Experts doubt Einstein..... but Einstein Dingleberries still worship him
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 398.0: USA Proves Flexagons Related to Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: The Necessity of an experiment (classical electrodynamics) that should have been done 100 years ago
From: Me, ...again! on 3 Jun 2010 16:47 On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, PD wrote: > On Jun 3, 10:07 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Jun 3, 11:01 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jun 3, 9:52 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Jun 3, 10:40 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>> On Jun 3, 9:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> Is the food going to be digested at exactly the same rate between an >>>>>> brother on a space ship and an brother on the Earth? Is the muscle >>>>>> tone of the brother on the space ship going to age at the same rate as >>>>>> the atomic clock ticks and is the muscle tone of the brother on the >>>>>> Earth going to age at the same rate as the atomic clock ticks on the >>>>>> Earth? >> >>>>>> Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the other brother >>>>>> being on the Earth is going to have a greater biological effect on the >>>>>> brothers than the rate at which an atomic clock ticks? >> >>>>>> Now, you are going to say, "All things being equal". But that is the >>>>>> whole point, things are not equal. If they are equal, then the atomic >>>>>> clocks tick at the same rate. >> >>>>> Well, let's see. If relativity predicts things will slow by 24.7% and >>>>> things slow by 24.7%, including the clock on the spaceship, and >>>>> chemical processes in the brother, and the oscillation of a spring, >>>>> then it is very likely that the reason is because relativity is >>>>> correct. To surmise that this is not what's going on, and that zero-G >>>>> environment is what causes the chemical processes to slow by 24.7% >>>>> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that >>>>> artificially replenished air is what causes the clock to slow by 24.7% >>>>> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that >>>>> cosmic rays is what causes the spring oscillation to slow by 24.7% >>>>> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), borders on >>>>> lunacy. No, it crosses right over the border and flops around in >>>>> lunacy land. >> >>>> The brother on the space ship is not going to age according to the >>>> rate at which an atomic clock ticks relative to the other brother on >>>> the Earth and his rate of aging based upon the atomic clock on the >>>> Earth. >> >>>> You are suggesting that a brother at zero G's on the space ship and >>>> the brother on the Earth both eat a tuna fish sandwich that both >>>> sandwiches will be digested based upon the rate at which the atomic >>>> clocks tick. Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the >>>> other brother being on the Earth might have more of an effect on the >>>> rate at which the sandwich is digested than the rate at which the >>>> atomic clock ticks? No, of course you do not, because you do not >>>> think. >> >>> Sure it will have an effect. But there will also be an effect that is >>> due to relativity, and this can be separated from other effects. >> >>> This is a simple experimental analysis skill that just about any >>> scientist learns. >>> For example, if you are trying to find out if smoking shortens >>> lifespan, you may also find that your smokers also drink alcohol, or >>> that their hair is a little longer, or that they live in sunnier >>> climates, and you may wonder if those factors also contribute to a >>> shorter life span. It is the task of the experimenter to understand >>> how to separate out the contribution that is JUST due to smoking. This >>> is not that hard. >> >>> If you don't have any idea how this is done, then perhaps you should >>> get a little bit of training. >> >> And what scientists also do is perform experiments, such as detecting >> the particle at the exits to the slits in a double slit experiment to >> see if the particle exits one, or both, slits. When experiment after >> experiment is performed and the particle is ALWAYS detected exiting a >> single slit, scientists, who are not under the delusional effects of >> the absurd nonsense of the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, conclude >> this is experimental evidence the particle always exits a single slit. > > Your wobbling off the matter of time dilation into the double slit > experiment is noted. Don't feel too bad. I've had a whole career in science, and in meetings, conferences, journal clubs...etc...the same phenomenon takes place, all the time. > If you can't stay on a topic to think it through, then you're not > going to be much good as a scientist. > >> >> Scientists also realize to conclude a C-60 molecule can enter, travel >> through, and exit multiple slits simultaneously in a double slit >> experiment without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a >> change in momentum is physically impossible. >> >> The Copenhagen interpretation of QM has nothing to do with the physics >> of nature. It is made up absurd nonsense which only exists in the >> minds of those too weak to understand the true nature of physics. >> >> >> >>>>>> One year is one orbit of the Sun by the Earth regardless of how many >>>>>> times an atomic clock ticks. >> >>>>> Search for posts >> >> > >
From: mpc755 on 3 Jun 2010 19:10 On Jun 3, 11:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 3, 10:07 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 3, 11:01 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 3, 9:52 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 3, 10:40 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jun 3, 9:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Is the food going to be digested at exactly the same rate between an > > > > > > brother on a space ship and an brother on the Earth? Is the muscle > > > > > > tone of the brother on the space ship going to age at the same rate as > > > > > > the atomic clock ticks and is the muscle tone of the brother on the > > > > > > Earth going to age at the same rate as the atomic clock ticks on the > > > > > > Earth? > > > > > > > Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the other brother > > > > > > being on the Earth is going to have a greater biological effect on the > > > > > > brothers than the rate at which an atomic clock ticks? > > > > > > > Now, you are going to say, "All things being equal". But that is the > > > > > > whole point, things are not equal. If they are equal, then the atomic > > > > > > clocks tick at the same rate. > > > > > > Well, let's see. If relativity predicts things will slow by 24.7% and > > > > > things slow by 24.7%, including the clock on the spaceship, and > > > > > chemical processes in the brother, and the oscillation of a spring, > > > > > then it is very likely that the reason is because relativity is > > > > > correct. To surmise that this is not what's going on, and that zero-G > > > > > environment is what causes the chemical processes to slow by 24.7% > > > > > (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that > > > > > artificially replenished air is what causes the clock to slow by 24.7% > > > > > (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that > > > > > cosmic rays is what causes the spring oscillation to slow by 24.7% > > > > > (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), borders on > > > > > lunacy. No, it crosses right over the border and flops around in > > > > > lunacy land. > > > > > The brother on the space ship is not going to age according to the > > > > rate at which an atomic clock ticks relative to the other brother on > > > > the Earth and his rate of aging based upon the atomic clock on the > > > > Earth. > > > > > You are suggesting that a brother at zero G's on the space ship and > > > > the brother on the Earth both eat a tuna fish sandwich that both > > > > sandwiches will be digested based upon the rate at which the atomic > > > > clocks tick. Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the > > > > other brother being on the Earth might have more of an effect on the > > > > rate at which the sandwich is digested than the rate at which the > > > > atomic clock ticks? No, of course you do not, because you do not > > > > think. > > > > Sure it will have an effect. But there will also be an effect that is > > > due to relativity, and this can be separated from other effects. > > > > This is a simple experimental analysis skill that just about any > > > scientist learns. > > > For example, if you are trying to find out if smoking shortens > > > lifespan, you may also find that your smokers also drink alcohol, or > > > that their hair is a little longer, or that they live in sunnier > > > climates, and you may wonder if those factors also contribute to a > > > shorter life span. It is the task of the experimenter to understand > > > how to separate out the contribution that is JUST due to smoking. This > > > is not that hard. > > > > If you don't have any idea how this is done, then perhaps you should > > > get a little bit of training. > > > And what scientists also do is perform experiments, such as detecting > > the particle at the exits to the slits in a double slit experiment to > > see if the particle exits one, or both, slits. When experiment after > > experiment is performed and the particle is ALWAYS detected exiting a > > single slit, scientists, who are not under the delusional effects of > > the absurd nonsense of the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, conclude > > this is experimental evidence the particle always exits a single slit. > > Your wobbling off the matter of time dilation into the double slit > experiment is noted. > > If you can't stay on a topic to think it through, then you're not > going to be much good as a scientist. > The only place a C-60 molecule is able to enter, travel through, and exit multiple slits simultaneously without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a change in momentum is in your mind. The only place where a C-60 molecule does not exit a single slit when it is not detected is in your mind. I have a physical explanation for gravity, double slit experiments, E=mc^2, the Higgs field, Einstein's train gedanken, and time dilation to name a few. With aether, the physics of nature are easily understood. Aether and matter are different states of the same material. The material is mæther. Mæther has mass. Aether and matter have mass. Aether is uncompressed mæther and matter is compressed mæther. Aether is displaced by matter. The aether is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. The 'displacing back' is the pressure exerted by the aether. Gravity is pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter. 'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state." The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the aether's state of displacement. A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave. The C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. The aether wave enters and exits multiple slits. The aether wave creates interference upon exiting the slits which alters the direction the C-60 molecule travels. Detecting the C-60 molecule causes decoherence of the aether wave and there is not interference. 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. EINSTEIN' http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2." The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether and matter is energy. Mass does not convert to energy. Matter converts to aether. As the mæther transitions from matter to aether it increases in volume. The physical effect the increase in volume has on the neighboring matter and aether is energy. The physical effect of mæther decompressing is energy. Mass is conserved. The rate at which an atomic clock 'ticks' is based upon the aether pressure in which it exists. In terms of motion, the speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth" causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated with the speed at which the GPS satellite moves with respect to the aether and the aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS satellites [to] tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the ground." (quoted text from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS). In Einstein's train gedanken the state of the aether is determined by its connections with the Earth. This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment than it is the train. The Observers on the train synchronize three clocks at M'. One Observer walks a clock to A' and the other walks a clock to B'. When the Observer walks the clock to A' the clock is being walked with the 'flow' of aether and ticks faster. The clock walked to B' is being walked against the 'flow' of aether and ticks slower. Lightning strikes occur at A/A' and B/B' and arrive at the Observer at M on the embankment simultaneously. When the lightning strikes occur on the train the clocks at A', M', and B' read 12:00:03, 12:00:02, and 12:00:01, respectively. The light from B' reaches the Observer at M' prior to the light from A'. When the Observers on the train get back together they conclude the lightning strike at B/B' occurred prior to the lightning strike at A/A' and the light traveled at 'c'. 'The Need to Understand Mass' By Roger Cashmore Department of Physics University of Oxford, UK. http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs2.htm "There is, however, one very clever and very elegant solution to this problem, a solution first proposed by Peter Higgs. He proposed that the whole of space is permeated by a field, similar in some ways to the electromagnetic field. As particles move through space they travel through this field, and if they interact with it they acquire what appears to be mass. This is similar to the action of viscous forces felt by particles moving through any thick liquid. the larger the interaction of the particles with the field, the more mass they appear to have. Thus the existence of this field is essential in Higg's hypothesis for the production of the mass of particles." The "action of viscous forces felt by particles moving through any thick liquid" is the particles interaction with the aether. The force is the pressure exerted by the displaced aether towards the particle. The "thick liquid" is the aether behaving as a frictionless superfluid 'one something'. "the larger the interaction of the particles with the field, the more mass they appear to have." The faster the particle moves with respect to the aether, the greater the pressure exerted by the displaced aether towards the particle. 'Politics, Solid State and the Higgs' By David Miller Department of Physics and Astronomy University College, London, UK. http://www.phy.uct.ac.za/courses/phy400w/particle/higgs3.htm "1. The Higgs Mechanism In three dimensions, and with the complications of relativity, this is the Higgs mechanism. In order to give particles mass, a background field is invented which becomes locally distorted whenever a particle moves through it. The distortion - the clustering of the field around the particle - generates the particle's mass. The idea comes directly from the physics of solids. Instead of a field spread throughout all space a solid contains a lattice of positively charged crystal atoms. When an electron moves through the lattice the atoms are attracted to it, causing the electron's effective mass to be as much as 40 times bigger than the mass of a free electron." The distortion of the background field is the displacement of the aether by the moving particle. The 'clustering' of the field around the particle is the 'displacing back'. The 'clustering' of the field is the pressure exerted by the displaced aether towards the particle. "The idea comes directly from the physics of solids." The aether behaves as a frictionless superfluid 'one something'.
From: mpc755 on 3 Jun 2010 19:12 On Jun 3, 2:02 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > yeah; "A=Mcc" -- ba-doomp! > > > Gravity, Double Slit Experiments, E=mc^2, Einstein's train gedanken > > are all easily understood once you realize aether and matter are > > different states of the same material and aether is displaced by matter.. > > thusNso: > the curvature of space was proven (with the aid of "synchronized > clocks" > with a friend at another locale on teh same meridian) by Aristarchus; > later, it was measured by Gauss on Alsace-Lorraine for France, > using his theodolite. > The curvature of 'space' is caused by the displacement of 'space' by matter. It is the material of space which is displaced by matter. The material is most often referred to as aether. The curvature of 'space- time' is more accurately described as the displacement of aether by matter.
From: mpc755 on 3 Jun 2010 19:23 On Jun 3, 4:24 pm, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, mpc755 wrote: > > On Jun 3, 10:40 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 3, 9:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> Is the food going to be digested at exactly the same rate between an > >>> brother on a space ship and an brother on the Earth? Is the muscle > >>> tone of the brother on the space ship going to age at the same rate as > >>> the atomic clock ticks and is the muscle tone of the brother on the > >>> Earth going to age at the same rate as the atomic clock ticks on the > >>> Earth? > > >>> Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the other brother > >>> being on the Earth is going to have a greater biological effect on the > >>> brothers than the rate at which an atomic clock ticks? > > >>> Now, you are going to say, "All things being equal". But that is the > >>> whole point, things are not equal. If they are equal, then the atomic > >>> clocks tick at the same rate. > > >> Well, let's see. If relativity predicts things will slow by 24.7% and > >> things slow by 24.7%, including the clock on the spaceship, and > >> chemical processes in the brother, and the oscillation of a spring, > >> then it is very likely that the reason is because relativity is > >> correct. To surmise that this is not what's going on, and that zero-G > >> environment is what causes the chemical processes to slow by 24.7% > >> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that > >> artificially replenished air is what causes the clock to slow by 24.7% > >> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that > >> cosmic rays is what causes the spring oscillation to slow by 24.7% > >> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), borders on > >> lunacy. No, it crosses right over the border and flops around in > >> lunacy land. > > > The brother on the space ship is not going to age according to the > > rate at which an atomic clock ticks relative to the other brother on > > the Earth and his rate of aging based upon the atomic clock on the > > Earth. > > > You are suggesting that a brother at zero G's on the space ship and > > the brother on the Earth both eat a tuna fish sandwich that both > > sandwiches will be digested based upon the rate at which the atomic > > clocks tick. Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the > > other brother being on the Earth might have more of an effect on the > > rate at which the sandwich is digested than the rate at which the > > atomic clock ticks? No, of course you do not, because you do not > > think. > > What happened to the interpretation that the brother on earth, along with > all the rest of the solar system can be thought of as going "the other > way" at speed, S, and the brother on the spaceship as being, considered, > as motionless, so the brother on the earth is really going to age slower? > > This is the best article I have found on the subject: 'On Einsteins resolution of the twin clock paradox' http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/dec252005/2009.pdf "Concluding note Einsteins paper in 1918 was apparently written on advise from friends to respond to the critics of special relativity, in manner that was appropriate for a scientist defending his theory. The very fact that Einstein used the gravitational time dilation predicted by the theory of general relativity, invented ten years after the formulation of special relativity, to justify the asymmetrical time dilation of transported clocks provides some support to the genuineness of the alleged reality of the paradox within special relativity." The rate at which an atomic clock 'ticks' is based upon the aether pressure in which it exists. In terms of motion, the speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth" causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated with the speed at which the GPS satellite moves with respect to the aether and the aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS satellites [to] tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the ground." (quoted text from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS). There is less aether pressure on the brother in the space ship circling the Earth than there is on the brother on the Earth and this aether pressure is effecting the molecules and atoms which each brother consists of. But to suggest the brothers age at the rate at which an atomic clock ticks is silly.
From: mpc755 on 3 Jun 2010 19:28
On Jun 3, 4:32 pm, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jun 2010, mpc755 wrote: > > On Jun 3, 11:01 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jun 3, 9:52 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> On Jun 3, 10:40 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> On Jun 3, 9:28 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>> Is the food going to be digested at exactly the same rate between an > >>>>> brother on a space ship and an brother on the Earth? Is the muscle > >>>>> tone of the brother on the space ship going to age at the same rate as > >>>>> the atomic clock ticks and is the muscle tone of the brother on the > >>>>> Earth going to age at the same rate as the atomic clock ticks on the > >>>>> Earth? > > >>>>> Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the other brother > >>>>> being on the Earth is going to have a greater biological effect on the > >>>>> brothers than the rate at which an atomic clock ticks? > > >>>>> Now, you are going to say, "All things being equal". But that is the > >>>>> whole point, things are not equal. If they are equal, then the atomic > >>>>> clocks tick at the same rate. > > >>>> Well, let's see. If relativity predicts things will slow by 24.7% and > >>>> things slow by 24.7%, including the clock on the spaceship, and > >>>> chemical processes in the brother, and the oscillation of a spring, > >>>> then it is very likely that the reason is because relativity is > >>>> correct. To surmise that this is not what's going on, and that zero-G > >>>> environment is what causes the chemical processes to slow by 24.7% > >>>> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that > >>>> artificially replenished air is what causes the clock to slow by 24.7% > >>>> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), and that > >>>> cosmic rays is what causes the spring oscillation to slow by 24.7% > >>>> (even though there is no quantitative prediction of that), borders on > >>>> lunacy. No, it crosses right over the border and flops around in > >>>> lunacy land. > > >>> The brother on the space ship is not going to age according to the > >>> rate at which an atomic clock ticks relative to the other brother on > >>> the Earth and his rate of aging based upon the atomic clock on the > >>> Earth. > > >>> You are suggesting that a brother at zero G's on the space ship and > >>> the brother on the Earth both eat a tuna fish sandwich that both > >>> sandwiches will be digested based upon the rate at which the atomic > >>> clocks tick. Don't you think one brother being at zero G's and the > >>> other brother being on the Earth might have more of an effect on the > >>> rate at which the sandwich is digested than the rate at which the > >>> atomic clock ticks? No, of course you do not, because you do not > >>> think. > > >> Sure it will have an effect. But there will also be an effect that is > >> due to relativity, and this can be separated from other effects. > > >> This is a simple experimental analysis skill that just about any > >> scientist learns. > >> For example, if you are trying to find out if smoking shortens > >> lifespan, you may also find that your smokers also drink alcohol, or > >> that their hair is a little longer, or that they live in sunnier > >> climates, and you may wonder if those factors also contribute to a > >> shorter life span. It is the task of the experimenter to understand > >> how to separate out the contribution that is JUST due to smoking. This > >> is not that hard. > > >> If you don't have any idea how this is done, then perhaps you should > >> get a little bit of training. > > > And what scientists also do is perform experiments, such as detecting > > the particle at the exits to the slits in a double slit experiment to > > see if the particle exits one, or both, slits. > > This was discussed in the book I cited: "Understanding Quantum Physics" by > Michael Morrison. > > When experiment after > > > experiment is performed and the particle is ALWAYS detected exiting a > > single slit, scientists, who are not under the delusional effects of > > the absurd nonsense of the Copenhagen interpretation of QM, conclude > > this is experimental evidence the particle always exits a single slit. > > There is an important caveat however: that the process of probing the > particles position and presence exiting the slit has the effect of > disturbing the motion of the particle (this is also very nicely discussed, > and referenced in the cited book), and complicates the interpretation of > the results. > Detection of the C-60 molecule exiting the slit(s) does affect the C-60 molecule. What it does is destroy the coherence of the C-60 molecules associated aether displacement wave (i.e. turns the wave into chop) and there is no interference. What placing detectors at the exits to the slits does not do is cause the C-60 molecule to exit a single slit. Here is a thought experiment which can not be answered by the Copenhagen interpretation of QM without the future determining the past. The C-60 molecule is in the slit(s). Detectors are placed at the exits to the slits. The C-60 molecule is always detected exiting a single slit. The C-60 molecule is in the slit(s). Detectors are placed and removed from the exits to the slits. The C-60 molecule creates an interference pattern How is this possible. The only explanation put forth by those who choose to believe in the Copenhagen interpretation of QM is the C-60 molecule enters one slit, or multiple slits, depending upon there being detectors at the exits to the slits when the C-60 molecule gets there in the future. That is absurd. The C-60 molecule is always detected exiting a single slit because the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single slit. It is the associated aether displacement wave which exits multiple slits and creates interference which alters the direction the C-60 molecule travels. Detecting the C-60 molecule causes decoherence of the associated aether displacement wave (i.e. turns the wave into chop) and there is no interference. > > Scientists also realize to conclude a C-60 molecule can enter, travel > > through, and exit multiple slits simultaneously in a double slit > > experiment without requiring energy, releasing energy, or having a > > change in momentum is physically impossible. > > The book I cited had something to say about that, too. > > > The Copenhagen interpretation of QM has nothing to do with the physics > > of nature. It is made up absurd nonsense which only exists in the > > minds of those too weak to understand the true nature of physics. > > All schools of thought depend on some interpretation. It is crucial to > making conclusions. > > > > >>>>> One year is one orbit of the Sun by the Earth regardless of how many > >>>>> times an atomic clock ticks. > > >>>> Search for posts > > |