danot Posted August 11, 2010 Author Share Posted August 11, 2010 Wrong. As long as you do it faster than the Planck time - you can..:-) Google Hawking radiation for one of the more crazy results of quantum mechanics. In theory, my mind can travel back in time; it is capable of revisiting any of my life experiences . Does that mean my mind is a time machine?..If so, does that make time travel into the past "theoretically possible"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat88 Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 somone with a huge red button with a label saying 'emergency' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 ...Pointless off topic drivel snipped.... oh... nothing left. Are you going to answer the original point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 and according to you everybody is a feeble wit Aye, or rhyming slang for it, steady esme we have hardly met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 11, 2010 Author Share Posted August 11, 2010 It has been observed though, and continues to be observed. It was even observed up at the Hicks building at the University by me. It is both a theory, and a fact. Much like the theory of gravity is also a fact. How did you test it?, and what were the results? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Aye, or rhyming slang for it, steady esme we have hardly met. permit me to disagree then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted August 11, 2010 Author Share Posted August 11, 2010 Utter rubbish. The ability to think outside the box is one of the very defining ideas of scientists - the ability to take existing knowledge, to comprehend, extend and axpand that further beyond existing knowledge is what science is all about. You on the other hand argue from a position of ignorance - you are either unable or unwilling to learn so as a defence you claim that people who can are conceited or arrogant in order to cover up and deflect people from your own shortcomings. It's a particularly common viewpoint sadly that all scientists have to content with, and one that invariably never changes. I'm quite prepared to admit that I don't understand the origins of creation. What I'm not prepared to do is shave the corners off square pegs to fit my round holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 How did you test it?, and what were the results? Why should Obelix bother telling you, seeing as just as with the successful prediction of background radiation, within a few posts in all likelihood you'll conveniently 'forget' everything Obelix said and go back to falsely claiming that "it [the big bang model] cannot be tested on, because it cannot be observed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 How did you test it?, and what were the results? how about instead of all these demands for proof from us you come up with something and we all demand proof from you or does this not work like that ? you are not satisfied, you think scientists are arrogant and you point to things that you do not understand as proof of this arrogance I disagree with the things you point to as proof which is the wrong thing to do in retrospect you think scientists are arrogant, I say fine, you are entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine bye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Obelix, are you relared to esme by any chance? Theory of Gravity? How long has gravity been a theory? Pick up your feet and you fall on your arse that aint no theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.