# Faster than light observed at NASA.



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

Why is it that when we observe what we expect we accept it but when we see what a guy too dumb to comb his hair says it cant be we accept the hairy fool?

NASA stunned: Scientist asked 'was Einstein wrong?' after object broke laws of physics


----------



## fncceo (Oct 7, 2019)

There are ways to travel distances faster than the speed of light that don't violate Einstein's observations. Space warping being only one of them.

The article also suggests, and quite rightly, that our own perception of the speed of these observed galaxies may be skewed and they are actually traveling much more slowly than we think.


----------



## Oddball (Oct 7, 2019)

Einstein got a lot of things right enough to make modern life beter...Science is an ongoing process.


----------



## Oddball (Oct 7, 2019)

fncceo said:


> There are ways to travel distances faster than the speed of light that don't violate Einstein's observations. Space warping being only one of them.


Worm hole...Then you don't even have to travel in anything that needs to go that fast.


----------



## wamose (Oct 7, 2019)

Cool Pappa Bell was faster than light 70 years ago. They say he was so fast that he could turn the bedroom light switch off and then be under the covers before the room got dark.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

fncceo said:


> There are ways to travel distances faster than the speed of light that don't violate Einstein's observations. Space warping being only one of them.
> 
> The article also suggests, and quite rightly, that our own perception of the speed of these observed galaxies may be skewed and they are actually traveling much more slowly than we think.


It is also posisble that they are going the speed that they are observed at or faster.  Space warping, okeedokee the universe could also be just a computer program


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

wamose said:


> Cool Pappa Bell was faster than light 70 years ago. They say he was so fast that he could turn the bedroom light switch off and then be under the covers before the room got dark.


Like i said when the observations do not fit into your religious parameters you ignore and mock it to protect your religion


----------



## wamose (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> wamose said:
> 
> 
> > Cool Pappa Bell was faster than light 70 years ago. They say he was so fast that he could turn the bedroom light switch off and then be under the covers before the room got dark.
> ...


What I said is urban legend and has nothing to do with religion. Cool Papa Bell played baseball in the negro league from 1922-1946. They say he was the fastest man that ever lived. He hit one up the middle once and was called out when the ball hit him sliding into second.


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

The article in the OP seems thin on details ... why do they think these objects are moving faster than light? ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

wamose said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > wamose said:
> ...


So suddenly you have no opinion on the science that turns einstein into a nothing


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 7, 2019)

Oddball said:


> Einstein got a lot of things right enough to make modern life beter...Science is an ongoing process.



Except climate change which is of course, the only settled science ever


----------



## wamose (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> wamose said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


I never did have an opinion about it. I'm not qualified to call Einstein a dummy, period. And if we got along with Einstein's theory of relativity all these years and it's the basis for modern physics, why should I get uptight about some alleged finding? Maybe it's right and maybe it's wrong and maybe it's different in the galaxy they were observing. I wish you well in your search for truth.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

wamose said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > wamose said:
> ...


Einstein was and always will be the fool who claimed that the universe was not expanding according to his physics.   I find it comical that you and others take his physics fully seriously when according to what you believe now he was totally wrong


----------



## G.T. (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> wamose said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


"Einstein was a fool."

-Frannie, on the internet


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

Just curious, Frannie, do you also think Maxwell is totally wrong ... that force is indeed "action from afar" ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Just curious, Frannie, do you also think Maxwell is totally wrong ... that force is indeed "action from afar" ...


There are many kinds of forces, are you referring to maxwell the piggy arriving home in mrs h van?

Wheeeeeeeeeeeee


This is pretty clear however


----------



## Confounding (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Einstein was and always will be the fool



Said some nobody on a message board.


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

James Maxwell and his theory concerning electro-magnetism ... the first real chink in Newton's theories that broke open the areas of relativity and QM ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

Confounding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Einstein was and always will be the fool
> ...


I just repeated einsteins claim that based on his math that the universe was static or not expanding.
So einstein was the fool that believed that not me.  That said since the motion can not be explained by math perhaps tyson is right and we all exist on a hard drive.   What tyson misses is that if he is right, the drive belongs to god


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> James Maxwell and his theory concerning electro-magnetism ... the first real chink in Newton's theories that broke open the areas of relativity and QM ...


Heisenberg's uncertainty principle came first with respect to qm

Lol electromagnetism is archaic


----------



## wamose (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> wamose said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You must be a liberal to be able to read that much into something (me) that you're clueless about. Are you part of this current coup against Trump?


----------



## wamose (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Confounding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


If the universe stretches to infinity, how can it expand?


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

wamose said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > wamose said:
> ...


You are a bitter beaten fool.  The whistleblowers are pranks against Schiff, no clue


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

Heisenberg's uncertainty principle came over 100 years after Field Theory was demonstrated, over 50 years after the robust proof was published ... you've evaded the question: do you think electro-magnetic forces are fraudulent? ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

wamose said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Confounding said:
> ...


No one knows what the universe is.  Expansion refers to matter either traveling away from the big bang or now as some speculate being pulled from outside the universe.

Be certain that I know far more about my portfolio than the universe


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Heisenberg's uncertainty principle came over 100 years after Field Theory was demonstrated, over 50 years after the robust proof was published ... you've evaded the question: do you think electro-magnetic forces are fraudulent? ...


What I am saying is that electromagnetism is old news.  Quantum computing with entanglement is the future.  Be pretty cool to be entangled with a webcam on Mars and have the info get to and back in nanoseconds....  Or computers without wires using DNA storage

Put down the book kid or you will die in the past


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

You think GR is fresh off the presses? ... odd ... you've claimed Einstein is wrong, I'm asking if you think Maxwell is wrong as well ... why are you having such a difficult time answering such a simple question? ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> You think GR is fresh off the presses? ... odd ... you've claimed Einstein is wrong, I'm asking if you think Maxwell is wrong as well ... why are you having such a difficult time answering such a simple question? ...


I am not having a difficult time, you are as you have some delusion that I must answer to you.

I don't.  Sorry to burst your bubble.

PS. Again there is no award for the history major.  The award goes to the history maker who goes where no man has gone before and gets there by his own hand


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

But you do answer me ... you have no idea who Maxwell is nor his connection to Einstein ... the more you respond to me, the more you tell me about yourself ... this is your thread, I assumed you wanted to discuss the matter in the OP ... foolish that I should deceive myself so quickly ...


----------



## miketx (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> But you do answer me ... you have no idea who Maxwell is nor his connection to Einstein ... the more you respond to me, the more you tell me about yourself ... this is your thread, I assumed you wanted to discuss the matter in the OP ... foolish that I should deceive myself so quickly ...


You just like a progressive. No science is set in stone. Newton's theories on gravity have been augmented when new understanding was reached.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> But you do answer me ... you have no idea who Maxwell is nor his connection to Einstein ... the more you respond to me, the more you tell me about yourself ... this is your thread, I assumed you wanted to discuss the matter in the OP ... foolish that I should deceive myself so quickly ...


Every time a new life comes into the world, the world and universe itself are reborn as the new life is blank to knowledge.

The fact is that you could study the past for a hundred years and never learn 1 percent of it.  Unfortunately you would never move.

Entanglement is showing instant results, does this mean we can converse with another galaxy?

Gates was a dropout, consider that

Edison never saw a day in school

You keep on studying.......Just don't wake up one day being old


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

miketx said:


> ReinyDays said:
> 
> 
> > But you do answer me ... you have no idea who Maxwell is nor his connection to Einstein ... the more you respond to me, the more you tell me about yourself ... this is your thread, I assumed you wanted to discuss the matter in the OP ... foolish that I should deceive myself so quickly ...
> ...


No one knows what gravity is, sure we can calculate its effects, but gravity, time, and space remain unknowns


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

miketx said:


> ReinyDays said:
> 
> 
> > But you do answer me ... you have no idea who Maxwell is nor his connection to Einstein ... the more you respond to me, the more you tell me about yourself ... this is your thread, I assumed you wanted to discuss the matter in the OP ... foolish that I should deceive myself so quickly ...
> ...



Newton rules supreme in the areas of science that interest me ... in some circumstances, this doesn't give good enough results and need to use the more refined principles of GR ... yes, I do think we need to progress beyond GR and find the even more basic nature of the universe ... but I don't think it's enough to say "such-and-such is wrong" without also adding "because this-and-that is correct" ... my own Crackpot Theory™ is the speed-of-light is slowing down over time, it's not that the galaxies are moving away from us, rather the light they emit is moving faster ... ha ha ha ... should only have to wait a couple billion years to find out ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > ReinyDays said:
> ...


Or we could use an entangled communication devise to search the galaxy for intelligent life and once found communicate all forms in info. Possibly expanding science by a million years a day. We might even learn more than the crash chips taught us

But you keep toying with electromagnetism.


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 7, 2019)

Wouldn't we have to build a "entangled communication device" first? ... this is the basis of Gene Roddenberry's  transporters in _Star Trek _... I do believe we'll need electricity to run the thing, something you don't believe in it appears ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 7, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Wouldn't we have to build a "entangled communication device" first? ... this is the basis of Gene Roddenberry's  transporters in _Star Trek _... I do believe we'll need electricity to run the thing, something you don't believe in it appears ...


That devise would be needed to transport matter.  All we really need is the information to understand ourselves and the universe better.  Theoretically anyway


----------



## fncceo (Oct 7, 2019)

Frannie said:


> the universe could also be just a computer program



Recent observations from long range telescopes suggest you may be right.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 8, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Wouldn't we have to build a "entangled communication device" first? ... this is the basis of Gene Roddenberry's  transporters in _Star Trek _... I do believe we'll need electricity to run the thing, something you don't believe in it appears ...


As of now I just read that a 2000 atom cluster has been quantum superimposed

Giant Molecules Exist in Two Places at Once in Unprecedented Quantum Experiment

Still data suits me fine


----------



## james bond (Oct 8, 2019)

fncceo said:


> There are ways to travel distances faster than the speed of light that don't violate Einstein's observations. Space warping being only one of them.
> 
> The article also suggests, and quite rightly, that our own perception of the speed of these observed galaxies may be skewed and they are actually traveling much more slowly than we think.



This is what Star Trek had with warp drive and warp speed I think.  Then in 1994 this physicist named Alcubierrecame up with a new technological idea which seemed based on the show and his idea for Alcubierre Drive -- NASA Admits Alcubierre Drive Initiative: Faster Than The Speed Of Light.  It was followed by more new ideas.

"In 1994, physicist Miguel Alcubierre formulated a theoretical solution, called the Alcubierre drive, for faster-than-light travel which models the warp drive concept. Calculations found that such a model would require prohibitive amounts of negative energy or mass.[9]

In 2012, NASA researcher Harold White hypothesized that by changing the shape of the warp drive, much less negative mass and energy could be used, though the energy required ranges from the mass of Voyager 1 to the mass of the observable universe, or many orders of magnitude greater than anything currently possible by modern technology. NASA engineers have begun preliminary research into such technology.[10]

In 2018, the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency made public a 2010 report that surveyed multiple different approaches to faster-than-light travel. Caltech professor Sean Carroll, who reviewed the report, explained that, while the theories were legitimate, they did not represent "something that's going to connect with engineering anytime soon, probably anytime ever."[11]"

Warp drive - Wikipedia

If DoD is involved, then they must be getting closer to FTL travel.  They're denying it which means the opposite lol.  I can't believe Frannie knew what he was talking about in some ways about this one, i.e. watched the show.


----------



## fncceo (Oct 8, 2019)

Space warping isn't breaking the limit of C.  Instead of traveling faster than light, you're bending space to shorten the distance traveled to achieve the equivalent of FTL travel without actually going faster.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 9, 2019)

james bond said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> > There are ways to travel distances faster than the speed of light that don't violate Einstein's observations. Space warping being only one of them.
> ...


Yea it's exactly like warp drive from star trek

Quick call spanky


----------



## james bond (Oct 9, 2019)

fncceo said:


> Space warping isn't breaking the limit of C.  Instead of traveling faster than light, you're bending space to shorten the distance traveled to achieve the equivalent of FTL travel without actually going faster.



It's the hyperspace that Star Wars brought up -- A physicist explains why Star Wars isn't entirely fiction.  It fits Frannie level science.  However, there are people who have hypothesis to support it like I posted before.  That said, we have to achieve some breakthroughs just to get to test anything or get to anything close.  It means going to Mars in months as a stepping stone or something like that.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 9, 2019)

james bond said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> > Space warping isn't breaking the limit of C.  Instead of traveling faster than light, you're bending space to shorten the distance traveled to achieve the equivalent of FTL travel without actually going faster.
> ...


The millennium falcon did not use entanglement kid.  The fact is that sci fy writers typically use theoretical physics phrases to amaze morons like you


----------



## james bond (Oct 9, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > fncceo said:
> ...









I was explaining your moronic thesis.  Entanglement does not mean FTL communications which exceed c.  It could mean quantum particles are using warp speed.  Bell hypothesized superdeterminism, but that would imply no free will as nature predetermines everything.  CERN is trying to establish the 4th D first and seeing if gravitons exist.  The thesis of Patrick Johnson is pretty far out and has been around for a while now, but no breakthroughs.  It just fits the math so well.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 9, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Wrong as entanglement does not require dilithium Crystal's

Unlike your brain


----------



## james bond (Oct 9, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...



I figured you wouldn't get it .  One thesis which I think is pretty good is what I laid out in my previous post.  It includes strings tied to quantum gravity, but we still need several breakthroughs before even getting close to FTL travel.  It means you don't have to go to sleep nor worry about being crushed by gravity.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 9, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...



What we need is a good examination and understanding of how the cubes toying with F18's make instant right angled turns at or above mach10

We do not need an examination of Gene Roddenberry's fictional starship


----------



## fncceo (Oct 9, 2019)

Frannie said:


> What we need is a good examination and understanding of how the cubes toying with F18's



Or concede they're doing no such thing.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 9, 2019)

fncceo said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > What we need is a good examination and understanding of how the cubes toying with F18's
> ...


https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...os-are-real-navy-says-please-stop-saying-ufo/

Now we must say UAP...UFO is out of vogue


----------



## james bond (Oct 10, 2019)

Frannie said:


> What we need is a good examination and understanding of how the cubes toying with F18's make instant right angled turns at or above mach10



We'll probably never know because good examinations are not possible.  That's why they're unidentified .  One also needs a trained observer with them.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 10, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > What we need is a good examination and understanding of how the cubes toying with F18's make instant right angled turns at or above mach10
> ...


All f18 pilots are trained, but you are really only observing radar hits at mach 10 or better.

We as in you and I will never know unless they land and say hi


----------



## james bond (Oct 10, 2019)

Frannie said:


> All f18 pilots are trained, but you are really only observing radar hits at mach 10 or better.
> 
> We as in you and I will never know unless they land and say hi




It's a different subject than FTL travel, but creation scientists have a theory about ufos/uaps.  They won't land; they'll keep being reported as ufos/uaps.  The alien abductions and landings are what people make up.

What do I keep saying about prince of the power of the air and where does he and his followers reside?  In the air and out in space.  Listen to the pilot in the video.  He's being deceived.  You're being deceived.  And suddenly we have... aliens.

ETA:  It's more evidence for you know who, but he wants to hide and is too powerful, so it's not a winning argument for creationists so we just keep it to ourselves .


----------



## Frannie (Oct 10, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > All f18 pilots are trained, but you are really only observing radar hits at mach 10 or better.
> ...


Shit I just accepted that it was a weather balloon too.  Now its unidentified aerial phenomenon.  This seems to be a big step if it is on the level...


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 10, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Entanglement is showing instant results, does this mean we can converse with another galaxy?





Frannie said:


> Or we could use an entangled communication devise to search the galaxy for intelligent life and once found communicate all forms in info.





Frannie said:


> Be pretty cool to be entangled with a webcam on Mars and have the info get to and back in nanoseconds.



*You cannot use entanglement for instant communication.* 

That is a misunderstanding by many who do not understand what entanglement is.

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 10, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Entanglement is showing instant results, does this mean we can converse with another galaxy?
> ...


You couldn't get 5G internet on your phone 20 years ago either.

Could you

They have already sent entangled photon images, I say one color for 0 and another color for 1
Quantum Photo Finish | DiscoverMagazine.com

Or would you only need one color because 1 color could be 2 colors at the same time?


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Entanglement is showing instant results, does this mean we can converse with another galaxy?
> ...


Entanglement is a discovery, the thing is that future discoveries effect what older discoveries can be used for,  Who would have thought that a nuclear explosion would lead to nearly inexhaustible power for land sea and space.  The only weird thing about entanglement is that it does not fit into classical science as it is known, which merely points out how much still remains unknown


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> You couldn't get 5G internet on your phone 20 years ago either.
> 
> Could you


Non-sequitur.


Frannie said:


> They have already sent entangled photon images, I say one color for 0 and another color for 1
> Quantum Photo Finish | DiscoverMagazine.com
> 
> Or would you only need one color because 1 color could be 2 colors at the same time?


The example you cite is an imaging application not an instant communication application.

*You cannot use entanglement for instant communication.*
.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > You couldn't get 5G internet on your phone 20 years ago either.
> ...


The super genius missed out on Morse code class

Precious

PS The image of the entangled photon cat contained information

Do try again


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Entanglement is a discovery, the thing is that future discoveries effect what older discoveries can be used for, Who would have thought that a nuclear explosion would lead to nearly inexhaustible power for land sea and space. The only weird thing about entanglement is that it does not fit into classical science as it is known, which merely points out how much still remains unknown


Entanglement is a discovery 1 hundred years ago.
Many quantum phenomena do not fit in classical science. 

.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> The super genius missed out on Morse code class
> 
> Precious


You missed the fact that *you cannot use entanglement for instant communication. Period.*

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Entanglement is a discovery, the thing is that future discoveries effect what older discoveries can be used for, Who would have thought that a nuclear explosion would lead to nearly inexhaustible power for land sea and space. The only weird thing about entanglement is that it does not fit into classical science as it is known, which merely points out how much still remains unknown
> ...


They sent an entangled image of schrodinger's cat.

An image is information


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > The super genius missed out on Morse code class
> ...


The cat was and is information

You are proven wrong


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> An image is information


Yes, an image is information, but it was not instant communication. The authors of the article did not say it was instant communication. Only you did.
.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > An image is information
> ...


Entanglement is instant

Get over it you just babbled that information could not be sent apparently being too ignorant to know that this had already been achieved

F


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Entanglement is instant
> 
> Get over it you just babbled that information could not be sent apparently being too ignorant to know that this had already been achieved
> 
> F


Discovery of the remote state of a particle by measuring an entangled property of the local particle gives instant knowledge of the remote particle state. Before the measurement of the local particle state, nothing is known about the state of either particle. Tell me how you can communicate instantly with that.

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Entanglement is instant
> ...


Face it you need to hand over the keys now..  if a cat image can be sent then any image can be sent. Including the images of the 26 letters in the alphabet you are using now.

Visionary thinkers do not live in shrodingers box


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Face it you need to hand over the keys now.. if a cat image can be sent then any image can be sent. Including the images of the 26 letters in the alphabet you are using now.
> 
> Visionary thinkers do not live in shrodingers box


To be a visionary thinker, you first must know how to think. Read your article again. They did not send the cat image superluminally.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Face it you need to hand over the keys now.. if a cat image can be sent then any image can be sent. Including the images of the 26 letters in the alphabet you are using now.
> ...


I am not living in individual articles.  I am living and thinking in free space.  An article is a little picture, one can understand the little picture and not see the complete scene.  Bill Gates was studying at Harvard when he saw the big picture and promptly dropped out to build it.

You study hard now


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> I am not living in individual articles. I am living and thinking in free space. An article is a little picture, one can understand the little picture and not see the complete scene. Bill Gates was studying at Harvard when he saw the big picture and promptly dropped out to build it.
> 
> You study hard now


Yes, I understand. You dearly want instantaneous or faster than light communication to be a fact. We all do. All scientists and technical people do. But you can't do it with entanglement. Having a vision of a better technical future is nice. But you also have to figure out how to, (and how not to) approach it. If you like to visualize the future but have no idea how to achieve that, then it has to remain science fiction. I am not saying that superluminal communication is not possible for all far in the future technology, I am saying that entanglement as we now understand it is not the right idea. 

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > I am not living in individual articles. I am living and thinking in free space. An article is a little picture, one can understand the little picture and not see the complete scene. Bill Gates was studying at Harvard when he saw the big picture and promptly dropped out to build it.
> ...


You can't do it is your philosophy, I do not share your negative outlook.  Never did and as such have done it so to speak

As for entanglement being old, this is just not true as every learn able thing  or discovery is as old as time, only human understanding changes.

Furthermore entanglement has already sent information as you claimed it could not.  You just cant see the big picture


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> You can't do it is your philosophy, I do not share your negative outlook. Never did and as such have done it so to speak


My outlook is this:
No-communication theorem - Wikipedia
My negative outlook?? That's the pot calling the kettle black. You have a totally negative outlook on abiogenesis. That does not stretch the laws of physics while entanglement being superluminal communication does stretch it.


Frannie said:


> As for entanglement being old, this is just not true as every learn able thing or discovery is as old as time, only human understanding changes.


Of course.


Frannie said:


> Furthermore entanglement has already sent information as you claimed it could not. You just cant see the big picture


Entanglement is valuable for transmitting secure information. But it can only do it at light speed.

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > You can't do it is your philosophy, I do not share your negative outlook. Never did and as such have done it so to speak
> ...


Any 8 year old can post to wikipedia.....

Nice source for your rambles

Lol abiogenesis, the belief that the most powerful and complicated code in the known universe a code that by its nature violates all natural physical laws created itself one day in a pond.  Tyson knows full well this is impossible so now he says that the universe is a program on a hard drive.  Now he knows this is nonsense but the program and the hard drive require a programmer......

Long ago revealed as god, so Tyson is merely calling God a programmer, and since DNA is molecular code Tyson is quite right to call God a programmer.

Time does change the understanding of what has always been

Your loss on the computer particle data entanglement front is accepted, your deflection to a topic that can not be proved or disproved is comical


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Any 8 year old can post to wikipedia.....
> 
> Nice source for your rambles
> 
> ...


As far as abiogenesis, I am living and thinking in free space. You can't do it is your philosophy, I do not share your negative outlook. Never did... Your rejection of even a possibility of abiogenesis is quite comical.

I accept that you disbelieve modern physics. You are very much like SSDD in that regard. 

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Any 8 year old can post to wikipedia.....
> ...


Lol, be my guest and demonstrate abiogenesis

I will personally hand you your Nobel prize if you choose, that is providing you do not fall on your face again

So do you really feel that special

Again how did life form in a pond if as renowned physicist Tyson says that everything including the pond are actually computer code?

Tyson needs your help, and a good shrink as well

See what is happening with Tyson is that he is coming to grips that God is a scientific necessity, he just refuses to say God but says programmer

God does not care what he is called, just that we follow our programming and survive and thrive


----------



## Harry Dresden (Oct 11, 2019)

wamose said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > wamose said:
> ...


i hate that when that happens...


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Lol, be my guest and demonstrate abiogenesis


Abiogenesis, what ever it was, followed laws of chemistry. Superluminal information transfer does not.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Lol, be my guest and demonstrate abiogenesis
> ...


Nope, the code in DNA is information, it is a complicated molecular code.  Combine any and every chemical you choose, you will get chemical reactions of all types, but you will never get a complicated string of base 4 codes needed to form life. (you will never get one string either)

This is not science because there is no evidence to show that this could happen, science requires evidence gathered and proved.  Shit mitochondria under electron examination is made of what appear to be molecular motors.  DNA is engineering, not in any way natural.  When we go to Mars we will reengineer the DNA for the new environment.

Do you doubt that?

The engineer is effectively God

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(00)81140-X

Rotary DNA motors.  - PubMed - NCBI


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Nope, the code in DNA is information, it is a complicated molecular code. Combine any and every chemical you choose, you will get chemical reactions of all types, but you will never get a complicated string of base 4 codes needed to form life. (you will never get one string either)
> 
> This is not science because there is no evidence to show that this could happen, science requires evidence gathered and proved. Shit mitochondria under electron examination is made of what appear to be molecular motors. DNA is engineering, not in any way natural. When we go to Mars we will reengineer the DNA for the new environment.



You lack imagination. You think life in it's final form must suddenly pop up for abiogenesis to be valid. Look up Markov Chains. Chains of many small steps can precede the first stage of life.

A card game where all four players are dealt a royal flush is highly improbable. If there are trillions of trillions of card games being played continually for millions of years, the low probability becomes almost a certainty. That also holds for a small chain of DNA starting a crude spark of life. Evolution does the rest. 

In short, Abiogenesis does not violate physics. Superluminal information transfer does.
.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, the code in DNA is information, it is a complicated molecular code. Combine any and every chemical you choose, you will get chemical reactions of all types, but you will never get a complicated string of base 4 codes needed to form life. (you will never get one string either)
> ...



The really funny thing here is that you switched this conversation to abiogenesis after you said that entanglement could not send information, then I proved that it already had.  So this entire abiogenesis conversation is happening because you humiliated yourself at not knowing that images of animals are considered information and as such I was correct and you are stuck behind the 8 ball

Schrödinger's cat caught on quantum film






Schrödinger’s cat is the poster child for quantum weirdness. Now it has been immortalised in a portrait created by one of the theory’s strangest consequences: quantum entanglement.

These images were generated using a cat stencil and entangled photons. The really spooky part is that the photons used to generate the image never interacted with the stencil, while the photons that illuminated the stencil were never seen by the camera.


When two separate particles are entangled, measurements of their physical properties are correlated, and they effectively share a single quantum state. Gabriela Barreto Lemos at the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna and her colleagues used this quantum connection between particles to make these images of a cat without directly photographing it.

To do it, the researchers created yellow and red pairs of entangled photons. The yellow photons were fired at the cat stencil, while the red photons were sent to the camera. Thanks to their entanglement, the red photons formed the image of the cat because of the quantum link to their yellow twins.

The silicon stencil was transparent to red light and the camera could only detect red light. This demonstrates that the technique can image objects that are invisible to the detected photons

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26111-schrodingers-cat-caught-on-quantum-film/#ixzz625JQpGpI

LOL so you think the parts of DNA could have formed and then combined themselves in the right order to form anything.

Please demonstrate


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > ReinyDays said:
> ...


Nah, makes too much sense. Like you're saying light speed increases where the Aether is thin or something. Crazy!


----------



## daveman (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> wamose said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Einstein thought he was right based on what was observable at the time.

Obviously, we can see more of the universe now.

About 20 years ago I bought a 1902 world atlas at an estate sale.  It was a magnificent work.  But it was based on what we knew at the time.  And at the time, we know the only timely means of travelling across the US (which had only 45 states) was by rail, and the _entire universe_ was only 100,000 light years across.  Currently, the furthest galaxy we're seen is 133,000 times further than that.  

So, yeah, it's no huge surprise the ideas about the universe change the more we can see of it.


----------



## daveman (Oct 11, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Just curious, Frannie, do you also think Maxwell is totally wrong ... that force is indeed "action from afar" ...


Would that be force applied with his silver hammer?


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Lol, be my guest and demonstrate abiogenesis
> ...



What laws of chemistry?  Abiogenesis does not happen outside the cell.  It's chemistry inside the cell.  Atheists are usually wrong.


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 11, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> Nah, makes too much sense. Like you're saying light speed increases where the Aether is thin or something. Crazy!



The æther would be thicker, denser, propagates light faster ... but I like the way you think ...


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> you said that entanglement could not send information


That is a lie. I said entanglement could *not* be used for communication *faster than light*.


Frannie said:


> So this entire abiogenesis conversation is happening because you humiliated yourself at not knowing that images of animals are considered information


That is a lie. You started a topic on negative outlook. I demonstrated you have a negative outlook. Here:


Wuwei said:


> My negative outlook?? That's the pot calling the kettle black. You have a totally negative outlook on abiogenesis.


Having demonstrated you have a negative outlook we can abort that topic, unless you really want to continue it.

BTW, nice pictures to demonstrate an interesting aspect of entanglement. But it does *not* demonstrate that it is *faster than light*.
.


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Wuwei said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...



You are posting one-time information.  You sent the cat that was already created.  However, if the person who received it changes a particle, then the particles are not entangled anymore and thus you can't communicate.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> What laws of chemistry? Abiogenesis does not happen outside the cell. It's chemistry inside the cell. Atheists are usually wrong.


If you are going to start this atheist crap, I'm not interested.
.


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

Relativity is shit.
QM is shit.
Space time and QM are hopelessly entangled, interdependent shit. Much like Republicans and Democrats. Best to forget them and move forward with what was fairly common knowledge before either thought conspiracy distracted everything.


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > Nah, makes too much sense. Like you're saying light speed increases where the Aether is thin or something. Crazy!
> ...


Probably so. Left my thinking cap out in the garage.


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > What laws of chemistry? Abiogenesis does not happen outside the cell. It's chemistry inside the cell. Atheists are usually wrong.
> ...



First, you didn't answer my question about what laws of chemistry causes abiogenesis?  Even with your Markov chains.  

Next, I made a statement that atheists are usually wrong.  Now, you are upset that I am discussing atheists.  Is it because I pointed out that you were WRONG haha.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> First, you didn't answer my question about what laws of chemistry causes abiogenesis? Even with your Markov chains.
> 
> Next, I made a statement that atheists are usually wrong. Now, you are upset that I am discussing atheists. Is it because I pointed out that you were WRONG haha.


For a Christian, you are quite an asshole.
.


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> That is a lie. I said entanglement could *not* be used for communication *faster than light*.



I think that's what you said or meant with _instant_ communication.  I would say it's one-time instant communication.  Not two-way.

ETA:  But the receiver would have to know when you took the measurement, so something would have be set up in advance.


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> The æther would be thicker, denser, propagates light faster ...



c is taken to be in a "vacuum" and thus maximal where gases are thin, no? Why would the Aether be thicker?


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > wamose said:
> ...


And now DeGrasse Tyson says that there is no universe, or more precisely that it and we are computer simulations on a hard drive.  Why? because exactly ZERO of Einstein's math adds up, as the math says 85 percent of the universe is missing.  The other think being speculated now is that expansion is happening from outside the universe.

All nonsense


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

Probability is real. Particulate electrons (and photons) are simply not. 


> No less of an authority than Albert Einstein was always uncomfortable with the whole wave function/probability distribution/fundamental uncertainty "thing" which is central to quantum mechanics.  As he once famously said, "God does not play dice".  However, the indeterminacy of quantum mechanics comes straight from the basic mathematics of the theory, and as Niels Bohr famously replied to Einstein, "God not only plays dice, he throws them where they cannot be seen".
> 
> The theory of quantum mechanics can be reformatted, so to speak, such that the electron does have a specific, but unknown position, as opposed to being everywhere at once with differing probabilities.  Such theories are called hidden variable theories, for the obvious reason.  In most situations standard quantum mechanics and the hidden variable theories predict exactly the same thing, so there isn't much practical difference between the two.  However, there are complicated, somewhat exotic situations in which they do not predict the same outcome, and physicists have examined these.  The experiments are challenging to carry out, and one or two have in fact seemed to favor hidden variables over quantum mechanics.  However, the great bulk of the experiments favor standard quantum mechanics, and as time goes by quantum mechanics is lengthening its lead over hidden variables.  It would seem that the Universe is perfectly happy to be a place where "particles", at the most smallest and most fundamental level, simply *do not exist.*


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> Wuwei said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


All the laws of any and every chemical reaction.  No chemical reaction can produce complicated or very simple code.  Only intelligence does this


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > First, you didn't answer my question about what laws of chemistry causes abiogenesis? Even with your Markov chains.
> ...



If it's to demonstrate that abiogenesis does not happen, then I am willing to be called a Christian arse hole.  What Pasteur showed was only life begats life, but the evolutionists continue to believe in their abiogenesis as "faith based" science.  You're the one who brought up abiogenesis.

I am willing to agree with you on the "instant" or "FTL" communication using quantum entanglement.  It's not really a good medium for communications except for one time or you take measurements every hour on the hour, but I'm not sure what information one could get out of that.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > You couldn't get 5G internet on your phone 20 years ago either.
> ...


Yea you did say that entanglement can not be used for communication.

Look don't fret, no one has ever beaten me, so you never had the chance really.

You will adjust, I adjusted a couple of law firms and the feds too.


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

Wearing one's ego on their sleeve tends to make it snotty.


Frannie said:


> Look don't fret, no one has ever beaten me, so you never had the chance really.


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Wuwei said:
> ...



Not intelligence.  The design of the system shows intelligence behind it.  Only life can begat other life.  Only through a living cell, can a chemical reaction occur to align the DNA to form another living organism.  This is impossible outside the cell.  Even if you have the same chemicals outside the cell, it does not happen.  This was shown by experiment, too.  With Darwin, he was handed a living cell in order to explain how ToE works.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Darwin is irrelevant, he never saw or dreamed of DNA, he thought life formed in a pool of goo


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Yea you did say that entanglement can not be used for communication.
> 
> Look don't fret, no one has ever beaten me, so you never had the chance really.
> 
> You will adjust, I adjusted a couple of law firms and the feds too.



I would agree with Wuwei, so he won that argument.  Entanglement can't be used for instant communication, but it would definitely be cool if it can.  All we know is its behavior.   I can't remember how Hawking was using it at the event horizon of a black hole, but it was just a thought experiment.

That said, CERN is using it to see if there are other dimensions, so quantum particles could give us more information on how gravity and our universe works.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Yea you did say that entanglement can not be used for communication.
> ...


You are a numbnut, woo woo lost and he admitted it when I posted the information THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SENT BY ENTANGLEMENT

AGAIN HERE IS THE INFORMATION ALREADY SENT AS AN IMAGE
This is not a debate, information has already been sent by entanglement, I was, am and always will be right in this.


----------



## james bond (Oct 11, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> Probability is real. Particulate electrons (and photons) are simply not.
> 
> 
> > No less of an authority than Albert Einstein was always uncomfortable with the whole wave function/probability distribution/fundamental uncertainty "thing" which is central to quantum mechanics.  As he once famously said, "God does not play dice".  However, the indeterminacy of quantum mechanics comes straight from the basic mathematics of the theory, and as Niels Bohr famously replied to Einstein, "God not only plays dice, he throws them where they cannot be seen".
> ...



>>Niels Bohr famously replied to Einstein, "God not only plays dice, he throws them where they cannot be seen".<<

God does not play dice.  Furthermore, I think that's Bohr's model of an electron on the left.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > Probability is real. Particulate electrons (and photons) are simply not.
> ...



So what?


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

james bond said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > Probability is real. Particulate electrons (and photons) are simply not.
> ...


Yes, that's the classic Bohr model. That kids are still being indoctrinated with that crap is a crime. The realistic model is the one on the right.


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

Frannie said:


> So what?


Electrons do not exist (as particles).
Gods neither for that matter (as supernatural planners or actors).

In that sense James is correct. "God does not play dice."  Dice exist.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > So what?
> ...


God brought life to the Earth, once life leaves the Earth by the hand of man, God is proved.  Since we are here now, God is already proved


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 11, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> c is taken to be in a "vacuum" and thus maximal where gases are thin, no? Why would the Aether be thicker?



There is no vacuum if there's æther ... that's the Crackpot part of this ... there's a mysterious and incredible substance that permeates the universe that doesn't interact with electro-magnetic radiation, it only propagates the waves ... the same as air is unaffected by the passage of sound waves ... the only way possible to detect the æther is to see if has any gravitation effects ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > c is taken to be in a "vacuum" and thus maximal where gases are thin, no? Why would the Aether be thicker?
> ...


Or see if it can be made into cake icing


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

If I had a tail I would chase it in a circle and not be a man. Since I have no tail fallacious reasoning is no reasoning at all.


ReinyDays said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > c is taken to be in a "vacuum" and thus maximal where gases are thin, no? Why would the Aether be thicker?
> ...


Agreed. That's why I put "vacuum" in quotes. The Aether is ubiquitous though it varies in density. It is the necessary medium for EM wave travel. Why do you  think it would be thicker (more dense) far from the theoretical center and why would the light go faster? Light measureably slows in glass, for example. Interestingly, sound waves go faster through solids.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 11, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> If I had a tail I would chase it in a circle and not be a man. Since I have no tail fallacious reasoning is no reasoning at all.
> 
> 
> ReinyDays said:
> ...


Either comes in  can


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

Thus the spelling of Aether.


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 11, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> Agreed. That's why I put "vacuum" in quotes. The Aether is ubiquitous though it varies in density. It is the necessary medium for EM wave travel. Why do you  think it would be thicker (more dense) far from the theoretical center and why would the light go faster? Light measureably slows in glass, for example. Interestingly, sound waves go faster through solids.



The universe was smaller when the light was emitted, and the æther was denser ... now the universe has expanded thinning out the æther ... it remains to be seen if the æther can be concentrated by gravity, and hopefully not as much as normal stuff ... and glass is normal stuff, it's not magical like æther is ... if you're going to be throwing counter-examples at me, I'll need some time to answer ... I'm kinda making this up as I go ...


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 11, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > Agreed. That's why I put "vacuum" in quotes. The Aether is ubiquitous though it varies in density. It is the necessary medium for EM wave travel. Why do you  think it would be thicker (more dense) far from the theoretical center and why would the light go faster? Light measureably slows in glass, for example. Interestingly, sound waves go faster through solids.
> ...


From what I've gathered the Aether was just the Aether before any Bang and is generally more dense in the presence of mass because it's always attempting to permeate it more than it has already. Gravity. No mass? No Aether. "Black Hole." Visible window into counterspace. Tremendously dense Aether all around creating new spiraling mass like crazy.


----------



## james bond (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...



Oh gawd, you're still stuck on this cat image?  It's only one-time, one-way communication.  Let's say at noon, we both agree to each do our part of the experiment.  You shoot the red photons towards the cat stencil while I shoot the yellow photons to the camera.  This way I can see what you sent.  However, it's only good for that one time and I got the reverse image.  It's very limited communications.  If there was some way for you to gather up the red photons while I gather up the yellow ones, then I can shoot it through a stencil and then you shoot it towards a camera.  Not really practical.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


They had 5g internet 30 years ago right

Kid I am investing in quantum 

You quote the science books

I'm investing in new ones


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 12, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> The universe was smaller when the light was emitted, and the æther was denser ... now the universe has expanded thinning out the æther ... it remains to be seen if the æther can be concentrated by gravity,


So backing up, the concept of the universe, being everything by definition - "expanding" - is pretty silly on its face.  Seems best to presume the Aether a constant in total (with variable density), the Universe (or "universes") within its bounds; what we experience as "space" being volumes of Aether where mass may come to exist and disappear again. A constant dielectric-magneto _electric_ exchange going on to some extent at every scale. Naturally "quantized" because the Aether itself has mass (thus "dark matter"). Protons resulting naturally from unstable neutrons, everything vibrates in accord with proton energy exchange harmonics  at root. "Energy" being our localized detection or measurement of ever ongoing dielectric and magnetic field exchanges through and enabled by the Aether. 

"when the light was emitted"

Such a biblical presumption. "The light" being all the EM energy and matter we detect emanating from the Bang? Perhaps so. Locally. I tend to believe our scientifically observable "Universe" just a dot in the actual Universe which may regenerate on an unimaginably massive scale. "Bangs" going on constantly, all within The Aether, unnoticeable to any observer due to the vast distances between. But we haven't even begun talking about the ramifications of longitudinal waves. The real means of producing "action at a distance." 

"glass is normal stuff, it's not magical like æther is"

The Aether strikes me as no more magical than water. Perhaps even less so. Gods and Easter Bunnies are magical.


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 12, 2019)

I think I have to stop here ... I'm new around here and don't want to get into trouble hijacking threads ... plus you got me claiming the expanding universe is evidence that the universe isn't expanding ... very unprofessional of me ...

I'm kinda on-board here with Frannie ... zapping house cats with yellow photons sound fun ... my own furry little bastard needs this ... but I digress ... the principle of transferring information instantaneously has been around for a while, if we have a pair of couple electrons 20 light years apart, just observing the quantum state of the one guaranties the other is in the opposite state, we don't have to wait 20 years, it happens immediately ... there's some technical issues, specifically how to get electrons 20 light years apart to couple, we might have to couple them locally and send half off using normal means ... I think it was Stephen Hawkins who noted that if this was possible, then Earth would be overrun with tourists ... but I do think we should continue zapping cats with high energy particles ... who knows what great discoveries can be made ...

I've always found that those who debate evolution vs creation know very little of either ... AFAIK, we still don't know what Chemical X is, and there's not that many possibilities ... good luck trying to get a peacemaker to say what exact was created in the beginning ... as a Christian I'm quick to admit I have no idea which is true, but I'll drink a cup of franken-coffee while planning how to help feed the hungry today ... I guess that makes me a hypocrite ...


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 12, 2019)

Welcome aboard, if I haven't said so already.
- "Chemical X"? Seriously?
-"if we have a pair of couple electrons 20 light years apart, just observing the quantum state of the one guaranties the other is in the opposite state, we don't have to wait 20 years, it happens immediately" - great illustration of QM's own religious belief requirements. Nonsense.
- "what exact was created in the beginning" - "created"? "beginning"? - back to mainstream circular reasoned religious belief requirements. Says much about our human need for just any old answer at a minimum, not much else.
- "as a Christian I'm quick to admit I have no idea which is true" - interesting in that most I've met claimed faith based absolutes which they attempted using as a bludgeon.
- "to help feed the hungry today" - none of this can matter by comparison if you're accomplishing any of that.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> You are a numbnut, woo woo lost and he admitted it when I posted the information THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SENT BY ENTANGLEMENT
> 
> AGAIN HERE IS THE INFORMATION ALREADY SENT AS AN IMAGE
> This is not a debate, information has already been sent by entanglement, I was, am and always will be right in this.


Nice pictures created by entanglement. Too bad they weren't instantaneous; not even faster than the speed of light.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > You are a numbnut, woo woo lost and he admitted it when I posted the information THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SENT BY ENTANGLEMENT
> ...


They are communication.  Now since they are not faster than light perhaps you can name their speed because obviously you know

PS Googles quantum computer just solved a problem in 200 seconds that would have taken a classical supercomputer 10000 years.

You bought Google right

Smile now Charlie


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> the principle of transferring information instantaneously has been around for a while,



It has never been around. Discovery of the remote state of a particle by measuring an entangled property of the local particle gives instant knowledge of both the local particle state and the remote particle state.

However, before the measurement of the local particle state, nothing is known about the state of either particle. You cannot communicate anything instantly when you don't know what the local particle state is. When you don't know what you are communicating, that isn't communication of information.

Entanglement is valuable for secure communication, but no faster than the speed of light.

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> ReinyDays said:
> 
> 
> > the principle of transferring information instantaneously has been around for a while,
> ...


Did you know Edison never went to school

Because of this fact he never learned the wrong way to think.......like you do


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> They are communication. Now since they are not faster than light perhaps you can name their speed because obviously you know


Entanglement for the two pictures was done through a pair of crystals. That would slow down the light a bit. Otherwise outside the crystals it would be at light speed.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Did you know Edison never went to school
> 
> Because of this fact he never learned the wrong way to think.......like you do


Important Facts About Thomas Edison & the Invention of the Light Bulb
Edison tested thousands of materials, including over 6,000 types of plant growths to find the best filament.

I don't think pure trial and error is the best way to think in today's world when you are developing modern technology.


----------



## daveman (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You know how much all this impacts your life directly?

Zero.  

So why are you so emotional about it?


----------



## ReinyDays (Oct 12, 2019)

- "Chemical X"? Seriously? --- Sure, why not, what would you call it? ... we have molecules that are not life bonding into molecules that are life ... and show me, how hard could it be ... Wald (1954) calls it an enzyme, if that helps ... 

-"if we have a pair of couple electrons 20 light years apart, just observing the quantum state of the one guaranties the other is in the opposite state, we don't have to wait 20 years, it happens immediately" - great illustration of QM's own religious belief requirements. Nonsense. --- not much of a religion if everybody agrees it's wrong ... there's some manner of inconsistency with GR so there appears to be a more fundamental process at work ... Universal Field Theory is an active area of research ... it's certainly possible that Einstein is right, that nothing travels faster than light, then we're screwed I guess ...

- "what exact was created in the beginning" - "created"? "beginning"? - back to mainstream circular reasoned religious belief requirements. Says much about our human need for just any old answer at a minimum, not much else. --- Actually, it looks like we inherited religion from our Neanderthal fore bearers ... it's good for the stupid ... I think we can agree some people are stupid today, they were even stupider back when ... "God says so" works for the most part ... 

- "as a Christian I'm quick to admit I have no idea which is true" - interesting in that most I've met claimed faith based absolutes which they attempted using as a bludgeon.
- "to help feed the hungry today" - none of this can matter by comparison if you're accomplishing any of that.

I'm loath to criticize my brothers and sisters that go door-to-door spreading the Gospel ... I've seen them change people's lives for the better ... and that's a high ideal, something maybe all of us should be watching for ... if you wanna believe in evolution, then the individual respected as a benefit to the community will have better access to mating partners ... sounds like the exact same thing to me ...


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > They are communication. Now since they are not faster than light perhaps you can name their speed because obviously you know
> ...


So you do not know...………………….

The fact is that the entanglement is instant, which is one of the quantum enigmas, instant does not actually imply a speed, instant means it is already there before you hit the send button. Which until explained causes a short in the human mind, and since the macro realm is all composed of the quantum realm the more we learn the less we know


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Did you know Edison never went to school
> ...


You miss the point which is that Edison never learned the fucking bullshit taught in schools.  Like the most powerful code in the known universe created itself from nothing one day because nothing got bored with doing nothing, or the universe is really a computer program on a hard drive, which includes you.

Edison was free of ignorance which freed his mind


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Wrong, I own stock in the most powerful quantum computer on the planet...……………..


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> So you do not know...………………….


You are being an asshole again. I answered the question with what little information was available.



Frannie said:


> The fact is that the entanglement is instant, which is one of the quantum enigmas, instant does not actually imply a speed, instant means it is already there before you hit the send button. Which until explained causes a short in the human mind, and since the macro realm is all composed of the quantum realm the more we learn the less we know


Resolving the state of an entangled particle is instant. Communication of information is not. 
We have been through this many many times. Why do you keep bringing up the same thing?


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> You miss the point which is that Edison never learned the fucking bullshit taught in schools. Like the most powerful code in the known universe created itself from nothing one day because nothing got bored with doing nothing, or the universe is really a computer program on a hard drive, which includes you.
> 
> Edison was free of ignorance which freed his mind


More BS. Total BS.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > So you do not know...………………….
> ...


You said that the speed was less than light.  What information do you have that everyone else lacks?

True though, pretty much everyone I humiliate ends up rationalizing me as the asshole that they are.  Why should you be any different than those that came before you?

Better to be me than you

Google has reached quantum supremacy – here's what it should do next

NASDAQ: GOOG - Google Search


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> You said that the speed was less than light. What information do you have that everyone else lacks?
> 
> True though, pretty much everyone I humiliate ends up rationalizing me as the asshole that they are. Why should you be any different than those that came before you?
> 
> Better to be me than you


Now you are being an asshole and a troll. You keep asking the same questions over and over after they were answered. You have no understanding of physics and are proud of it. You are seriously afflicted with the Dunning-Kruger effect.  
.


----------



## james bond (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...



You have to judge the stock for yourself, but I'm not quoting science books.  I read that article you linked and it discussed how they made the image.

The called one set of entangled photons red and the other yellow.  I take my yellow photons with me to my home.  You send your red photons at noon the next day
through a dog stencil (am a dog person myself).  I shoot the yellow photons at noon towards a camera to get the image.

So, you are right one time about being able to communicate instantly, but Wuwei is still right and smarter than you.  How do I collect the yellow photons and send it back to you and how do you collect your red photons to shoot towards the camera?

The devil is in the details.


----------



## james bond (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Wuwei said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...



I see Google is making progress.  However, they still have to make further breakthroughs.

Physicists Just Quantum Entangled 10 Photon Pairs And Set a New World Record

New Quantum-Entanglement Record Could Spur Hack-Proof Communications | Live Science


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > You said that the speed was less than light. What information do you have that everyone else lacks?
> ...


Well there you go being stupid again.  Do tell us all the answers to what no one knows.  Einstein called it spooky because it did not make sense to him

Lol but you know


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Actually both of you are far brighter than albert in your own minds, because Al had no clue, he just said was spooky


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Well there you go being stupid again. Do tell us all the *answers to what no one knows*. Einstein called it spooky because it did not make sense to him
> 
> Lol but you know


Answers to what? Precisely what is your question?

.


----------



## daveman (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


So, Einstein's wrong ideas impact your net worth...how, exactly?


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Wuwei said:
> ...


Now how exactly does entangled hack proof communications happen without information

Thanks for proving my point


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Well there you go being stupid again. Do tell us all the *answers to what no one knows*. Einstein called it spooky because it did not make sense to him
> ...


Ok, how does entangled hack proof communications happen if as you babbled in front of the entire crew that entanglement can not send information

The little picture is dangerous

Look ahead

New Quantum-Entanglement Record Could Spur Hack-Proof Communications | Live Science


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Stock values, I want a piece of the quantum Mars internet network


----------



## daveman (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Can you show me on the doll where Einstein hurt you?


----------



## Frannie (Oct 12, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Physicists Prove Einstein Wrong With 'Spooky' Quantum Experiment

The Tale Of A 1986 Experiment That Proved Einstein Wrong

Experiment Proves Einstein Wrong


Your God is dethroned by reality


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 12, 2019)

> Apart from carrying out experiments, one of the potential uses for this kind of system is for "quantum key distribution," in which quantum communication systems are used to share an encryption key between two parties that is impossible to intercept without alerting the users. When combined with the correct encryption algorithm, this system is uncrackable even if encrypted messages are sent over normal communication channels, experts have said.


.. forgetting that the NSA will demand the key to monitor it.


----------



## daveman (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


"Your God"?

Do you think I worship a mere man?  

Stupid, _stupid_ woman.


----------



## MAGAman (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Like i said when the observations do not fit into your religious parameters you ignore and mock it to protect your religion


Religion? You accept some dufus' word on blind faith and talk about other's religion?


----------



## MAGAman (Oct 12, 2019)

Frannie said:


> That devise would be needed to transport matter.  All we really need is the information to understand ourselves and the universe better.  Theoretically anyway


Better hurry. According to the 2 most brilliant scientists (AOC and Hanoi Jane) you've only got 11 years.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Einstein was too stupid to comb his own hair, yet people like you reference his nonsensical farts


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

MAGAman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Like i said when the observations do not fit into your religious parameters you ignore and mock it to protect your religion
> ...


Look doofus, the only word I accept is mine, be the next in line to question it, then sit down and be quiet


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

MAGAman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > That devise would be needed to transport matter.  All we really need is the information to understand ourselves and the universe better.  Theoretically anyway
> ...


Well when the crew loses on the science of entangled particles, switching to political opinions that can not be right or wrong is expected I guess

CIAO


----------



## daveman (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


See, here's the thing:  I am responsible ONLY for what I say.  And I have NOT said anything like that.

So you stick to my statements when criticizing me, or you shut the fuck up.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Tell us more about how bright steiny was


----------



## daveman (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


How can I tell you more about it, when I haven't said anything about it in the first place?

You know how you like to pretend you're smarter than everyone else?  Yeah, that's not working out so great.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


I do not pretend. One thing I never do


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Ok, how does entangled hack proof communications happen if as you babbled in front of the entire crew that entanglement can not send information
> 
> The little picture is dangerous
> 
> ...



You answered your question yourself:
New Quantum-Entanglement Record Could Spur Hack-Proof Communications | Live Science

.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, how does entangled hack proof communications happen if as you babbled in front of the entire crew that entanglement can not send information
> ...


My questions are never answered, because if I do not know or can't figure it out, no one can.

Been demonstrated

You will never understand or know

Just how it is


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> My questions are never answered, because if I do not know or can't figure it out, no one can.


You are dripping with the hubris of a troll.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > My questions are never answered, because if I do not know or can't figure it out, no one can.
> ...


I troll for stripers...………………….

You pretend


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Why is it that when we observe what we expect we accept it but when we see what a guy too dumb to comb his hair says it cant be we accept the hairy fool?
> 
> NASA stunned: Scientist asked 'was Einstein wrong?' after object broke laws of physics


Uh-huh...Frannie the Science Troll


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that when we observe what we expect we accept it but when we see what a guy too dumb to comb his hair says it cant be we accept the hairy fool?
> ...


Dude you are the troll, but do not fret you are amusing


----------



## EvilEyeFleegle (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> EvilEyeFleegle said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


ROTFLMAO! Rubber and glue..that's all you got..how sad....


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 13, 2019)

> As of 2017, microfossils, or fossilised microorganisms, within hydrothermal-vent precipitates dated from 3.77 to 4.28 billion years old found in rocks in Quebec may harbour the oldest record of life on Earth, suggesting life started soon after ocean formation 4.4 billion years ago. According to biologist Stephen Blair Hedges, "If life arose relatively quickly on Earth … then it could be common in the universe.


Given light and warmth nothing stops the growth of slime for long.


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 13, 2019)

> Nikola Tesla positively denied that Einstein’s theory was true, not just because he rejected the idea that matter is convertible into energy, and energy into matter, or even the existence of space-time, but because he himself had measured speeds traveling faster than light.
> 
> As far back as 1896 he conducted experiments on cosmic rays where he measured cosmic ray velocities from the star, Antares, which he measured to be _fifty times_ greater than the speed of light, thus demolishing one of the basic pillars of the structure of Relativity.


Also a great quote from the same source:


> Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible. But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for them and its assumption dispenses with space curvature. All literature on this subject is futile and destined to oblivion. So are also all attempts to explain the workings of the universe without recognizing the existence of the {A}ether and the indispensable function it plays in the phenomena.


----------



## daveman (Oct 13, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


And you're a liar, too.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


I have leg pressed 1600lbs

No lie


----------



## Frannie (Oct 13, 2019)

EvilEyeFleegle said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > EvilEyeFleegle said:
> ...



Actually I have Apple Google Netflix Raytheon Taiwan Semiconductor Alibaba and about 500 more

Yawn

What you gots there


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Sure.  It's not like you have any credibility left.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Sure. It's not like you have any credibility left.


He is just a troll trying to get attention. His digressions have sure turned idiotic.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Hundreds of people have watched, I know you can't fathom health and strength.  I enjoy the looks of the meak like you


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Sure. It's not like you have any credibility left.
> ...


Yo WooWoo, you figure out that you are wrong about entanglement sending information yet?

Physicists transmit data via Earth-to-space quantum entanglement

Seems the Chinese don't care about your no can do attitude


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Yo WooWoo, you figure out that you are wrong about entanglement sending information yet?
> 
> Physicists transmit data via Earth-to-space quantum entanglement
> 
> Seems the Chinese don't care about your no can do attitude


I will feed the poor hungry troll once more. Our troll wants more attention by lying. Is that how you want attention? By lying? 
.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Yo WooWoo, you figure out that you are wrong about entanglement sending information yet?
> ...


So you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet with your claims that entanglement can never be used to send information when it already has done so

Physicists transmit data via Earth-to-space quantum entanglement

(Phys.org)—Two teams of researchers in China have advanced the distance that entangled particles can be used to send information, including encryption keys. In their papers, both uploaded to the _arXiv_ preprint sever, the two groups outline their work and suggest their achievement represents an essential step toward the development of a global-scale quantum internet.

You still in denial, or are you figuring out how dumb you really are


----------



## Grumblenuts (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> the looks of the meak





> what you get when you mix Squirrels with Milk


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

Grumblenuts said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > the looks of the meak
> ...


How is the heart doin poppypoo


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


"Meek".  

You lead an interesting life.  Some of it may even have happened.


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> So you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet with your claims that entanglement can never be used to send information when it already has done so


The lying troll is back. You should be embarrassed that you think communication using entanglement is instant. And you lie about what I said. Here it is:

*I said that you can communicate with entanglement but it's not instant.*


Wuwei said:


> Entanglement is valuable for secure communication, but no faster than the speed of light.





Wuwei said:


> Yes, an image is information, but it was not instant communication. The authors of the article did not say it was instant communication. Only you did.





Wuwei said:


> Entanglement is valuable for transmitting secure information. But it can only do it at light speed.





Wuwei said:


> Resolving the state of an entangled particle is instant. Communication of information is not.



*However you said that entanglement can be used for instant communication.*


Frannie said:


> Entanglement is showing instant results, does this mean we can converse with another galaxy?





Frannie said:


> Or we could use an entangled communication devise to search the galaxy for intelligent life and once found communicate all forms in info.





Frannie said:


> Be pretty cool to be entangled with a webcam on Mars and have the info get to and back in nanoseconds.



You are absolutely wrong. You can use entanglement for *secure communication but it is not instant*. It is at light speed.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > So you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet with your claims that entanglement can never be used to send information when it already has done so
> ...


Get triggered much fool, you do know that what you posted is all still here.

Lol, I hope your potato peeler is sharp because you are gonna be peeling for a long time

PS All communication is instant today, how long do you think it takes my post to make a fool of you, a few seconds if that.  As I said one of the quantum enigmas is that entanglement is instant.

PSS Still undefeated

PSSS Did I mention the 5 no hitters that my son threw and I called the pitches for

Yawn


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Wuwei said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


YEAH WUWEI YOU BETTER LISTEN TO HER SHE OWNS STocks an an an leg presses a...lot...or something that somehow proves her intellectual superiori...

You know what, never mind.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Wuwei said:
> ...


I love it when the people who's brains I have entangled do exactly as I intended.  

Again as I said entanglement is instant, no lag.....


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You intend people to mock your pompous buffoonery?

Well...yer doin' a hell of a job.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



I know that it is hard for you to keep up, but do try

Now as I said Quantum entanglement is instant, or at least as the Chinese have measured at LEAST 10000 times faster than light

Quantum "spooky action at a distance" travels at least 10,000 times faster than light

Quantum entanglement, one of the odder aspects of quantum theory, links the properties of particles even when they are separated by large distances. When a property of one of a pair of entangled particles is measured, the other "immediately" settles down into a state compatible with that measurement. So how fast is "immediately"? According to research by Prof. Juan Yin and colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai, the _lower limit_ to the speed associated with entanglement dynamics – or "spooky action at a distance" – is at least 10,000 times faster than light.

Now the argument could be made that 10000 times the speed of light is not actually instant, however 1,860,000,000 miles traveled per second is pretty close to instant. Now the 10000 times the speed of light is the low number, the actual could be much faster, we may need to leave the galaxy to get a proper test.

Still undefeated


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Oh.  You mean you really _are_ a pompous buffoon?

Yeah, lemme know how that works out for you.  Speaking only for myself, I'm _this_ close to taking you seriously.  Pinky swear.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Please stick to the subject of quantum particle entanglement.

I know that it is hard for you to keep up, but do try

Now as I said Quantum entanglement is instant, or at least as the Chinese have measured at LEAST 10000 times faster than light

Quantum "spooky action at a distance" travels at least 10,000 times faster than light

Quantum entanglement, one of the odder aspects of quantum theory, links the properties of particles even when they are separated by large distances. When a property of one of a pair of entangled particles is measured, the other "immediately" settles down into a state compatible with that measurement. So how fast is "immediately"? According to research by Prof. Juan Yin and colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai, the _lower limit_ to the speed associated with entanglement dynamics – or "spooky action at a distance" – is at least 10,000 times faster than light.

Now the argument could be made that 10000 times the speed of light is not actually instant, however 1,860,000,000 miles traveled per second is pretty close to instant. Now the 10000 times the speed of light is the low number, the actual could be much faster, we may need to leave the galaxy to get a proper test.

27 up 27 down...………………….


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Hey, guess what?  I don't give a shit.  I was making fun of your Einstein butthurt, which you never rationally explained.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Yea I did explain it, as little or nothing Einstein wrote was fully correct beginning with his babble that the Universe was not expanding but was static.

PS. When you fuck up with your computations of the universe as Einstein did, everything that follows is flawed like laying a flawed foundation in a building, everything above is effected by the flaw

I could go into more detail, but the information would just bounce around your empty head like popping pop corn


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



After all these years I still get a kick of people taking the time to say they don't give a shit yet take the time to say so


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > So you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet with your claims that entanglement can never be used to send information when it already has done so
> ...


Wrong again WooWoo

I know that it is hard for you to keep up, but do try

Now as I said Quantum entanglement is instant, or at least as the Chinese have measured at LEAST 10000 times faster than light

Quantum "spooky action at a distance" travels at least 10,000 times faster than light

Quantum entanglement, one of the odder aspects of quantum theory, links the properties of particles even when they are separated by large distances. When a property of one of a pair of entangled particles is measured, the other "immediately" settles down into a state compatible with that measurement. So how fast is "immediately"? According to research by Prof. Juan Yin and colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai, the _lower limit_ to the speed associated with entanglement dynamics – or "spooky action at a distance" – is at least 10,000 times faster than light.

Now the argument could be made that 10000 times the speed of light is not actually instant, however 1,860,000,000 miles traveled per second is pretty close to instant. Now the 10000 times the speed of light is the low number, the actual could be much faster, we may need to leave the galaxy to get a proper test.

27 up 27 down...………………….   

Is it possible to sharpen a potato peeler?  I'm just asking because you are the certified xpurt


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Yeah, still don't give a shit.  You act like he kicked your puppy.  Lighten up, Francis.


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


That mean ol' puppy-kicking doodyhead Einstein!

You really took this personally.  Hint:  It doesn't affect you one bit.  No, really.


----------



## daveman (Oct 14, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Wuwei said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Y'know, for a capitalist like yourself, you sure are putting a lot of stock (ha!) in what comes out of a Communist nation.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Wuwei said:
> ...



Know your enemy...…………………..

Heard that somewhere.

Stock, yea I own some Alibaba, and Taiwan Semi


----------



## Frannie (Oct 14, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Ignorance is a cancer that effects everyone...…………..

Kind of like my internet tantrums


----------



## daveman (Oct 15, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


There's a difference between knowing your enemy and unquestioningly believing everything he says and financing his totalitarianism.


----------



## daveman (Oct 15, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Troll.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Must be embarrassing getting a particle physics lecture from a troll

Have you accepted that entanglement is instant yet and that instant is certainly faster than light?

Yawning


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Must be embarrassing getting a particle physics lecture from a troll

Have you accepted that entanglement is instant yet and that instant is certainly faster than light?

Next Yawn


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > So you haven't embarrassed yourself enough yet with your claims that entanglement can never be used to send information when it already has done so
> ...


Hey Woo Woo you still out there?

Wanna go another round?  I might be able to un-entangle your cranium and or at least get the gerbils out.

No guarantees and as always the entangled cranium assumes all de-entanglement risks.


----------



## daveman (Oct 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Oh, hey, Frannie!  Still obsessed with things that don't affect 99.99% of humanity, I see.  You seem to be quite upset that people are allowed to have different opinions than you.  

Bummer.


----------



## daveman (Oct 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Wuwei said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You can say what you want.  I'd appreciate it, though, if you argued against things I actually say instead of wasting my time screeching about things I haven't said.

kthnxbai


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

ReinyDays said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > ReinyDays said:
> ...


I think you might have meant to say the speed of the light they emit is slowing down. 

I too believe that the speed of light may not be constant throughout the universe. That in the vast regions between the galaxies that light may travel at a different speed. 

It seems to me that this whole affair of dark matter and dark energy is just a fancy fudge factor because we don’t have a complete understanding of how light travels across the universe.


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > ReinyDays said:
> ...


Gravity is a consequence of space time being warped or curved. 

Time is effectively a measure of the expansion of the universe.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


Actually gravity is an unknown as nothing Einstein babbled was fully or at all correct


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Eddington’s experiment says otherwise.

So do the myriad of technologies that use GR.


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

Quantum entanglement is not a teleportation device.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Never bought options, no need to gamble when the market is so predictable.

Options huh, should I buy a 300 horse Nissan maxima with a CVT trans or a 200 horse Acura with an 8 speed trans?  I considered a 315 horse Mustang base model but am not really wanting a turbo and the 5.0 V8 is a pig  options options options


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


There is no technology however that explains the speeding expansion of the universe.  At this point all bets are off and gravity explains nothing


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> Quantum entanglement is not a teleportation device.


It is depending on what you want teleported.  See smart phones teleport information and information is really all one needs


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Or the most likely explanation which is we can’t measure the expansion of the universe and we are chasing our tails making up bullshit explanations of phenomena that no one has ever detected.


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum entanglement is not a teleportation device.
> ...


Information, sure.  

Matter, no.


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

So it is possible for information to travel faster than the speed of light because information is no thing. 

Nothing or no thing can travel faster than the speed of light. Information is no thing.


----------



## miketx (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> So it is possible for information to travel faster than the speed of light because information is no thing.
> 
> Nothing or no thing can travel faster than the speed of light. Information is no thing.


It can take a short cut.


----------



## ding (Oct 20, 2019)

miketx said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > So it is possible for information to travel faster than the speed of light because information is no thing.
> ...


Entanglement is a pretty cool phenomenon but it’s application is limited to communication. And even then I am struggling to see how it will become anything more than a cool experiment.


----------



## miketx (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


There is more to physics then we know.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Actually nothing ever detected has been explained in any way.  The fact is that so called brilliant minds are saying that the universe is fake, and is a computer program...

So if I hit this clown in the head with a hammer the brains aren't real.


Tell us more genius


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> So it is possible for information to travel faster than the speed of light because information is no thing.
> 
> Nothing or no thing can travel faster than the speed of light. Information is no thing.


I had this argument with WooWoo last week and he lost

Entangled information is traveling 10000 times the speed of light, AT LEAST

Physicists transmit data via Earth-to-space quantum entanglement

So please stop quoting the former genius once known as Einstein because the moron never figured out what a comb was


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

miketx said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


And there may be more than we can know


----------



## james bond (Oct 20, 2019)

ding said:


> I too believe that the speed of light may not be constant throughout the universe.



This is a fact.  Speed of light is the maximum speed limit in a vacuum.  It's speed can change due to the medium the massless photons (fastest particles of light) are traveling in called impedance.  Obviously light can be stopped (blocked) with enough impedance.  

Now, I've heard theoretical physicists say the universe is expanding faster than the maximum speed of light, but that's wack. 

Here is an example.  This guy contradicts himself -- Is the speed of light constant throughout the universe?  › Ask an Expert (ABC Science).

That said, if you meant that the maximum speed of light has been slowing down from the past, then there is a decay theory that shows that -- The Velocity of Light and the Age of the Universe..


----------



## Frannie (Oct 20, 2019)

james bond said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > I too believe that the speed of light may not be constant throughout the universe.
> ...


Entangled photons move at least 10000 times the known speed of light.

Please pay attention


----------



## james bond (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...



Now, you're back to the ignorant state.  I was talking about the speed of light or c.

What you and I talked about before was one-way communication using quantum entanglement which is limited.  Now, you bring up teleportation via quantum entanglement which is slightly more robust form of communication.  However, teleportation is limited, too.  It's like what happened in the movie The Prestige, but at the quantum level.  We will probably be able to "teleport" more larger particles -- atoms, maybe molecules, of information in order to have a _ftl_ internet.  Maybe.  But, we still need a breakthrough and it's not really PHYSICAL teleportation, so the speed of light remains intact.  It's still quantum entanglement or spooky _action_ at a distance.  Nothing about traveling from point A to point B.

How Quantum Teleportation Actually Works


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

james bond said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Light is composed of photons...……………………..

Alternatively light is photons

This entangled image is light









Jesus


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > So it is possible for information to travel faster than the speed of light because information is no thing.
> ...


I’m only pretty certain what I wrote went over your head.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Information is certainly a thing, DNA is the information needed to create life.  Your computer is run by information, the instructions to assemble a ship qualified to travel the universe is information.  Why would one downgrade the importance of information?

Answer, poor information to begin with.

PS. You could not go over my head if you were in a 757


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


It’s beyond your comprehension. 

I’m not downgrading the importance of information. I am telling you that the information being teleported does not have a physical presence so the transmission of information through QE does not violate the speed of light.


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Do you believe the photons were teleported?


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Lastly quantum entangled information doesn’t travel across space and time. It is shared.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Einstein clearly said that nothing could exceede the speed of light.  Einstein also never articulated that anything could travel instantly which rightfully so messed up the human mind and will do so until explained.


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


QE doesn’t violate the speed of light. 

Nothing is traveling. And if it were it still wouldn’t because it is only information which has no physical presence.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > james bond said:
> ...


Teleported is a science fiction word.  The information in the form of photons shaped as a cat in reference to Schrodinger's cat paradox was quantum entangled, I do not think this I know this.  The cat creates more questions than it answers.  Oddly enough one could in theory instantly transmit all the information to build a super computer, and also transmit the dna instructions to build the sender of the info.

It's not yet known what is really happening or what all the prospects are, but you are composed of information directed matter


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Wrong, information is clearly something.  You are saying that a book is something yet the contents of the book are nothing.

The book only exist as a transport medium for the information it contains

Next potato peeler


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Not quantum information. It has no physical representation. It isn’t traveling across the universe. It is shared because it is entangled.


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


No one but you believes QE means photons are being teleported.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Information is information no matter how it is shared.

Book
E book
Radio tv broadcast
Computer file
Entangled info is just another medium


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Nothing is being transmitted over a distance.   Spin is shared because their spin is entangled.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I never used the word teleported.  However entanglement is able to send information.  What is more important, a book or the info in the book?

Lol, you are as ignorant as Sagan was when he babbled that science would slow then stop because everything has been learned.....  Funny how the guys at Intel ignored the moron


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You said it violated the speed of light and that proved Einstein was wrong. So of course you believe something was teleported.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The Chinese are transporting data.  Seriously kid what is transported to a smart phone on various waves?

Thoughts for one


----------



## Wuwei (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Wanna go another round?


You got pwned. Live with it.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Wanna go another round?
> ...


Hey woowoo welcome back.  You want to scream again that quantum entanglement can not send data when the Chinese are already doing just that?

So either keep up or tap out.....

Lol


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Clearly you don’t understand what quantum entanglement is. 

Data does not leave a transmitter and travel a distance to a receiver in quantum entanglement.


----------



## Frannie (Oct 21, 2019)

ding said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Tell the Chinese, clearly they do not care about your ignorance

Physicists transmit data via Earth-to-space quantum entanglement


----------



## daveman (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


I said "opinions", you moron.


----------



## daveman (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum entanglement is not a teleportation device.
> ...


Teleportation - Wikipedia

*Teleportation* is the hypothetical transfer of matter or energy from one point to another *without traversing the physical space between them*.​Cell phones don't teleport information.  Period.  End of story.

Where did you get the ridiculous idea that you're not an idiot?


----------



## ding (Oct 21, 2019)

Frannie said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Just because the word transmit is used doesn’t mean the quantum spin was transmitted across space and time.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > The super genius missed out on Morse code class
> ...


You missed one too many classes...……………………

Quantum Communication Just Took a Great Leap Forward


----------



## miketx (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Why is it that when we observe what we expect we accept it but when we see what a guy too dumb to comb his hair says it cant be we accept the hairy fool?
> 
> NASA stunned: Scientist asked 'was Einstein wrong?' after object broke laws of physics


How does one "observe" something that is faster than light?


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

miketx said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that when we observe what we expect we accept it but when we see what a guy too dumb to comb his hair says it cant be we accept the hairy fool?
> ...


You turn your head really fast.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

miketx said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that when we observe what we expect we accept it but when we see what a guy too dumb to comb his hair says it cant be we accept the hairy fool?
> ...


Chinese physicists measure speed of Einstein's 'spooky action at a distance': At least 10,000 times faster than light - ExtremeTech


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> miketx said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Hey, do they finance that research by selling the organs they harvest from political prisoners?


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > miketx said:
> ...


Dunno but they eat puppies


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Given:  Chinese Communists are pieces of shit.

Your theory:  We must believe everything they say.


----------



## CWayne (Dec 17, 2019)

Its just a  teenage Orgainian playing with his galaxies.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Yes one must understand and study the enemy. 

JPL is doing the same experiments

News | Teleporting toward a quantum Internet

The Good, the Bad, and the Quantum -- NASA JPL’s Cold Atom Laboratory | Science and Technology


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


It only took you 255 posts to acknowledge the Chinese are Not Nice.  Was it painful?


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Are you suggesting that the enemy should be ignored


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


I'm suggesting we shouldn't immediately and unquestioningly believe everything our enemies say.

Can you understand that?


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Unfortunately their anti ship missiles tell a different story as they could sink any carrier instantly from afar...…


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You bet, Comrade.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Tell us how would any carrier shoot down 100 to 1000 anti ship missiles launched simultaneously?

The Russians have 1 carrier group because in a real war carriers are useless as you still have to get near enough to the country to launch jets.  Carriers are useless

Don't tell Tom Cruise

With mounting questions about cost and survivability, a shifting political landscape for US aircraft carriers


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Maybe we can teleport carriers.

Tell me, after you kiss Commie Chinese ass, are you hungry again an hour later?


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Too big to sail? US aircraft carriers could go the way of the dinosaur

You forgot to answer how would a carrier group shoot down 1000 anti ship missiles?

You are actually learning something that the fake media never tells you

Has China Made Aircraft Carriers Obsolete?


----------



## daveman (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You forgot to answer if you get hungry an hour after you kiss Commie Chinese ass.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Yawn...………………………….

As It Begins Its Second Century, Is the Aircraft Carrier Obsolete?

It's real simple, in WW2 the carriers could hide, satellites have made that impossible so the landscape has changed.

Change or get left behind

You might as well stay where you are because you are dead weight


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Don't eat Chinese food as I am gluten free and soy sauce is poison to me


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Give up so soon


----------



## Wuwei (Dec 17, 2019)

Frannie said:


> You missed one too many classes...……………………
> 
> Quantum Communication Just Took a Great Leap Forward


You missed all your classes

The Real Reasons Quantum Entanglement Doesn't Allow Faster-Than-Light Communication


----------



## Frannie (Dec 17, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > You missed one too many classes...……………………
> ...


That article is from May 4 2016, back when you were still in high school

This is from December 16 2019

How to use entanglement for long-distance or free-space quantum communication

Those who do not keep up, get left back

PS  Thomas Edison missed all his classes too as he never attended the schools that you did that rotted your mind

In 1854, *Edison's* family moved to Port Huron, Michigan, where he attended public *school* for a total of 12 weeks. A hyperactive *child*, prone to distraction, he was deemed "difficult" by his teacher. His mother quickly pulled him from *school* and taught him at home.

Yawn


----------



## luchitociencia (Dec 17, 2019)

The topic is hilarious. Einstein was a poor retarded.

Of course a galaxy can travel faster than 300,000k/s. Why not?

According to you, what can impede a galaxy traveling faster than such a speed?

Come on, start to write in order your reasons. You must have scientific evidence for them. Lol.


----------



## Wuwei (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> That article is from May 4 2016, back when you were still in high school
> 
> This is from December 16 2019
> 
> ...


You have to stop reading easy science for tots.

Faster-than-light communication - Wikipedia
_The current scientific consensus is that faster-than-light communication is not possible, and to date it has not been achieved in any experiment....
However, it is now well understood that quantum entanglement does not allow any influence or information to propagate superluminally._​
Why you can’t use quantum entanglement for faster than light communication
_Entanglement, we are told, is a non-local effect.  Doesn’t this, as a fair amount of science fiction implies, mean that there might be some effect we could use in the future for faster than light communication?

Unfortunately, the answer is no.  This doesn’t come from a pessimistic view of the possibilities, but from an understanding of what entanglement actually is, an understanding I have to admit I’ve only recently fully come to appreciate.
_​This guy came to understanding recently. You are a little late, by 100 years too.
.


----------



## Likkmee (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Options are readily available !


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > That article is from May 4 2016, back when you were still in high school
> ...



So NASA is doing science for tots in your delusion.


Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > That article is from May 4 2016, back when you were still in high school
> ...



Look woowoo, you have to stop babbling about the mistakes that Einbooby made 100 years ago because NASA has just recently
found entire galaxies moving at at least 5 times the speed of light.  So kid you are not arguing with me but with NASA.

You are a loser that is actually babbling about what was believed to be true 100 years ago, get current or get the fu.ck out.

Was Einstein's Theory of Relativity ... Wrong?


'Was Einstein wrong?' How scientist was stunned after object broke laws of physics

http://www.stsci.edu/ftp/science/m87/press.txt

Is this really the best you can doo doo

Tell us about the telegraph from 100 years ago

Or the pony express

Jesus you are lost in time

NATO 2019
Who is Prof. André Xuereb?


----------



## Wuwei (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> Look woowoo, you have to stop babbling about the mistakes that Einbooby made 100 years ago because NASA has just recently
> found entire galaxies moving at at least 5 times the speed of light. So kid you are not arguing with me but with NASA.
> 
> You are a loser that is actually babbling about what was believed to be true 100 years ago, get current or get the fu.ck out.
> ...


All three articles you cited were the same thing. At the end of each article is another explanation. A huge black hole with a high speed jet. You got thrown by a journalistic trick -- title it with an extraordinary question, and answer "no" at the end of the article. It sucks readers in so the site can let them see ads unless your ad blocker is on. Did you read the ads?
.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

Wuwei said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > Look woowoo, you have to stop babbling about the mistakes that Einbooby made 100 years ago because NASA has just recently
> ...


And you are arguing that the knowledge of the past will never be added too.  It's retarded.

Why are you mocking NASA and Cornel

Is the universe expanding faster than the speed of light? (Intermediate) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

Since relativity is clearly wrong people are coming up with all sorts of wacky answers to explain faster than light travel


----------



## luchitociencia (Dec 18, 2019)

Why keeping a dumb theory of relativity if it is already known that theory is good for nothing?

And again, With all your knowledge in physics, *do not ignore* the following question

*According to you, what can impede a galaxy traveling faster than 300,000 km/s?*

It is time for you to also work for debunking such superfluous theory of relativity.


----------



## daveman (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Eat shit, Commie.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Play with yours democrap


----------



## daveman (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


I am a conservative.  You lick Commie ass.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



You are seriously delusional too

Also rather unhappy.

Merry Christmas


----------



## daveman (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Naaah, my life's great.  You can tell because I don't suck Commie ass.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Why do you keep blabbering about it then?

You hungry?


----------



## luchitociencia (Dec 18, 2019)

Huge galaxies can indeed travel faster than 300,000 km/s.

Light is just a microscopic particle, easy to be left behind by a galaxy.


----------



## daveman (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Not at all.  Someone points out a flaw in what you're using instead of reasoning, and you screech BUT THE CHINEEEEEESE!!

Are they paying you?


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Actually the article that I read about carriers being obsolete in a real war is a Navy man...

Are U.S. Navy surface ships sitting ducks to enemies with modern weapons?


----------



## daveman (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


You keep posting Chinese articles.  How much you get per post?


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Where do you see Chinese?

Are U.S. Navy surface ships sitting ducks to enemies with modern weapons?


----------



## daveman (Dec 18, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


All over this thread, where you're kissing Commie Chinese ass about physics.  Bloody hell, own it.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 18, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


You are daydreaming about your Mom


----------



## Frannie (Dec 19, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


China’s quantum satellite achieves ‘spooky action’ at record distance

China Shatters “Spooky Action at a Distance” Record, Preps for Quantum Internet

Chinese satellite uses quantum cryptography for secure videoconference between continents

Since you ask


----------



## daveman (Dec 19, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Ahhh.  The old "your MOM!!" gambit.  Used to devastating effect in 3rd-grade recesses everywhere.

Hey, you know how you like to pretend you're smart?

Evidence suggests otherwise.


----------



## daveman (Dec 19, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


YAY COMMUNISM


----------



## Frannie (Dec 19, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


How many shares of Apple, Google and Taiwan Semiconductor do you own Mr. superhero


----------



## MaryL (Dec 19, 2019)

I remember reading about a Galaxy that predated the Big bang? Then OOPS! Never mind, it was just a observational error...So color me ...skeptical.


----------



## daveman (Dec 19, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


I don't know the actual number of shares my 401k is into.

Meanwhile, it doesn't take brains to buy stock.  You really are an idiot.

Which is all anyone can expect from someone who kisses Commie ass.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 19, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


I have 5 brokers...………………….

LOL

Goog can't get broken up soon enough for me

My 401 owns shares of the Micex too

and Alibaba

Is it fun living in an old folks mausoleum where kids and pink flamingoes are illegal


----------



## daveman (Dec 20, 2019)

Frannie said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Frannie said:
> ...


Nobody gives a shit what you say you have.  It means nothing.  But it's funny how you believe you waving around your fictional portfolio around will make people accept Commies say without question.  

Idiot.


----------



## Frannie (Dec 20, 2019)

daveman said:


> Frannie said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



It does not matter how much one makes.  What matters is how much one keeps.

Many like you live in denial

Bothers me not

Alphabet





NYSE: TSM - Google Search


----------



## Grumblenuts (Jul 1, 2021)

ReinyDays said:


> Grumblenuts said:
> 
> 
> > Nah, makes too much sense. Like you're saying light speed increases where the Aether is thin or something. Crazy!
> ...


I don't think I've actually revisited this until now, but yeah, you're absolutely right. Currently watching videos from a YouTube channel called SteamPunk. Still haven't found the guy's name yet but he seems very knowledgeable for his age and a good teacher:


----------

