Bufofrog

2 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

Why it cannot be so?

Because that is how graphs are made.

The graph you supplied makes no sense at all.

12 minutes ago, DimaMazin said:

Let's consider Minkowski diagram with general coordinates of two frames

I'm not sure what that graph is supposed to tell us, but it sure isn't a Minkowski diagram.

The only way that graph makes sense is if t'= -t and x' = -x

29 minutes ago, Paulsrocket said:

How would you tell it apart from the other trillions of photons, and then to prove entanglement you need to measure it which first means isolating the entangled proton, then measuring it

I would do it the way the Clauser and Aspect's experiments did it.

33 minutes ago, Paulsrocket said:

Heisenberg's indeterminacy principle making an accurate measurement if not impossible, at least always suspect.

That is not true.  The uncertainty principle say for certain pairs of measurements you cannot give an accurate measurement of BOTH of the attributes at the same time.

35 minutes ago, Paulsrocket said:

Note, I am not arguing that entanglement happens, just wondering how one would find a proton that is entangled say a million miles away?

You would need some sort of spaceship.

On 1/9/2024 at 12:16 AM, ttelect said:

You judge the Science I have revealed to you

There is nothing wrong with having unsupported beliefs IMO, but they certainly are not science.

13 hours ago, Paulsrocket said:

How was that determined when neither have been observed?  Seriously I am asking

I seriously don't believe you.

If this was a good faith question I would take the time to answer you but you are simply denying theories that you don't understand, so it would be a waste of my time.

Just read and try to understand the article that you provided, the answer to your 'serious' question is in the article.

2 hours ago, Paulsrocket said:

Please elaborate as to how you know how they are not intertwined as neither has ever been observed?    Do you know something that NASA does not?

Mr. Srocket, if you would have read (and understood) the article you supplied you too would know that dark matter and dark energy are completely different things and not somehow 'intertwined'. 

7 hours ago, Paulsrocket said:

Dark matter and dark energy are so intertwined that they can't be separated,  

They have nothing to do with each other so they certainly aren't intertwined.  I guess since they both have the word dark in the names you somehow through they were related to each other, which is kinda humorous.

1 hour ago, mar_mar said:

All of them? On the whole Earth ? Do you know what population was?

Yes.  Yes.  No.

Does that surprise you?

5 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

May i ask what have happened to those beings between an ape and a human?

Humans are apes.  If I understand your question correctly, the answer is mans ancestors like Australopithecus and Homo Erectus died out.

1 hour ago, Paulsrocket said:

Indeed the center of the Milky Way is a black hole.

We are actually orbiting the galaxy's center of gravity.  The SMBH near the center of the galaxy is exerting less gravitational pull on you than a car in your driveway.

30 minutes ago, chron44 said:

One proof of what I am implying is if we ask ChatGPT

Asking a chat bot a scientific question is a waste of time, it is just a chat bot.

32 minutes ago, chron44 said:

First I have to "declare" that my quest here in this thread is the issue of what time is.

That is philosophy not science.  What is length?  I can measure or count using some arbitrary scale but fundamentally what is length?

10 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

Wikipedia doesn't know what  conscience is. For me it is religious concept.

This is not in the religion section so there is no need to bring it up religious concepts.

41 minutes ago, Pooh said:

A once logical conclusion can be debunked by a single observation, and, therefore, logic is not a reliable tool.

It's way better tool than illogic.

4 hours ago, ourlivinguniverse said:

And, better still, the conundrum of wave-particle duality becomes trivial

I didn't know there was a conundrum,

3 minutes ago, Spring Theory said:

This speculation requires that you accept the possibility of the absurd premise.

That is an insurmountable problem for your idea I'm afraid.

23 minutes ago, Spring Theory said:

If a photon wraps around itself its magnetic fields that point in opposite directions will also align.

-1.  You have been polite and respectful but you ignore members criticism and continue to double down on things like "photon wraps around itself" which is absurd.

27 minutes ago, Spring Theory said:

No, an electron has positive charge at its center which is really compressed space. A black hole can create electrons.

Sorry, but this is just looks like unevidenced, illogical arm waving.

2 hours ago, mar_mar said:

what exactly knowledge  you can verify? can you verify evolution theory?

Yes.

18 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

what for? for you to believe?

Sure.

20 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

faith is "assurance about what we do not see."

Exactly, its belief without evidence.  I do not have that type of faith.

22 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

i say that you have to trust knowledge which you can't verify.

I don't trust knowledge that can't be verified.

1 minute ago, mar_mar said:

you have to trust all the knowledge except empirically obtained

Are you saying only empirical evidence should be accepted?

6 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

what do you mean saying "evidence of God"? what evidence would be appropriate?

I don't know.  I'm sure if God exists he could come up with something convincing.

7 minutes ago, mar_mar said:

And what about finger tips?

Notice that by pressing your finger tips to the keyboard letters you can look up the evidence for the BB and evolution.

46 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Don't you have to trust the evidence?

That is kind of an absurd thing to say.  If the evidence is not trustworthy it is by definition not evidence.

Seems like you just want to argue for fun which I am not interested in.

4 hours ago, mar_mar said:

I think this theory of evolution and a theory of bb are exactly matter of faith.

You are quite simply wrong.  There is lots of evidence for both of these theories, so faith is not necessary.  The evidence is literally at your finger tips if you could be bothered to look.  On the other hand there is no evidence of God and there is no evidence of the biblical creation, so it takes faith to believe in those. 

On 1/2/2024 at 6:26 AM, mar_mar said:

Don't listen to imaginative music, don't  watch imaginative movies, paintings, and don't read imaginative literature. Only documentaries and science fiction.

Don't you realize that science fiction is imaginative movies and literature?  The fiction part of science fiction should have been a big clue.

What a monumental was of time.