Is NASA brain dead?

[extrasense]

Scientifically speaking, it is no brainer.
Meaning, so called NASA science team did not show any signes of life for years. Mars data analysis is nonexistent, after more than a year of rover presence on Mars and 80000 pictures taken.
Want to see Martian Civilization signes?
Look here:
http://www.space.afreepress.com/?pnav=895

e s

[Communist Hamster]

Wow, Frederick Shitburger the second, SOME INTERESTINGLY SHAPED ROCKS. Rock solid proof of martian civilisation.

[Roman]

A semi-triangular rock? Are you kidding me?

Next time, put trash like this in the pseudo-science forum.

[extrasense]

Wow, Frederick Shitburger the second, SOME INTERESTINGLY SHAPED ROCKS. Rock solid proof of martian civilisation.

What is the difference between communist hamster and communist rat? Is there any?

e s

[(Q)]

Rocks can naturally form geometric shapes - no big deal.

[extrasense]

Rocks can naturally form geometric shapes - no big deal.

I believe, nobody ever observed a rock with equilateral triangular orthogonal prism symmetry. Never.

es

[(Q)]

How would you know?

[superluminal]

This is absurd for so many reasons, it's funny!

[extrasense]

How would you know?

It is not one of the crystal symmetries, which are all known and enumerated.

Which means, it can only be created by chance. And the probability of particular macroscopic shape being created by chance is negligible. It is exectly the same as your precise portrait in stone, being created by chance.

e s

[Entropic]

well if there is a chance a rock can take that shape, it has to happen one day. This can't be used as hard evidence of life on mars. Still nice rare find, if i found an equillateral rock i would be amazed.

[superluminal]

extrasense:

It is exectly the same as your precise portrait in stone, being created by chance.

Really? A simple triangle, formed by simple erosion, fracturing processes, or impact is as unlikely as a detailed portrait with its millions of inflection points and contours. Really? Wow. Back to statistics 101...

[extrasense]

well if there is a chance a rock can take that shape, it has to happen one day. This can't be used as hard evidence of life on mars. Still nice rare find, if i found an equillateral rock i would be amazed.

The probability is about "gugol in power -10000."
It is less than chance of you winning top prize in 100 lottery drawings in a row

e s

[extrasense]

Really? A simple triangle, formed by simple erosion, fracturing processes, or impact is as unlikely as a detailed portrait with its millions of inflection points and contours. Really? Wow. Back to statistics 101...

I do not know what they teach you in "statistics 101",
but the statistical physics is a different story. And it does not care what the actual shape is, as they all have the same probability exp(-E/kT).
E is the energy, k is Bolzman constant, T is absolute temperature.
Take it from me, the physicist, or anybody else - it is the pricise and universal rule that governs all physical objects.

e s

[superluminal]

Crackpot. You're dismissed.

[extrasense]

Crackpot. You're dismissed.

It is the rule of a fool:
fool turns to personal insults, when he has lost the argument.

e s

[(Q)]

And the probability of particular macroscopic shape being created by chance is negligible.

The probability exists. How many rocks are there in the universe?

[extrasense]

And the probability of particular macroscopic shape being created by chance is negligible.The probability exists. How many rocks are there in the universe?

N = { 10 to power 78 } is number of atoms in the Universe.
The total number or rocks must be smaller than that .

It is easy to check, that less than 1/10 of rocks
of size Vo=1*1*1 mm have shape of a equilateral triangular orthogonal prism

p(Vo) < 1/10

It is a law of statistical physics, that

p(V)={ p(Vo) to power V/Vo }

For the V=10*10*10 cm rocks, V/Vo = 1000000

p(V)={10 to power -1000000}

Expected number of the rocks of shape we are talking about, in the whole Universe, should then be less then n,

n=N*p(V)={10 to power -999922}

which is practically ZERO

e s

[superluminal]

He's right you know. It's not his math. His statistical analysis is not incredible naive and plain wrong. And all of the amazingly regular naturally occurring rock triangles, rectangles and even pyramids that my kids have brought me over the years, from our own backyard, don't exist. Should have taught my kids more stats.

[Communist Hamster]

It is the rule of a fool:
fool turns to personal insults, when he has lost the argument.

e s

What is the difference between communist hamster and communist rat? Is there any?

e s

*Cough*

[extrasense]

all of the amazingly regular naturally occurring rock triangles, rectangles and even pyramids that my kids have brought me over the years, from our own backyard, don't exist. .

Well, could you then post a single image of naturally occuring
equilateral triangle orthogonal prism ?



es