Jan 22 2012: Do not forget several issues:
1. Not all of the relativity theory is true and some was "proven" by wrong experiments.
2. It assumes that space and time are homogeneous and linear in nature.
3. Light speed is actually the speed of photons, which are massless. But yet, we can measure the impact (mv) of a light wave on a black/white plate (!?)
4. Einstein's E=mc^2 is only describing an approximation of how much potential inner kinetic energy is stored in the second level of material's structure (as we know it).
Jan 22 2012: True!
But then, how can a mass of lowlives be controlled and managed by some interesant morons, who can not agree that "God did something with no meaning"?
Until humanity wakes up from such dilusional concepts - no one will be able to agree with you my friend.
Keep trying though :-)
Good luck!
Jan 22 2012: Well, in fact, I can not agree that it does nothing to the reputation of nowadays science. In a few years, thie era will be referred to as "the stupidity era" :-(
Jan 16 2012: Not true! Super conductors and other fundamentals for PC are not based upon quantum physics!
It does utilize some molecular physics with is a fraction of nano-technology, chemistry and some electro physics.
In higher resolution, one may claim that EVERYTHING relies on quantum physics (matter).
But then... How does the parallel univers theory assisting with making electronic chips?!
Jan 16 2012: Well, I have to admit, should the concept of parallel universe was true, it was solving many problems we encounter while trying to explain certain phenomenas concerning the properties of matter.
But then, an explanation that while the energy particles (in much deeper scale into the atom) are spinning around each other, at some situations it "looks like" matter and in some it does not, or - there is something we do not understand here, should be better than "Ok! It comes from a parallel universe! - solved!"
Which is, to my opinion, quite stupid.
I am very sad to say so. I work in that same area, and I see how "science becomes a joke".
This era in science, as called "modern science" is going to be remembered as a humiliating era to science.
Let's talk in 1000 years :-)
Jan 15 2012: Don't you forget:
Talking about FALSE stories...
1. Most of "modern science" is based upon imaginary theories of "quantum physics" and "parallel universe". How else can "modern scientists" explain some unexplained phenomenas unless they invent an answer which can get them funds to keep their wasted time paid?
2. Any belief, is basically a false story. This includes any religional tale and explanation.
The word "belief" by definition is categorizing any related "data" into "non fact" or else it was a knowledge and a fact which no one have to believe in order to know it.
3. There are NO true stories. The question should always be: how much of this is true facts and how much of it is subjective impressions of the writer.
As I see it, humanity lives in a huge lie. Comprised of many smaller ones.
We know a little fraction of the reality (as we define "reality" to be)
Any number, closer to zero, would be fine.
Wake up humans! Reality will always prevail!
Good luck!
TEDCred score: +0.60 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: about speed of light
1. Not all of the relativity theory is true and some was "proven" by wrong experiments.
2. It assumes that space and time are homogeneous and linear in nature.
3. Light speed is actually the speed of photons, which are massless. But yet, we can measure the impact (mv) of a light wave on a black/white plate (!?)
4. Einstein's E=mc^2 is only describing an approximation of how much potential inner kinetic energy is stored in the second level of material's structure (as we know it).
Etc.
A comment on Conversation: the universe does not need to have meaning behind it.
But then, how can a mass of lowlives be controlled and managed by some interesant morons, who can not agree that "God did something with no meaning"?
Until humanity wakes up from such dilusional concepts - no one will be able to agree with you my friend.
Keep trying though :-)
Good luck!
A comment on Conversation: Have all "modern scientists" forgot that all these bogus "parallel universe" theories are still just unproven theories?
A comment on Conversation: Have all "modern scientists" forgot that all these bogus "parallel universe" theories are still just unproven theories?
It does utilize some molecular physics with is a fraction of nano-technology, chemistry and some electro physics.
In higher resolution, one may claim that EVERYTHING relies on quantum physics (matter).
But then... How does the parallel univers theory assisting with making electronic chips?!
A comment on Conversation: Have all "modern scientists" forgot that all these bogus "parallel universe" theories are still just unproven theories?
But then, an explanation that while the energy particles (in much deeper scale into the atom) are spinning around each other, at some situations it "looks like" matter and in some it does not, or - there is something we do not understand here, should be better than "Ok! It comes from a parallel universe! - solved!"
Which is, to my opinion, quite stupid.
I am very sad to say so. I work in that same area, and I see how "science becomes a joke".
This era in science, as called "modern science" is going to be remembered as a humiliating era to science.
Let's talk in 1000 years :-)
A comment on Talk: Tyler Cowen: Be suspicious of stories
Talking about FALSE stories...
1. Most of "modern science" is based upon imaginary theories of "quantum physics" and "parallel universe". How else can "modern scientists" explain some unexplained phenomenas unless they invent an answer which can get them funds to keep their wasted time paid?
2. Any belief, is basically a false story. This includes any religional tale and explanation.
The word "belief" by definition is categorizing any related "data" into "non fact" or else it was a knowledge and a fact which no one have to believe in order to know it.
3. There are NO true stories. The question should always be: how much of this is true facts and how much of it is subjective impressions of the writer.
As I see it, humanity lives in a huge lie. Comprised of many smaller ones.
We know a little fraction of the reality (as we define "reality" to be)
Any number, closer to zero, would be fine.
Wake up humans! Reality will always prevail!
Good luck!
A reply on Talk: Tyler Cowen: Be suspicious of stories