Jump to content

Abhirao456

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About Abhirao456

  • Rank
    Quark

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    Physics

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I've read some works of Emilio del giudice about coherence domains in water. However I saw this interesting article on Brownian Collisions which make the formation of these coherence domains something quite hard to possibly exist..... Here is the article:- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328024287_Limits_on_Quantum_Coherent_Domains_in_Liquid_Water Also here are two more articles on coherence domains in water;- https://m.scirp.org/papers/90862 (umm click download pdf cuz scirp articles on the site are presented in a very hard to read manner) https://www.r
  2. Oh crap😂😂 Also one last question, I saw this guy has cited one or two Legitimate papers, does this increase the credibility of the author in any way? Say for example, just before the start of section 4. *Biological dynamics* , he cites a very very credible paper, does this mean that he read that and is right?
  3. I am actually familiar with this, does this mean it's impossible to find a mistake with the paper?
  4. Hey since you're quite knowledgeable in physics, could you point out atleast 5 mistakes in the paper please? Or is it impossible cuz its a word salad?
  5. Hi, yes I have read penrose's view, his view is called the Orch Or theory, the article I linked is quite different actually although he does say something about the microtubules..... The author of the article I linked is weird, he says there is a "tension domain" and a "energy domain" according to Quantum Field Theory, which I think isn't the case..... Also he states the mind body is a form of a toroid which Penrose doesn't say...... I generally overlook people who put toroids in their theory because they tend to couple this with their pseudoscientific nonsense, but I questioned bec
  6. Hey I'm so sorry I don't know how the forum works, I had written that is open access journal so I wanted to edit and put researchgate, I'm so sorry Hmm your right, although you may not be an expert about the mind stuff, I think his physics part should atleast make sense, if it doesn't then I don't think his other stuff should because he uses the so called "physics" to relate it to the mind, moreover neither is he physicist, cosmogonist , biologist,etc. He is just a physiotherapist, that's all..... That being said I think the fact that people who are expertise in physics sho
  7. I asked to some other guy, he said it's awesome and seems like word salad because of its technicality, is their really anything of use? You are theoretical physicist so could you get anything put of the paper?
  8. Also is there really something knows as a tensive gradient in quantum physics? Also is them something known as Spin Conjugate Dynamics /Phase Conjugate Dynamics really?
  9. I have one request, I hope you could answer it…. I saw this article that makes heavy assumptions based on Quantum Electrodynamics , like something like formation of an energy domain or such, and it connects it with brain activity which is super weird, I did ask a neuroscientist and he said he couldn’t make any sense with the physics part of it because the author delves into parts of physics which I’ve not heard off such as Energy Quanta-Gradients and stuff like that, and to me it seems pretty pseudosciencey as it is published in a non peer review Journal, however if you don’t mind you could p
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.