Klaynos

You have no evidence that the earth isn't in its natural state. There is no evidence that the earth was terraformed by any sentient being. 

You have nothing but wishful thinking. 

1 hour ago, Mike Smith Cosmos said:

... evidence ...

Mike, you keep using that word. I'm not sure you know what it means. You presented no evidence just a little story about how you think the earth is pretty (whatever pretty is). 

What does the physical sciences part cover?

I've just been the industrial supervisor for someone doing a GIS masters so programs do exist. It's an interesting field with some potential in the growing world of data science.

4 minutes ago, Mike Smith Cosmos said:

 

Sure , we we're Terraformed , by physics , chemistry and Biology . 

But that surely requires some form of oversight , 

 

Nope. It just requires the laws of physics. As your first assertion here is wrong we can happily dismiss the rest of your post. 

Please, Mike, try and understand the difference between evidence and baseless assertion. It's getting old. 

Mike, if you want to stop getting down votes I'd suggest a few things. 

• Stop making the same unsupported claims. 
• Listen to the criticisms supplied by the membership. 
• Act on that criticism rather than just repeat your claims. 
• Where you don't understand, ask. 
• Stop making the same unsupported claims. 
• Stop making unsupportable claims. 

Your response to criticisms thus far is reading as just shouting "yeah but hirearchy and superior being," at best it's nonsense. 

I'd have thought the best option is if each hole had a funnel to put the balls in one place. You could then light gate (or weigh) the funnel or endpoint and use a colour sensor to id the player from the colour of the balls. Player number would be limited to the number of colours you can source and distinguish. 

You're right. It's not wise to call your idea unsubstantiated. It's wise to call it completely and utterly unsubstantiated. 9 pages of circles and no evidence. My first post on the first page still stands. 

21 hours ago, Strange said:

 

The mods probably wouldn't notice as they can't be blocked in this way. (They can't be put on ignore either - as I found out on another forum when one of them "went rogue".)

 

This isn't true. I tried to send a message to a user *cough* the other day and found I couldn't. 

13 hours ago, Ted Robinson said:

Re: Klaynos response: The smartest people work with entanglement as a scientific phenomenon, but I see its instantaneity as a tell that fundamental space-time doesn’t exist.  Thus the “unpicturable” nothingness that would deny any origin at all, which leads into metaphysical areas where real scientists prefer not to tred.  But this kind of theory does not lend itself mathematical quantifications of course.  Very incidentally, Mensa, ISPE and the Triple Nine Society differ in that the latter two limit their membership only to those who would qualify in the highest 5% of Mensans (99.9th vs. 98th percentile).

·    

This isn't a theory as modern physics would consider a theory. It's not even a hypothesis. We (the physics community) are working towards better mathematical models of cosmology. 

It's not incidental at all, it's completely irrelevant. 

Even a pretty cheap pair of binoculars can give you some amazing views of the sky. Especially if you're somewhere dark. Definitely worth trying!

Hi Ted,

A few thoughts before reading what you've got here. 

1. There's no maths, physics uses the language of maths to make quantitative predictions. Without it you're just telling stories. 

2. That's a big wall of text, it's unlikely anyone is going to be bothered to read it. Especially after he preamble. 

3. The preamble is not positive. You've got to remember some of he smartest people who are alive have spent lifetimes on trying to understand this. Just being a member of mensa etc... Isn't going to swing it. I strongly suspect that people will read it and then not bother to read the rest. People in science care about the content not who's saying it. (see the logical fallacy of appeal to authority).

5 hours ago, Ted Robinson said:

I’m spanking new here and don’t know exactly where to start, but I’m 83 now and don’t have time to learn anything, so I’ll just leap in by noting beecee’s comment: “that because there are many unqualified people that come to a science forum to tell everyone participating, how mainstream science has got it wrong, and they have the answer!”  Well, by gum, I’m undoubtedly one of those, but then I’m a Life Member of Mensa, a member of ISPE, and was once Regent of the Triple Nine Society, so I must be smart . . . I think.  Anyway I can’t help responding to alexcouch’s observation “You can't really have nothing, cause if there is nothing, then why is there something within this nothing? There is matter within this void and that honestly doesn't make any sense.”My personal thoughts on this might be uninteresting and ill-informed, ... ...

Tim Peake, the ESA astronaut ,told me an interesting story a few months ago. 

One of the people he knows was desperate to become an astronaut, he joined the USAF, trained as a fighter pilot, became a test pilot and applied. He failed the tryouts. 

A few years later he left the air force and retrained as a medical doctor. A couple years later NASA advertised for doctors to become astronauts to support the longer duration missions. He applied and was successful. A route to his dream that didn't even exist when he started out and one he never thought would happen. 

10 minutes ago, inverse said:

sorry I can't reply to this question  to protect  copyrights ,I applied patent institute and will await after completion of PCT application

Then you're unlikely to get help in a public forum. Sorry but without even the most basic information that you've failed to supply we cannot draw any conclusions. 

3 hours ago, alexcouch said:

Thank you so much for your input! I was absolutely hoping for a response like this. I knew that there were inconsistencies, and I am glad that you pointed out and explained each inconsistency and flaw with this idea. When I say "independent research" I was mainly reading up on various reputable sources from various university websites that have certain topics that they have explained by lecturers posted online. I also have been listening to some physicists on youtube talk as well, but that can get a little sketchy, cause it's youtube after all. And then the chargeless and massless part I learned from cause I did not know that photons were massless and chargeless, but I did have "light" in mind because I knew that light was massless but didn't think that it was chargeless, but we are all wrong sometimes! I really am looking to get into this kind of field one way or another, but again, I gotta take baby steps. This was just an idea that I had that I wanted to bounce off already established laws and theories before I start doing anything serious with it!

Thank you for that congrats! I like to try to stay humble with my ideas because I don't like to get cocky with this kind of stuff. I am completely unqualified and I really wanted to dive into the world of physics to try and better prove or disprove any ideas I may have. I do agree that I should get into some books and attend some courses but I gotta stick to my game design school so I don't fail it and miss out on a great opportunity like a B.S. in Game Design, you know?

Both of you guys really helped me understand a lot! Thank you for your guys' inputs!

Stay, ask questions about the things you've read. You'll be amazed by what you can learn, I am almost every day. You've got a great attitude

Certainly a careful control should have been run at the same time. Along with careful handling (gloves as a minimum). 

Also reversing by completely removing the data would have been a sensible step. 

1 hour ago, Strange said:

There is a physical difference between "erased" and data stored. Storing data means injecting electrons through an insulator onto an isolated conductor. So there will be a difference in energy (and, presumably, the number of electrons). I haven't done any calculations yet but it seems surprising that it would be easy to measure...

Thank you for filling in some of my unknowns. Flash memory is something that seems to have fallen through things I've learnt about over the years. 

Some reading that you might find interesting:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/black-hole-computers-2007-04/ (I first read about this concept years ago it may have changed but I cannot find anything more recent).

https://arxiv.org/abs/1309.7889 does information have made? The answer is situation dependent it seems. I've only read the abstract so it might be dross. 

I did wonder about this as the SD card is already full of data, it's just not useful? This might be my missunderstanding of how we cards work. I'm far more comfortable with hard disk physics. 

Mathematics isn't terribly specific and wouldn't tend to include observations. What would you be observing? 

Government research establishments is an interesting 3rd way between academia and industry. Normally less teaching than academia but also less freedom to explore your own direction. These are often quite confined and less inclined to do the big blue sky research than academia. But rather the next step somewhere before industry might pick it up. 

None that I know of out of he box. I've done something similar in the past using both R and MATLAB. But you'd need to write the code to do it.