-
last updated on: 27/11/14 03:45AM

About the author

Contact the author
Categories

Latest blog posts
eurs du soccer nike free run pas cher homme vers cer
[27/11/14 03:45AM]
air max 90 pas cher Dj aux rgion
[27/11/14 03:44AM]
aces air max france pas cher exactem
[07/11/14 09:26AM]
10 air jordan pas cher homme en cuenta
[07/11/14 09:26AM]
max 1 pas cher nudit ne trompant pas
[31/10/14 05:04AM]
Photo Albums








    canada goose pas cher france Now [06/10/14 07:44AM]   
Rate this post  
And what the flaws in our present fomulation of the laws of physics may be. I just hope the inevitable revelation that the experiment was probably in error doesn't put a damper on that. a blog does not equate to researchers. I was interested and I also paid out interest. They didn't point a finger and declare with complete certainty that they experienced carried out it. Their report was more of, "we received a outcome, it repeats, but we aren't certain why." which is much from a definitive result. I cannot manage what bloggers and non scientist alike get excited about. I found it chanel solde fascinating and like the scientists wanted others to attempt a replication of the check or at least provide a purpose for the seemingly not possible result Of course it was flawed. Everybody understood that almost instantly. This is why it's so important to properly evaluation and confirm new information prior to heading community with it, you don't need to get people all excited over nothing. It makes the whole scientific community appear silly. One of the most basic tenets of science is reproducibility. That means this outcome ought to be able to be produced again and once more, ideally NOT on the same (evidently damaged) gear. Did they do this? Nicely they reproduced it, but they used acheter casque beats the precise exact same equipment, in the precise exact same configuration. It stands to reason that they are probably heading to get the exact same bogus outcome. canada goose pas cher france Now if someone can actually corroborate these results and produce superluminal neutrinos, that is a whole different story. As it stands this is just another case of researchers looking for their 15 minutes of fame. I believe skildude responded nicely, but you do not seem to concur, and so I inquire, how are scientists intended to reproduce some thing they do not even know about it, simply because feasible findings had been not made public, hmmm? Catch 22. Understanding doudoune canada goose pas cher a ships location you could beam a concept from Washington DC straight to the ship. Messages could be encoded but it would be pointless simply because the neutrinos wouldnt be detected unless of course someone setup a detector system in between the ships and sender or beyond the ships on their own. either way the concept beats by dre france would be not likely to be detected by anyone other than the anticipated receiver. Can I sign up for a patent on this correct now!!! How about the notion about time then? We know that powerful gravitational fields is slowing time down. Einstein's well-known equation E=mc2 "only" is trying to relate matter to the corresponding power it signifies, but what about a possible equation which relates time to the pace of mild? Is time something which is getting a definition at all? The 2nd paragraph might suggest that gravity and time is relating to every other. But any equation (I guess an equation neeeds constants, not variables)



   Trackbacks

      TRACKBACK URL: http://lundaowo11.blogghy.com/trackback/5053

   Comments

   Post a comment
Name:


Email:


4 + 4 = ?

Please write above the sum of these two integers

Title:


Comments:




Powered by Blogghy

Page generated in 0.1111 seconds.