Antihydrogen Trapped For 1000 Seconds

Started by
95 comments, last by Eelco 12 years, 11 months ago

...



Um, everyone here who has been paying attention to this thread knows my real name and where to find my papers. Hell, I even gave you guys direct links. The fact of the matter is that It is you and forsandifs who are hiding behind a wall of anonymity, not I.

I have one very short but effective proof that shows that Quantum Graphity and Loop Quantum Gravity are not consistent theories of gravitation, let alone theories of all interactions.

Well, I guess I did have one other postulate about ultrahigh energy cosmic rays being part of dark matter, but recent cogent findings show that I'm likely incorrect. I admitted to this yesterday on a public forum, under my real name.

Anyway, you should check out the crackpot multiverse theories, and Carroll's work. It claims that we can indeed perform experiments to observe flipflops of the arrow of time. I don't believe it, but still, you're lying about how it's "impossible" according to "everyone". Plus, if you actually knew anything real about relativity theory, you would know that scalars are reserved exclusively for invariant quantities. Time is clearly not invariant in relativity theory. Stop being pedantic, because it works against you every time.
Advertisement
[quote name='taby']
...
[/quote]

I'm not hiding behind anything, there's no need for anonymity... I have postulated no theories of my own nor do I have a definitive grasp on physics. Until I get my degree in Computer science, physics will remain to be just an interest. But the next in line after CS would be a degree in physics. For now, I just repeat things as I understand them ( I do not claim my understanding is correct, far from it, there's always more to learn) and look for discrepancies in various claims over different physical theories while trying to keep an open mind. If you have some papers and some solid mathematical proof, why don't you try forwarding it to a scientific journal, get feedback from the scientific community?

I understand time is not purely a scalar value as it is shown in general relativity, but although a mathematical possibility exists of it being a vector quantity, we still have no proof that a change of direction of time is possible. Observation is key and until some experimental data shows that it is indeed possible to experimentally prove time is a vector quantity ie. make it go backwards, okay. But for now it's just a belief generated out of current scientific development. For now, it's only a mathematical advantage to think about it as a vector. But it is a component of a four-vector and is crucial to Lorentz transforms. Whether it truly is a traversable dimension, only time will show. All that I am stating is the fact we've never observed such a thing.
[size="1"]The best advice I can give is the one I follow myself - listen to those with more experience. Listen and absorb.
[size="1"]If you are a complete beginner and want to know more about game development, read this guide.
Oops, I guess you're right... I did have one other postulate that spacetime was plastic. I've since realized that this would mean that gravity is dissipative, which seems absurd to me now. If you want to read up on other postulates related to dissipative gravity though, check out 't Hooft.

Oh, and leave David Deutsch's shadow photon theory out of this. Unlike you, he's not a total asshole.

Oops, I guess you're right... I did have one other postulate that spacetime was plastic. I've since realized that this would mean that gravity is dissipative, which seems absurd to me now. If you want to read up on other postulates related to dissipative gravity though, check out 't Hooft.

Oh, and leave David Deutsch's shadow photon theory out of this. Unlike you, he's not a total asshole.


The part in bold was necessary because...?

One question... If you are such a brilliant scientist, how come your reputation has decreased over 9 times since you've joined this thread? If I recall correctly, it was 75 only five days ago.
[size="1"]The best advice I can give is the one I follow myself - listen to those with more experience. Listen and absorb.
[size="1"]If you are a complete beginner and want to know more about game development, read this guide.
Heh.

If you really want to be start being honest, and are indeed truly interested in spotting fake scientists, then please read the latest papers on Quantum Graphity and Loop Quantum Gravity.

After you've done that, you should ask yourself why there is not one mention of Delaunay tesselation, and why all of their diagrams of "atoms of space" look like fish scales. Next, ask yourself why there is not one mention of Voronoi diagrams in the Quantum Graphity papers.

After you're done that, you should ask yourself why the only diagram of a black hole in the Quantum Graphity / condensed matter paper is square in shape, and how it leads to a false conclusion that their model provides attractive gravity.

Finally, apply Hanlon's razor. Clearly these people are either total idiots, or total liars. Either way, they are not real scientists.

Once you have verified that these facts are true, I will personally take you through a step by step tutorial on how I disproved their theories using actual mathematics. A small hint: It has everything to do with the fact that black holes are actually round.

If you don't do these things, then you're just proving what I already suspect -- you're full of shit, and likely a QG/LQG sockpuppet.
One question... If you are such a brilliant scientist, how come your reputation has decreased over 9 times since you've joined this thread? If I recall correctly, it was 75 only five days ago.


I think it has more to do with his erraticness and attitude than any lack of scientific prowess. I suspect his reputation would have increased rather than decreased if he had made the points he made in a calm, non-aggressive, non-insulting, and more easily followable manner.

EDIT: the style of his posts in this thread is just fine for anonymous forum trolling but not very suitable when trying to have an unanonymous, serious, and/or sensible discussion :/
Back on topic.

So what exactly are the hypothetical applications for anti-matter? Are there any?

Beginner in Game Development?  Read here. And read here.

 


[quote name='Eelco' timestamp='1304785063' post='4807722']
[quote name='Antheus' timestamp='1304539621' post='4806554']
Quantum physics is the least confusing part of this thread...


The manic mind is a fascinating phenomena.
[/quote]

False. This is my permanent mode of operation, and so it's not actually manic. We just don't share the same baseline.

The point I was making is that it's kind of annoying when trollbaiters like Human Resource and forsandifs play games.
[/quote]

I dont know you well enough to comment on that; maybe you are indeed 'bi-winning', or a unipolar manic. But that hypothesis is rather inconsistent with the fact that it appears that you used to have a good rating until a few days ago. Or that you are married, or ever held any job whatsoever.


I have actually read your papers, and although im sure you conclude the same thing from them; they confirm my view on the matter.

You sir, are somewhere inbetween a hypomanic and manic state, and unfortunately you are probably doing the exact same thing to all other aspects of your life as you are doing to your rating here.

Sadly, I have no idea what to say to you, and you will probably just shout me down, but at least I tried: go talk to someone who knows about these things. Crosscheck your views on what your baseline actually is with people who know you well.

Back on topic.

So what exactly are the hypothetical applications for anti-matter? Are there any?


Making the papal conclave interesting?

Back on topic.

So what exactly are the hypothetical applications for anti-matter? Are there any?


Aside from blowing up the Vatican, antimatter, if it could be produced and stored in useful quantities, would be great for propulsion. There are also medical applications.

Also, I'd just like to point out that although the majority of physicists hypothesize that antimatter will fall "down", this has not yet been experimentally observed. There are theoretical arguments, yes, but these theories can still be falsified. This experiment is a direct test of these theories.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement