TV companies like to think they're on the cutting edge, so they go out and find people who have theories with no tangible proof and very little chance of ever getting any, and claim that it's a "revolutionary new theory that could change the world" or something. It's hardly ever anything new.
Edited by - Darkstone on 5/17/2004 11:26:20 AM
Important MessageYou are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login. |
Parallel Universe Test
This is where you can discuss your homework, family, just about anything, make strange sounds and otherwise discuss things which are really not related to the Lancer-series. Yes that means you can discuss other games.
25 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Mon May 17, 2004 4:24 pm
And I quote about the author:
"Sam Sachdev, a graduate of the University of Iowa, is also a freelance science journalist. In addition, for between three and four hours a day, he writes fiction. Presently, he's writing a play about the relationship between gay-rights and marriage, in the U.S., and Christianity."
The question then becomes whether any of those three or four hours a day were spend on this article.
"Sam Sachdev, a graduate of the University of Iowa, is also a freelance science journalist. In addition, for between three and four hours a day, he writes fiction. Presently, he's writing a play about the relationship between gay-rights and marriage, in the U.S., and Christianity."
The question then becomes whether any of those three or four hours a day were spend on this article.
Mon May 17, 2004 10:20 pm
Thats a basic part of quantum mechanics. Where they got paralell universes from that is anyones guess.
they got the idea of paralell universes because they were LOKKING for evidence of it, because they were so desperate to find it, they mistook simple quantum mechanics for interdimensional interference
Tue May 18, 2004 9:53 am
These sort of things get boring because people fail to realise that there is actually an explanation.
I agree with Taw,
Now THAT's something worth thinking about. It's actually the same photon going through twice - but an explanation of why would bore you all to death
I agree with Taw,
rather more interesting is that if you shoot a single photon through a double slit in said piece of paper, you get 2 photons on the other side - wtf is that all about?
Now THAT's something worth thinking about. It's actually the same photon going through twice - but an explanation of why would bore you all to death
Tue May 18, 2004 10:55 am
i read in "New Scientist" that this company
had found a way to make ultra tiny holes in gold leaf
so that if the shone 300 photons of light at the gold
leaf, 700 photons would be emitted out the other side,
thus light energy seemingly coming from no-where,
that perpetually increased, they shone about 3000
photons at the gold leaf, and it emitted about 6800
through the holes.
just imagine the capabilities, the brightness of a Floodlight
from a small LED. Cool.
El Goonish Shive
had found a way to make ultra tiny holes in gold leaf
so that if the shone 300 photons of light at the gold
leaf, 700 photons would be emitted out the other side,
thus light energy seemingly coming from no-where,
that perpetually increased, they shone about 3000
photons at the gold leaf, and it emitted about 6800
through the holes.
just imagine the capabilities, the brightness of a Floodlight
from a small LED. Cool.
El Goonish Shive
25 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2