Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 4 2008, 10:08 AM)
Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
Hi David,
Bold statements. I agree that much of the objects that you mention are still in the early stages of verification, but could you elaborate on these specifics, just so we, the forum, don't think you're just lecturing us and the scientific community at large?
1) You say that Black Holes don't exist. What exactly do you believe doesn't exist?
a) That light is not affected by gravity?
The possibility that a gravity well can never be too strong as to not let light escape?
c) That there is some other interstellar object that galaxies revolve around that do not emit any sort of radiation except in the areas that would be expected of a super-massive BH?
I'm sure there are other issues that arise when you eliminate BH's from our most accepted model of the universe.
Addressing your statement one at a time , I believe, would be the easiest way to start.
Peace,
Ron
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
Hi David,
Bold statements. I agree that much of the objects that you mention are still in the early stages of verification, but could you elaborate on these specifics, just so we, the forum, don't think you're just lecturing us and the scientific community at large?
1) You say that Black Holes don't exist. What exactly do you believe doesn't exist?
a) That light is not affected by gravity?
The possibility that a gravity well can never be too strong as to not let light escape?c) That there is some other interstellar object that galaxies revolve around that do not emit any sort of radiation except in the areas that would be expected of a super-massive BH?
I'm sure there are other issues that arise when you eliminate BH's from our most accepted model of the universe.
Addressing your statement one at a time , I believe, would be the easiest way to start.
Peace,
Ron
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 4 2008, 10:08 AM)
Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
Well, so far we've had plenty of evidence for these phenomenon, but I would be glad to hear your argument for those statements. However, it looks like you're just spewing nonsense again with no proof. Oh well.
- Gehn
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
Well, so far we've had plenty of evidence for these phenomenon, but I would be glad to hear your argument for those statements. However, it looks like you're just spewing nonsense again with no proof. Oh well.
- Gehn
"There shall, in that time, be rumours of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things wi-- with the sort of raffia work base that has an attachment. At this time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock. Yea, it is written in the book of Cyril that, in that time, shall the third one..."
Black holes can be, becouse gravitation never will be such big that even light can't escape.
Dark matter and energy and faster than light Universe expansion also very speculative, so to me strange how sciencist can say that universe only 13.7 bilions years and not hundreds or milions time more.
Each now called "quantum computer" is classical computer, becouse giving the same result as if instead them would be the same size and speed classical computer.
Protein folding is very speculative and scietists even don't know structure of that atoms consist proteins
Maybe proteins even don't fold at all? Maybe just thermal noise of another molecules pushing proteins into some folded buble...
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~christos/hp.ps
http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~fraenkel/Papers/pfs.ps
for ps reading
http://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/ghos...um/gsv49w32.exe
http://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/ghos...60/gs860w32.exe
Dark matter and energy and faster than light Universe expansion also very speculative, so to me strange how sciencist can say that universe only 13.7 bilions years and not hundreds or milions time more.
Each now called "quantum computer" is classical computer, becouse giving the same result as if instead them would be the same size and speed classical computer.
Protein folding is very speculative and scietists even don't know structure of that atoms consist proteins
Maybe proteins even don't fold at all? Maybe just thermal noise of another molecules pushing proteins into some folded buble...http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~christos/hp.ps
http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~fraenkel/Papers/pfs.ps
for ps reading
http://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/ghos...um/gsv49w32.exe
http://mirror.cs.wisc.edu/pub/mirrors/ghos...60/gs860w32.exe
Excellent reference, Mandible!
David, you still have only qualitatively defended one part of one statement. I'm still not convinced.
Peace,
Ron
Also, David, you can look up the Schwarzschild radius and calculate the escape velocity of body meeting the Schwarzschild criteria. It's more than the speed of light.
If you don't believe that a body can become that dense, look up the ratio of the mass of a nucleous to the mass of the electrons and their relative distances to each other. If a body consisted of all nucleons (neutron star) you'll understand how a mass can become so dense.
Peace,
Ron
David, you still have only qualitatively defended one part of one statement. I'm still not convinced.
Peace,
Ron
Also, David, you can look up the Schwarzschild radius and calculate the escape velocity of body meeting the Schwarzschild criteria. It's more than the speed of light.
If you don't believe that a body can become that dense, look up the ratio of the mass of a nucleous to the mass of the electrons and their relative distances to each other. If a body consisted of all nucleons (neutron star) you'll understand how a mass can become so dense.
Peace,
Ron
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 4 2008, 10:08 AM)
Black holes don't exist
I'm afraid they do, Dave. They're black, things fall in and they never come out. Black holes exist all right. Singularities don't exist in the centre of black holes, but that's a different kettle of fish.
QUOTE
dark energy don't exist
It does. I know what it is, and why it does what it does. QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| dark energy don't exist |
It does. I know what it is, and why it does what it does.
dark matter don't exist
dark matter don't exist
You're quite right about this. It's because dark energy exists that dark matter does not. Oh there's matter out there, and it's dark, but not in the quantities required to explain flat galactic rotation curves.
...... cretin's too polite!
And... mmmm.... ''ABTRACTed''
QUOTE
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
It does, honest. When you understand dark energy, it's simple. You have to think in terms of compressed elastic being let go. It expands, and there's nothing to hold it in. QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| universe faster than light expansion don't exist |
It does, honest. When you understand dark energy, it's simple. You have to think in terms of compressed elastic being let go. It expands, and there's nothing to hold it in.
quantum computer don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
You're right about this. All this quantum mysticism is just hogwash.
QUOTE
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
There's quite a lot know about proton structures. But I don't know much about them, so I'll pass on this one.
QUOTE (Farsight+Jan 4 2008, 04:58 PM)
I'm afraid they do, Dave. They're black, things fall in and they never come out. Black holes exist all right. .
Hey Farsight,
You keep your A$$'ole wide open this time,eh? Richard Branson is waiting in line to try and plug it.
Darren
Hey Farsight,
You keep your A$$'ole wide open this time,eh? Richard Branson is waiting in line to try and plug it.
Darren
As far as black holes are concerned anyone heard about laser-stars? Its a rejected possibility saying that quasars are some kind of natural laser stars thus they are much closer than we think. The same theory negates red-shift solely as indication of distance. I dont know if similar but Halton Arp is claiming pretty much the same thing as far as red-shift is concerned.
Laser star theory goes to say that there are no host galaxies for quasars to be seen and they are needed because of black holes. Any way you turn it, quasars are not perfect fit for black hole theory and exceptions are always bad news for theory.
Laser star theory goes to say that there are no host galaxies for quasars to be seen and they are needed because of black holes. Any way you turn it, quasars are not perfect fit for black hole theory and exceptions are always bad news for theory.
DavidD, all,
Quantum Computers
Some use a search engine to find information, no problems as long as you know what is the fact and what are speculative?
Robert Schoelkopf, & Steven Girvin (Yale I believe) using qubits for this process. (not cubits) You can find the information in the resource center at your university, for up-to-date progress that is being made.
dawn
Quantum Computers
Some use a search engine to find information, no problems as long as you know what is the fact and what are speculative?
Robert Schoelkopf, & Steven Girvin (Yale I believe) using qubits for this process. (not cubits) You can find the information in the resource center at your university, for up-to-date progress that is being made.
dawn
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 4 2008, 10:08 AM)
Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and " structure are don't known yet"
ummm, structures are don't known yet?
my, i say, that makes allot of sense ,
don't you think,
pity some people don't know the English language,
well, anyway, you may have a point regarding the non existence "theory" that you have here, from a philosophical prospective, then yes,
according to the Co-ordinating Philosophical Research in the University of London, the moon doesn't exist when your not looking at it, for , because you cannot prove that it exist when you don't look at it , for it is sight that determines the judgment that you have upon the question, take away this sight, and you have NOTHING!!!
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and " structure are don't known yet"
ummm, structures are don't known yet?
my, i say, that makes allot of sense ,
don't you think,
pity some people don't know the English language,
well, anyway, you may have a point regarding the non existence "theory" that you have here, from a philosophical prospective, then yes,
according to the Co-ordinating Philosophical Research in the University of London, the moon doesn't exist when your not looking at it, for , because you cannot prove that it exist when you don't look at it , for it is sight that determines the judgment that you have upon the question, take away this sight, and you have NOTHING!!!
QUOTE (dawn+Jan 4 2008, 08:28 PM)
DavidD, all,
Quantum Computers
Some use a search engine to find information, no problems as long as you know what is the fact and what are speculative?
Robert Schoelkopf, & Steven Girvin (Yale I believe) using qubits for this process. (not cubits) You can find the information in the resource center at your university, for up-to-date progress that is being made.
dawn
Quantum computers don't exist. And no progress was doen in quantum computation at all, except theoretical
All few qubits quantum computers working just like classical computers, and so all now known few qubits quantum computers are realy classical computers. Those quantum computers with same number of gates and at the same frenquency is the same speed as classical computers or maybe even slower.
http://www.cs.sandia.gov/~wehart/Papers/19...stal-sand.ps.gz
(remove ".gz", when download)
http://download.scientificcommons.org/372021
Protein folding may even don't solving NP-complete problems if there is some interresting clever algorithm...
Quantum Computers
Some use a search engine to find information, no problems as long as you know what is the fact and what are speculative?
Robert Schoelkopf, & Steven Girvin (Yale I believe) using qubits for this process. (not cubits) You can find the information in the resource center at your university, for up-to-date progress that is being made.
dawn
Quantum computers don't exist. And no progress was doen in quantum computation at all, except theoretical
All few qubits quantum computers working just like classical computers, and so all now known few qubits quantum computers are realy classical computers. Those quantum computers with same number of gates and at the same frenquency is the same speed as classical computers or maybe even slower.
http://www.cs.sandia.gov/~wehart/Papers/19...stal-sand.ps.gz
(remove ".gz", when download)
http://download.scientificcommons.org/372021
Protein folding may even don't solving NP-complete problems if there is some interresting clever algorithm...
QUOTE (einstienear+Jan 4 2008, 10:15 PM)
the moon doesn't exist when your not looking at it, for , because you cannot prove that it exist when you don't look at it
What about reflection of the moon in the water? Or moon reflection of light in the night? If you are turned away from moon there is still glow. Where is the glow coming from if the moon is not there? The moon is there whether you look at it or not.
What about reflection of the moon in the water? Or moon reflection of light in the night? If you are turned away from moon there is still glow. Where is the glow coming from if the moon is not there? The moon is there whether you look at it or not.
Dark matter probably does not exist, the observations that deduce dark matter have a much simpler and rational explanation.
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 5 2008, 06:51 AM)
Quantum computers don't exist. And no progress was doen in quantum computation at all, except theoretical
All few qubits quantum computers working just like classical computers, and so all now known few qubits quantum computers are realy classical computers. Those quantum computers with same number of gates and at the same frenquency is the same speed as classical computers or maybe even slower.
http://www.cs.sandia.gov/~wehart/Papers/19...stal-sand.ps.gz
(remove ".gz", when download)
http://download.scientificcommons.org/372021
Protein folding may even don't solving NP-complete problems if there is some interresting clever algorithm...
Hi All, David,
When the first classical computer used hundreds of watts of power and minutes to compute simple math (division was even a milestone), did we quit on it? If we had you would not be able to converse about these things the way we are now.
As far as overall feasibility, look at Dawn's links. I've also read that one of the major problems right now is putting together an error correction algorithm for something with more possible words on one bit than in an entire 'classical; computer. This may be tough, but I also know the concept has been proven at (yes) slower than classical speeds, but if you've ever been in research, proof of concept is what really propels a program.
BTW, are you going to find the escape velocity of a body that meets the Schwarzschild radius criteria? If you can't, I'll do it for you just to hear your explanation.
Peace,
Ron
All few qubits quantum computers working just like classical computers, and so all now known few qubits quantum computers are realy classical computers. Those quantum computers with same number of gates and at the same frenquency is the same speed as classical computers or maybe even slower.
http://www.cs.sandia.gov/~wehart/Papers/19...stal-sand.ps.gz
(remove ".gz", when download)
http://download.scientificcommons.org/372021
Protein folding may even don't solving NP-complete problems if there is some interresting clever algorithm...
Hi All, David,
When the first classical computer used hundreds of watts of power and minutes to compute simple math (division was even a milestone), did we quit on it? If we had you would not be able to converse about these things the way we are now.
As far as overall feasibility, look at Dawn's links. I've also read that one of the major problems right now is putting together an error correction algorithm for something with more possible words on one bit than in an entire 'classical; computer. This may be tough, but I also know the concept has been proven at (yes) slower than classical speeds, but if you've ever been in research, proof of concept is what really propels a program.
BTW, are you going to find the escape velocity of a body that meets the Schwarzschild radius criteria? If you can't, I'll do it for you just to hear your explanation.
Peace,
Ron
Yes David, answer this much respected man of wisdom, otherwise we'll hideously increase the torture up several quantum levels .... idiot!
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 4 2008, 10:08 AM)
Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
This sounds like, for lack of a better term, a "stupid" nihilistic rant of delusions.
F-
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
This sounds like, for lack of a better term, a "stupid" nihilistic rant of delusions.
F-
QUOTE (Ron+Jan 5 2008, 06:59 PM)
Hi All, David,
When the first classical computer used hundreds of watts of power and minutes to compute simple math (division was even a milestone), did we quit on it? If we had you would not be able to converse about these things the way we are now.
As far as overall feasibility, look at Dawn's links. I've also read that one of the major problems right now is putting together an error correction algorithm for something with more possible words on one bit than in an entire 'classical; computer. This may be tough, but I also know the concept has been proven at (yes) slower than classical speeds, but if you've ever been in research, proof of concept is what really propels a program.
BTW, are you going to find the escape velocity of a body that meets the Schwarzschild radius criteria? If you can't, I'll do it for you just to hear your explanation.
Peace,
Ron
This work on quantum error correction is completly unsuccesfull! One QC working on 10 GHz and decoherence time is 1 ns. Another QC working at 1GHz and decoherence time is 10 ns. So what is diferent?
First classical computers was giving result, but this ones giving result only like classical/probabilitic computers and no quantum results!
Everypeople who saying that small quantum computers exist, misleading himself. They just don't exist and nobody prove yet that they are realy quantum computers!
I can't, but there is one question interesting to me, that is energy of particle which flying into Black hole with speed 0.999999 of speed of light? This energy is like it would fly classicaly with such speed (newton) or like his mass is very big (einshtein)?
When the first classical computer used hundreds of watts of power and minutes to compute simple math (division was even a milestone), did we quit on it? If we had you would not be able to converse about these things the way we are now.
As far as overall feasibility, look at Dawn's links. I've also read that one of the major problems right now is putting together an error correction algorithm for something with more possible words on one bit than in an entire 'classical; computer. This may be tough, but I also know the concept has been proven at (yes) slower than classical speeds, but if you've ever been in research, proof of concept is what really propels a program.
BTW, are you going to find the escape velocity of a body that meets the Schwarzschild radius criteria? If you can't, I'll do it for you just to hear your explanation.
Peace,
Ron
This work on quantum error correction is completly unsuccesfull! One QC working on 10 GHz and decoherence time is 1 ns. Another QC working at 1GHz and decoherence time is 10 ns. So what is diferent?
First classical computers was giving result, but this ones giving result only like classical/probabilitic computers and no quantum results!
Everypeople who saying that small quantum computers exist, misleading himself. They just don't exist and nobody prove yet that they are realy quantum computers!
I can't, but there is one question interesting to me, that is energy of particle which flying into Black hole with speed 0.999999 of speed of light? This energy is like it would fly classicaly with such speed (newton) or like his mass is very big (einshtein)?
There is too much negativity in science today. We should work on what we do know, instead of prancing about like lightweights on a staurday's night, pub-crawling... or should that be, lab-crawling around until we find the RIGHT THEORY, OR RIGHT PATH.
I don't saying that don't need continue reasearch in quantum computation, but I am just saying reality, that quantum computer don't exist and will never will exist. But those companies, which saying that they have small quantum computer lieing to peoples, becouse they can't prove that this is realy quantum computer and they "quantum computers" don't giving speed up, becouse they are classical or probabilistic spin or atom energy levels computers! If you will read they papers on arxiv.org, then you will see, that they can't prove that they small QC is realy QC. Or scientist don't understand physics or this is the same like with nuclear fusion energy. Personly I don't understand what is qubit phase and don't understand how some quantum algorithms can give speedup. About spin I found, that atom, which consist of one proton and one neutron don't have spin becouse those spin is antiparalel, and in another book I read that deutron spins are paralel. But the most strange to me is that why spins isn't SN-SN? And then total spin must be twice as big. Or maybe another probabilistic combination...
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 6 2008, 10:34 AM)
I don't saying that don't need continue reasearch in quantum computation, but I am just saying reality, that quantum computer don't exist and will never will exist. But those companies, which saying that they have small quantum computer lieing to peoples, becouse they can't prove that this is realy quantum computer and they "quantum computers" don't giving speed up, becouse they are classical or probabilistic spin or atom energy levels computers! If you will read they papers on arxiv.org, then you will see, that they can't prove that they small QC is realy QC. Or scientist don't understand physics or this is the same like with nuclear fusion energy. Personly I don't understand what is qubit phase and don't understand how some quantum algorithms can give speedup. About spin I found, that atom, which consist of one proton and one neutron don't have spin becouse those spin is antiparalel, and in another book I read that deutron spins are paralel. But the most strange to me is that why spins isn't SN-SN? And then total spin must be twice as big. Or maybe another probabilistic combination...
They will... if we have our equations correct.
They will... if we have our equations correct.
QUOTE (NeoNo.1+Jan 6 2008, 10:38 AM)
They will... if we have our equations correct.
But do you understand that it means, if quantum computer will be build? It means, that P=NP. And normaly it's stupid. And I don't believe in many universe interpretation and think that Universe is classical and noisy and thus quantum computer imposible like showing all experiments.
Protein folding also unknown and so on that unknow there is hypotheses that protein folding solving NP-complete problems, but nobody know protein structure and how they realy folds and so it's just another one theory, which can't be veryfied practicaly. So normaly I believing that P is not equal NP and thus quantum computer will be never build.
But do you understand that it means, if quantum computer will be build? It means, that P=NP. And normaly it's stupid. And I don't believe in many universe interpretation and think that Universe is classical and noisy and thus quantum computer imposible like showing all experiments.
Protein folding also unknown and so on that unknow there is hypotheses that protein folding solving NP-complete problems, but nobody know protein structure and how they realy folds and so it's just another one theory, which can't be veryfied practicaly. So normaly I believing that P is not equal NP and thus quantum computer will be never build.
1. Superpopitioning we know.
2. A+nNp or if you like, P=NP
3. Artificial Intelligence is our next threat.
2. A+nNp or if you like, P=NP
3. Artificial Intelligence is our next threat.
QUOTE (NeoNo.1+Jan 6 2008, 11:28 AM)
1. Superpopitioning we know.
...... cretin's too polite!
...... cretin's too polite!
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 4 2008, 10:08 AM)
Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
''Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet''
(B- W)- r'
(DE- WE)- r'
Work this out first. It is in an idiodyncratic method, but it should help.
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet
''Black holes don't exist
dark energy don't exist
dark matter don't exist
universe faster than light expansion don't exist
quantum computer don't exist
proteins folding and structure are don't known yet''
(B- W)- r'
(DE- WE)- r'
Work this out first. It is in an idiodyncratic method, but it should help.
QUOTE (Cecil P Abstract+Jan 6 2008, 11:40 AM)
...... cretin's too polite! And... mmmm.... ''ABTRACTed''
Even BlueBrain project more realistic than those things... IBM...
IBM...
QUOTE (DavidD+Jan 6 2008, 12:27 PM)
Even BlueBrain project more realistic than those things... IBM...
IBM...
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.