Science hijacked by pseudo

extrasense · Nov 20, 2004

The Hubble is just an example of non scientific priorities of NASA. In fact, science is a miniscule part of their budget. Look at their failure to analyze Mars Rovers data. There are a lot of evidence of Mars life and civilization in the pictures they've get. NASA science is brain dead. I hope Bush in the second term will kick out the failed administration, that was condemned by the every review that ever happen. ES

extrasense · Nov 21, 2004

Here is an another nutcake pseudo for you: quantum teleportation. And it is being treated as legit by Nature and NewScientist, the "champions" of science! Inmates are runnining the asylum! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ES

Maddad · Nov 21, 2004

Saiph "anyway, how's that psuedoscience? They're making a decision, one way or another, to stop a science program. One that they've funded, and by your own words a very sucessful one (i.e. they did real science). *Listening for the sizzle of extrasense brains frying* steve "Well, U left out a few reasons to save the Hubble. . . Whether this is true or not, it misses the point. The point is that these decisions were based on weighing the advantages and disadvantages of real science.

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

"advantages and disadvantages of real science" Yea, according to kooks in NASA <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

Saiph · Nov 22, 2004

Right, there will be no optical space telescope when hubble comes down. But that's not a big loss anymore. With adaptive optics large ground based telescopes can match hubble in the only area it excelled at (in the optical regime), that of resolution. Hubble cannot contribute in a meaningful way towards observing earths surface. Cheaper spy satellites beat it hands down. this is not an option. The Webb telescope is entering productiion IIRC, it's a suitable replacement, though it's mission will be more focused on extrasolar planets instead of hubble constant research. extrasense: Really, they saw strong signs of extraterrestrial life. Howso? What makes you think they didn't look at it? I remember them looking at the blueberries for a good chunk of time before they ruled out life based origins. anything else? Cause they're looking for life, they'd like to find life. But they are also going to look for any other possible explaination. If they didn't they'd be idiots and practicing pathological science. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Nov 22, 2004

what aspect of quantum teleportation? Entanglement? Tunneling? what? You do know that: a) The media usually reports it wrong and sensationalizes it. b) These are observed phenomena c) We aren't exactly sure what's going on or what it means. I.e. the interpretation isn't very solid yet, especially with new quantum experiments. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

-- what aspect of quantum teleportation? --- All of it is crap, produced by kooks that pretend to be scientists. Inmates are running asylum <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ES

Saiph · Nov 22, 2004

1) Great support of your statement. I see the light! Now, really, do you have anything solid to support your statement? Saying their kooks doesn't help your case at all, since they could be right. 2) You're the one talking about evidence of civilizations on mars missed by the mars rover. Or rather evidence found by the rovers, but blatantly ignored by nasa scientists. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

spacechump · Nov 22, 2004

All of it is crap, produced by kooks that pretend to be scientists. Well you have me convinced<img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> I compare your logic to a chimp or a newborn. If you don't understand it, it doesn't exist. Commercial units: http://www.magiqtech.com/ And also countless upon countless entanglement experiments of confirmation. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=quantum+entanglement And you call US close-minded.

iron_sun_254 · Nov 22, 2004

The reality does not care what you believe or do not believe. Quantum Computing is parasitic pseudoscience. Get a grip. Reality does not care what you believe either.

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

-- You're the one talking about evidence of civilizations on mars ...found by the rovers, but blatantly ignored by nasa scientists. --- That is correct, NASA "scientists" are an another example of kook nest <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Inmates are running asylum! ES

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

If you have any idea of physics, you must know that relativistic quantum theory is providing for any signal speed being less than speed of light. This takes care of childish claims that "quantum teleportation" happens immediately regardless of distance. Now, since you never know where a quantum object is located at given point of time, you have no chance to know if it has moved or not. Get a grip. Inmates are running the asylum! ES

nacnud · Nov 22, 2004

Quantum teleportation as described in the literature is a reality but it has not been correctly described in the media. In effect it is more akin to quantum photocopying that teleportation. An exact copy of a particle is created at a different location to where the original particle was 'read' rather than moving one particle through space. As the two particles are identical is every respect in away it can be said to have been transported from one place to another as an outside observer could not tell the original from the copy but the term teleportation is misleading in how the process actually works. As with quantum computing it is the media that is failing to explain the details of what is actually happening. However that does not mean that such things are pseudo science.

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

--- it is more akin to quantum photocopying that teleportation --- Call it any way you want, it is a lie made for parasites' enrichment. The same is the case with quantum computing. --- media is failing to explain the details --- Sure, we always rather blame the mirror than our face <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Media is guilty of conspiring with parasites from pseudoscience, while shuting down everybody who speaks the truth. The inmates run asylum! ES

nacnud · Nov 22, 2004

Right....... So I suppose you know better then?

odysseus145 · Nov 22, 2004

Extresense, please explain why you believe quantum teleportation, etc, is a "lie." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

It is not hard to know better than kooks that run the science now. It is hard to expose them and defeat them. ES

extrasense · Nov 22, 2004

The claims that quantum computing makes, show absolute misundestanding of the quantum theory. dE * dT /> h is the uncertainty principle, basic for quantum theory. It is all you need to know to see that the qc idea is a bogus one. If you want to have a fast computer, dT must be low. This means that dE must be high. Which means that E must be high. When E is high, which normally means a lot of particles, we have the case of CLASSICAL physics, not of the quantum one. "Quantum computing" makes all kinds of moronic claims, about quantum states and measurements. The things that physicists use to explain stuff to nonprofessionals, it takes for reality. Stupidity, ignorance and pseudoscience is the substance of "QC". ES

odysseus145 · Nov 22, 2004

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />It is not hard to know better than kooks that run the science now. It is hard to expose them and defeat them. <hr /></blockquote> These "kooks" have been studying this material for years, and there have been many published works about it. I don't pretend to understand everything they talk about, and I do not say they are kooks out of my ignorance. I know there are people here who are much more capable of explaining quantum computing than I, but something tells me you will not listen. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

spacechump · Nov 22, 2004

If you have any idea of physics, you must know that relativistic quantum theory is providing for any signal speed being less than speed of light. This takes care of childish claims that "quantum teleportation" happens immediately regardless of distance. No useful information can be passed faster than light with QT. The measurement is still passed along with regular channels. If these measurements are not known then you have no way of knowing if the state change was random or because of the transfer of states. But why would you care? You've shown you're as unintelligent as every other kook screaming "Please pay attention to me even though I look like a fool to the world!"

spacechump · Nov 23, 2004

These "kooks" have been studying this material for years, and there have been many published works about it. The only thing he has going for him is a crappy website full of rock images....

extrasense · Nov 23, 2004

-- These "kooks" have been studying this material for years -- And could no figure out anything. Creationists have more going for them <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ES

odysseus145 · Nov 23, 2004

And so no matter what scientists say, if it does not sound resonable to extrasense, than it cannot be true. That's what all of this has amounted to. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

odysseus145 · Nov 23, 2004

Extrasense, I'm going to regret asking but whats your view of string theory? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

extrasense · Nov 23, 2004

-- whats your view of string theory? -- I did not happen to study it much. It has a lot of interesting math involved, so do not expect me to call it pseudoscince. As to its success in fully explaining the world, I remain sceptical yet. I would like to see more intuitive theory. Reasonable people can disagree on that <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> ES

Science hijacked by pseudo

extrasense

Guest

extrasense

Guest

Maddad

Guest

extrasense

Guest

Saiph

Guest

Saiph

Guest

extrasense

Guest

Saiph

Guest

spacechump

Guest

iron_sun_254

Guest

extrasense

Guest

extrasense

Guest

nacnud

Guest

extrasense

Guest

nacnud

Guest

odysseus145

Guest

extrasense

Guest

extrasense

Guest

odysseus145

Guest

spacechump

Guest

spacechump

Guest

extrasense

Guest

odysseus145

Guest

odysseus145

Guest

extrasense

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page