"There is no "instantaneous" communication, instead all you can do is "read back" what was written; the "reading process" doesn't depend on where the particles are, but the "writing process" does." So the observer plays quite a role in the entanglement read/write process then. A bit like the double slit experiment; take away the observer and outcomes change dramatically. It appears to be all about data/energy transfer and mathematical construct/measurement stability. Weird stuff.
Concepts/Ideas/Imagination etc are the first step in the scientific methodolgy... We had the concept of electricity powering cities one time...it's now a reality...we had the concept of motor cras at one time...they are now a reality...Someone had the concept of the Internet not too long ago...guess what? That's also a reality. Einstein [ and others] had the concept of space/time, time dilation, length contraction....They always were realities, except we weren't smart enough to realize it. Goodbye dmoe...
- (Bold and Color by dmoe!) paddoboy, this "we" that you constantly refer to may include yourself - it does not however include real, rational, intelligent, open-minded individuals! BTW, paddoboy, some of you "we's" weren't and still aren't smart enough to realize how to spell "methodolgy..."!!! But, then again, ATTENTION TO DETAIL may not be a prerequisite in your version of "the scientific methodolgy..."!!!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! So you retract your rather silly "concept" rant then? Good, at least that's some progress. With the methodology spelling, these little typographical unintentional errors will occur. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I would rather concentrate on the hard core important stuff. But, you need to take stock of things...In your scrutinizing of my posts, you are not only missing the forest, you are also missing the trees. I certainly do not have the time, paranoia or the inclination, to scrutinize your posts likewise, plus of course the vast majority of those posts, lack any scientific content. On second thought, since most seem to reference me, I should be humbled by that fact alone. * nudge, nudge, wink, wink * Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! All the best with your continued infatuation with me. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I retracted nothing! I have no infatuation with you. Insults are not considered "scientific content", yet you cannot Post without including pathetic puerile paddoboy attempts at such!
Point out precisely where and how he allegedly did, paddoboy; or else you will have again confirmed by your own actions that you're just another silly internet troll.
See post 362. He has to accept it, whether he admits it or not. Concepts/Ideas/Imagination etc are the first step in the scientific methodolgy... We had the concept of electricity powering cities one time...it's now a reality...we had the concept of motor cras at one time...they are now a reality...Someone had the concept of the Internet not too long ago...guess what? That's also a reality. Einstein [ and others] had the concept of space/time, time dilation, length contraction....They always were realities, except we weren't smart enough to realize it.
Undefined, using Logic and Intelligence, when addressing paddoboy, is about as useful as an ashtray on a motorcycle!
How does repeating what I have been telling everyone for some time now (about Einstein starting with imagination and insight before 'doing the maths') support what you claimed about dmoe allegedly "retracting" whatever it is in your mind? Please set out the train of events/posts/claims and point to EXACTLY specify/identify what it is that dmoe has allegedly in your mind "retracted", and support your assertion with the full arguemnts so that the forum are left in no doubt/ambiguity about the matter which you base your claim of "retraction" on. If you can't do that, then you owe dmoe an apology. Yes? Thanks.
You think so? I actually agree with others, and see that as referencing yourself more than anyone else.
How exactly does your uncomprehending 'belief' which your 'agreement' is based on have anything to say about your understanding or the validity of that/those which you 'believe' and those which 'agree with'. These froum discussions are about testing the validity of the VERY things which you 'believe' and 'agree with' without your comprehending any of it. So as the new ideas change the orthodoxy, as science does despite 'beliefs' and 'source' personalities etc, where does that leave you if you then must believe something new and trust someone new? Get a grip and get a clue about what is actually happening in science RIGHT NOW before you carry on in your uncomprehending believer troll mode way of 'discussing' the science of new ideas. Drop the hero-worshipping angle and start thinking for yourself and KNOW instead of BELIEVE something for a change, paddo. Try it once and I assure you you will never look back! Good luck, mate. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I have a good handle on things I think, and it in most cases [athough not all] it aligns with mainstream thinking. You know why? Because that in the main, is/are the models MOST supported by observational and experimental evidence. And in all probability what we are discussing in the main [SR/GR/BB] will all be encompassed by a future QGT. You have nothing...other than an ego to inflate. I see your claims as dreams, fairy tales, and ego boosting.... But you can falsify my theories if you like...Get it peer reviewed and accepted. Then come back...... I have things to do undefined [real things to do! ] and am tired of your obsessive one-up-man-ship game..... Just remember what happens when one pisses into the wind.
My bolding above. Hence your 'understandings are perforce partial at best, misleadingly facile at worst, so you are in no position to 'lay down the law' to anyone else at all, like you have been doing with your personal opinionating about OTHERS. Please STOP with your inane ego-tripping self-justifying rationalizations about what you "have a good handle" on, willya, paddo?! Go on another holiday, only this time actually catch up and try to understand PROPERLY what's happening before you again make with the opinions about others. OK? Take it easy, and don't swill down too much VB in that new man-cave of yours you built, mate! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I'm not laying down any law, nor have I attempted to. I merely recognize the near non existence of some self promoted genius, lingering out in layman's land, waiting with paper in hand, to tear down the supposed towers of mainstream intransigence...I merely detest the 100% positive nature and the "this is the way it is, and no correspondence will be entered into" attitude, that has been so prevalent with you and others of late....I merely strongly refute the highly unlikely event that someone is going to pop out of nowhere, with some model that will revolutionize physics/cosmology...Especially when the current models [SR/GR and BB] match what we currently observe so well. What you need to do [and Farsight] is take a lesson or two in humility. When another Einstein comes along, or a Bohr or Feynman, maybe even a Zefram Cochrane, [Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!] I'm sure they will all submit to the system we have now with peer review, and establish themselves and whatever new models that eventuate with them, via the accepted method.
- (Bold by dmoe!) paddoboy, fictional characters are fictional characters! The use of fictional characters to support your feckless argument only serves to point out how incredibly puerile your position is in the first place! BTW, paddoboy, does the use of the fictional Zefram Cochrane constitute "scientific content"?
Not to mention the unlikelihood of someone overturning our existing understanding of physics when they themselves can't even demonstrate a basic grasp of the concepts they're supposedly overturning. I have yet to meet an alternative theory crank here who actually appears to have a good background in contemporary science, they seem to get all their info from Discovery Channel and layman summaries as if those were adequate substitutes for knowing the nitty gritty details and hands-on experiments. Was there any purpose to this post other than acting like the dumbest man on Earth?
Exactly! He is rather infatuated with me, but then I am a handsome devil. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
