Wave-Particle Universe Theory (WPUT) and engine design: 32.7c = 9.81 × 10⁹ m/s — an aerospace rocket concept for reducing interstellar flight time

Status
Not open for further replies.
khoa181101 said:
Use new document to prove my equation is wrong.
Click to expand...
Nobody cares anymore. You've squandered any good will you might have had.

You came here expecting a technical review of your paper.
You submitted it, as if we are reviewers.
You didn't do the slightest courtesy of engaging us.
You didn't tell us it was fiction. You expected us to figure it out.
You told us you weren't using AI for content.
You lied.
You let AI speak for you for 70 posts.
You didn't review what it was saying; you just posted its vomit.

You have - and have had - zero respect or consideration for the people here who have engaged with you.
You are behaving like a robot, who thinks it's engaging with other robots.

We have zero obligation - let alone motivation - to help you.

Go away.
 
One more pin to knock down:
khoa181101 said:
my equations
Click to expand...
Ah, but they're not "your" equations, are they? They're ChatGPT's.

You swore up and down that you "only use AI for organizing" - but that's a lie. Your chatbot is writing your content for you. You're caught red-handed having your chatbot produce content for you - content that you didn't even read.

You can claim "No no, it was me!" all you want, but that ship has sailed. You can't unring that bell.

So why would anyone else try to find mistakes in ChatGPT's content when you didn't even bother to do that yourself?
 
DaveC426913 said:
One more pin to knock down:

Ah, but they're not "your" equations, are they? They're ChatGPT's.

You swore up and down that you "only use AI for organizing" - but that's a lie. Your chatbot is writing your content for you. You're caught red-handed having your chatbot produce content for you - content that you didn't even read.

You can claim "No no, it was me!" all you want, but that ship has sailed. You can't unring that bell.

So why would anyone else try to find mistakes in ChatGPT's content when you didn't even bother to do that yourself?
Click to expand...
Don't reply if you can't prove my equation is wrong. I'm not allowed to use AI to create a nice PDF with fancy fonts, and I don't even use GPT. You're making an argument against the entire theory of world-renowned scientists without proving where my equation is wrong. I'm being friendly because you found the errors. If you're smart enough, prove it further in my revised calculations on page 3 or 4.
 
DaveC426913 said:
One more pin to knock down:

Ah, but they're not "your" equations, are they? They're ChatGPT's.

You swore up and down that you "only use AI for organizing" - but that's a lie. Your chatbot is writing your content for you. You're caught red-handed having your chatbot produce content for you - content that you didn't even read.

You can claim "No no, it was me!" all you want, but that ship has sailed. You can't unring that bell.

So why would anyone else try to find mistakes in ChatGPT's content when you didn't even bother to do that yourself?
Click to expand...
After nearly 32 equations, you still haven't proven why it's wrong :((
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top