pretty much debunked a couple of his ramblings a few weeks ago?

There's no such thing as scientific "fact" in a lot of fields. Theories are proposed explanations for things we observe. If they make correct predictions about phenomena then it is a useful theory. There may be large underlying fundamental problems with a theory but that doesn't mean it's completely wrong or that it isn't of use in practical applications.

I was reading up on this Doctor Dave guy or whatever he's called and he seems terribly caught up in semantics. like, he says physics is the science of physical objects and that anything not physical cannot be described by physics. or when he writes about mass he says that scientists measure mass but they should actually count matter (or the other way around, can't remember...) but how is counting and measuring not exactly the same thing? when you measure the lenght of your table you count the number of centimeters that go into it.

firstly, i dont know what your talking about when u say u debunked anything, but u clearly didnt since he uses pure rattional logic