The Big Bang Theory Big Blunder: An Open Letter to Closed Minds
in [Relativity]
|
From: mpc755 on 29 Sep 2009 18:58 On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > > > > mpc755 wrote: > > > > [...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as > > > > yourself. > > > > You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. > > > > It will fit perfectly. > > > No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open > > minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the > > evidence. > > > The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both > > slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to > > realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is > > incorrect. > > As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as > nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call > "closed-minded". > The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your ignorance. When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. I see no reason to consider nonsense. > > > > The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single > > slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. > >
From: doug on 29 Sep 2009 20:04 mpc755 wrote: > On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >>>On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >> >>>>mpc755 wrote: >>>> >>>>>[...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as >>>>>yourself. >> >>>>You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. >> >>>>It will fit perfectly. >> >>>No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open >>>minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the >>>evidence. >> >>>The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both >>>slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to >>>realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is >>>incorrect. >> >>As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as >>nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call >>"closed-minded". >> > > > The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single > slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single > slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your > ignorance. No, you are trying to lie about what the experiment says in order to fit your prejudices. Why do you think lying helps your case? > > When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the > particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the > displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, > altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the > observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. Except that it is not and you are lying again. > > I see no reason to consider nonsense. > You seem to prefer lying to thinking. > >> >>>The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single >>>slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. >> >> >
From: mpc755 on 29 Sep 2009 19:05 On Sep 29, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > mpc755 wrote: > > On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > > >>>>mpc755 wrote: > > >>>>>[...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as > >>>>>yourself. > > >>>>You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. > > >>>>It will fit perfectly. > > >>>No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open > >>>minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the > >>>evidence. > > >>>The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both > >>>slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to > >>>realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is > >>>incorrect. > > >>As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as > >>nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call > >>"closed-minded". > > > The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single > > slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single > > slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your > > ignorance. > > No, you are trying to lie about what the experiment says in order > to fit your prejudices. Why do you think lying helps your case? > > > > > When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the > > particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the > > displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, > > altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the > > observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. > > Except that it is not and you are lying again. > Why is it not? > > I see no reason to consider nonsense. > > You seem to prefer lying to thinking. > > > > >>>The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single > >>>slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. > >
From: doug on 29 Sep 2009 20:08 mpc755 wrote: > On Sep 29, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > >>mpc755 wrote: >> >>>On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: >> >>>>>>mpc755 wrote: >> >>>>>>>[...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as >>>>>>>yourself. >> >>>>>>You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. >> >>>>>>It will fit perfectly. >> >>>>>No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open >>>>>minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the >>>>>evidence. >> >>>>>The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both >>>>>slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to >>>>>realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is >>>>>incorrect. >> >>>>As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as >>>>nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call >>>>"closed-minded". >> >>>The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single >>>slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single >>>slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your >>>ignorance. >> >>No, you are trying to lie about what the experiment says in order >>to fit your prejudices. Why do you think lying helps your case? >> >> >> >> >>>When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the >>>particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the >>>displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, >>>altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the >>>observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. >> >>Except that it is not and you are lying again. >> > > > Why is it not? Because you are lying about what the experiments showed. > > >>>I see no reason to consider nonsense. >> >>You seem to prefer lying to thinking. >> >> >> >> >>>>>The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single >>>>>slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. >> >> >
From: mpc755 on 29 Sep 2009 19:08
On Sep 29, 8:08 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > mpc755 wrote: > > On Sep 29, 8:04 pm, doug <x...(a)xx.com> wrote: > > >>mpc755 wrote: > > >>>On Sep 29, 6:41 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>On Sep 29, 5:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>On Sep 29, 6:06 pm, YBM <ybm...(a)nooos.fr> wrote: > > >>>>>>mpc755 wrote: > > >>>>>>>[...] someone who prefers to remain ignorant such as > >>>>>>>yourself. > > >>>>>>You'd better post this next time you'll answer to yourself. > > >>>>>>It will fit perfectly. > > >>>>>No, I'm willing to look at the experimental evidence and make open > >>>>>minded judgments as to how best the concepts and theories support the > >>>>>evidence. > > >>>>>The simple fact QM has to say a C-60 molecule enters and exits both > >>>>>slits when you do not look for it, is enough nonsense for me to > >>>>>realize the QM explanation of what is occurring in nature is > >>>>>incorrect. > > >>>>As YBM said, you've described yourself well. Dismissing something as > >>>>nonsense before considering the evidence is what normal people call > >>>>"closed-minded". > > >>>The evidence is the C-60 molecule always enters and exits a single > >>>slit, because it is always detected entering and exiting a single > >>>slit. You have to ignore the experimental evidence which fits your > >>>ignorance. > > >>No, you are trying to lie about what the experiment says in order > >>to fit your prejudices. Why do you think lying helps your case? > > >>>When I first heard of the double slit experiment it was obvious the > >>>particle was creating a displacement wave in the aether and the > >>>displacement wave created interference when exiting the slits, > >>>altering the direction the particle travels. This description of the > >>>observed behaviors is supported by the experimental evidence. > > >>Except that it is not and you are lying again. > > > Why is it not? > > Because you are lying about what the experiments showed. > What am I lying about? > > > >>>I see no reason to consider nonsense. > > >>You seem to prefer lying to thinking. > > >>>>>The C-60 molecule is always detected entering and exiting a single > >>>>>slit because it always enters and exits a single slit. > > |