Viewing profile — cm127
cm127
HN member- Joined
- Sat, Nov 12, 2011, 11:10 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 83
- Public activity
- 107 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About cm127
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #14224370
Solar radiation? Probably why burrowing would be the way to go.
-
comment
Comment #13188408
What's the point? It's about understanding the universe! If the ether exists then it could mean an open-system exists in the universe, i.e. the big bang is still happening, -- or t…
-
comment
Comment #13186860
That's like saying computers and laptops are so great -- we'll never need smart phones. Sure, classical devices / models are great and proven true, -- but that's still a limited vi…
-
comment
Comment #13185762
Is that where they explain particle-wave duality, or is that where they pretend it's not an issue?
-
comment
Comment #13185648
The point is so much of our conclusions are based off of these null hypothesis. It's like saying the iPhone will never succeed because so many other "smart" devices at the time wer…
-
comment
Comment #13185500
I'm starting to become skeptical of our understanding of quantum mechanics because we completely discredited a common theory with only one experiment over a hundred years ago: http…
-
comment
Comment #13113933
He kinda mentions it in passing at a TED talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUXNiVW3oc4 He literally suggests vaccines will help with depopulation.
-
comment
Comment #13113907
It looks like part of the section is missing. It starts at Winter B.S. 1960 -- Tucson, AZ.
-
comment
Comment #13102006
How do you know you're not being taught 2+2=5. No one is close to figuring out a unifying field theory based on "The Standard Model" and Relativity, so in many ways it doesn't real…
-
comment
Comment #13101613
Look: I'll just state what is bothering me about your comments: you're trying to assert your opinion as scientific fact / proof without a scientific explanation; you're trying to f…
-
comment
Comment #13101211
Let's take a step even further back: why am I defending this theory? I only brought up what I was reading: a new theory that challenges quantum mechanics. Why did I bring this up? …
-
comment
Comment #13099915
Complaining about linguistic specifications is not arguing rational thoughts; it's arguing laziness. Seriously, concede that you don't understand the theory and therefore can't mak…
-
comment
Comment #13099707
Eh, I don't think it's unfair: this person is openly attacking me for giving attention to a form of untested science -- declaring it "crockpottery". I honestly feel proud of myself…
-
comment
Comment #13099686
What specifically makes the theory drivel? Exactly, what is scientifically not matching? Take your time because I'm pretty sure you don't have the mental capacity to think for your…
-
comment
Comment #13099603
You're pathetic. You're too lazy to think outside your echo chamber, so you completely disregard it BECAUSE YOU NEED GROUP THINK TO HAVE ANY OPINION. Again, I think you're the most…
-
comment
Comment #13099593
Seriously? Bringing up a researched subject is trolling because I don't know all the answers you're postulating as if I've studied this extensively for years..? Is this how "scient…
-
comment
Comment #13098817
Jesus Christ, I'm not your professor. Do your own research. You have the skills to read about this stuff. Why do you need me? I'm not trying to convince you to believe in anything.…
-
comment
Comment #13098746
I'm still researching this, but it's happening at a quantum level, so I expect it to be slow. But like you said, it will have an aggregate affect over time. Also, it sounds like yo…
-
comment
Comment #13098700
Here's another form of crazy: trying to force Relativity into a unified field for over a hundred years and getting nowhere. Yeah, you'll "probably" get it one day... What did Einst…
-
comment
Comment #13098568
It theoretically happens very slowly, so it probably does escape detection.
-
comment
Comment #13098532
You can't use a hypothetical to disprove a theory. Your entire comment is completely baseless: "These people don't follow my school of thought, so they must be wrong!" No offense, …
-
comment
Comment #13098437
It's from the Model G theory in Subquantum Kinetics, -- and it seems more believable than a finite amount of matter being made from a single blast of energy billions of years ago.
-
comment
Comment #13098225
Think of it this way: the Universe is continuously expanding, -- so in a way, it's like we're still experiencing the Big Bang. So... does that mean matter is still being produced? …
-
comment
Comment #13098088
You're not really proving or disproving anything. You're just complaining he's using another mathematical model. So what? The worst part is you have no basis for any of your argume…
-
comment
Comment #13097961
I think you're proving Dr. Paul LaViolette's point why the theory is not getting attention: emotional, knee-jerk reactions like this. Seems like I have to agree with everything you…