They are not going to just tell you
It sounds exactly like racist BS. But in fact recent Chinese law makes every corporation and every citizen a part of the state security apparatus.
That are all spies now. Every single one of them.
21 posts • joined 27 Aug 2014
THANKS to The Register, for publishing the photo.
I've been getting keyboard marks on my face from the bad habit media has of publishing a cartoon instead of the photo whenever astronomers discover something. As if the photo and an artists impression were in any way equivalent.
Here we have the rare opportunity to compare THE ACTUAL DATA with the artists impression of it. They are not at all alike, are they. Now let's briefly think... which image contains actual information, and which contains only entertainment? You see what I'm saying, here?
If the Oort Cloud is real, then yes.
But let's keep in mind no one has ever seen the Oort Cloud. It was a suggestion. not a discovery. It was a convenient explanation for the origin of comets. And surely this passing star stirred up a great many comets and sent them crashing about our ears.
What's that? It didn't? Hmmmm...
I predict the experiment will be a SUCCESS.
Unfortunately, that won't prove anything. Even if it's "real"quantum jitteryness, there is this thing called thermal noise. I don't think it will be possible to tell them apart. But, go on. Surprise me.
And Swarthy is right, it looks just like a pair of Micholsen-Morely devices. And if it finds something, then we have a whole lot of physics to do over again.
While I'm here, I should set out a few of these! !!! !! !!!! !!!!! !! !
Professor Bhattacharya and his team at the University of Michigan have invented a new form of LASER that emits polaritons instead of light. Polaritons are a novel form of matter, not light, not electrons, but both. Polaritons have mass. That means the Polarition beam is a rocket as well as a laser.
The kicker is, it's electric. A solar panel or Nuclear Thermogenerator will power one indefinitely.
Screw the Solar Sail. Give me a Polariton Beam. Then we need never decommission a Satellite because of fuel, ever again.
Why is this guy a nut. I only clicked in to find that out. And here we have a rebuilt Enfield. One of the most ordinary firearms in the World. Let's be clear, a top feed, 5 round bolt rifle without so much as a detachable magazine. I mean its got NOTHING that would appeal to an enthusiast except its history. BRITISH history.
What Makes This Guy A Nut?
I think more is being said about the author than about the subject. I think he is afraid of guns. Let me be clearer, I think he is afraid of defending his own safety. Possibly because of the noise. I think it is fortunate I don't have to depend on him, for anything.
Ya think? Check this out.
I almost recall gamboling shallows neath orange frilled sun specked froth. A growser suddenly cast shadow, skattering our troop. But he was already eating, so too casually we went again our way.
If you can do more with less, mention.
Oh, and feel free to Google, and discover it has never been written before.
Ever notice Enceladus? Or Europa? Or a comet? Did you think water grows on trees? Try finding one on Enceladus.
Stars forge atoms into larger atoms, up to iron. Then, exploding stars forge even heavier elements while hurling them into the great wide open. Later, this material collects itself into new solar systems. It happens H is the most common atom and O is one of the most reactive common atoms. They cannot avoid getting to know one another. Scientists are supposed to know this stuff. So are schoolchildren.
Water might be the most common molecule in the universe.Of course Earths' water predates the Sun. We are certainly not going to be able to get any out of the Sun. Unless, I suppose, you go at night.
Okay, that's enough.
I made it half way down the page before barfing. I choked my way past the part ab the author supposing a scientist would of course discard the inexplicable. Lot's of people know next to nothing about science, so this is just the author identifying himself as one.
But the suggestion a scientist would make disproving the existence of god a personal goal is a demonstration of complete unfamiliarity with science and the method. Obviously the author is a theolog. As such he is utterly unqualified to comment regarding science. And so is the executive crew of this film.
Moreover, if the author enjoyed this movie, if he calls it intelligent without being familiar with the means scientists use in their work, it would hurt me to see it. That doesn't mean you shouldn't see it. Knock yourself out. I'm saying you will enjoy the movie more without me rolling on the floor in my own vomit.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019