Search results

Well I was thinking that shit was retarded, but now that I know space is big, its a lot more sensible. Thanks for clearing up my confusion on space castles.

Im personally surprised they haven't made a mobile ap. They obviously have a following of retarded whales. Cash those fuckers in at every turn.

you don't get fireball explosions like that in space. completely fucking unrealistic.

Oh, I thought you knew anything about neutrino detectors. I'll explain it more simply for you. Neutrino detectors work by detecting cerenkov radiation. Neutrino detectors emit cerenkov radiation passively. Since passively emitted radiation from carbon usually has a cap (~150 kev), the...

Oh, they don't detect it with cerenkov radiation now adays? You know the light caused by charged particals moving through a material faster than its speed of light. Charged particles like electrons. electrons being emitted in carbon decay, carbon which tends to be an important part in the...

This direct/indirect argument is entirely a creation of the other arguers minds. I don't care if the observations are direct or indirect. There are plenty things in science which get observationally proven via only indirect observation. Look back at what I've read, have I mentioned direct or...

The only neutrino detectors that 'work' create the same sort of radiation that they detect. It is almost impossible to differentiate between natural radioactive decay and neutrino emissions, and no experiment devised has successfully shown that the neutrinos they detect could not be a by-product...

The hallmark of an observable phenomenon is that its observable. Seems pretty simple to me.

Theories being inconvenienced by something not existing is not proof that it does exist. I mean, maybe it is to you, but my{and the scientific communities] standards require ACTUAL, OBSERVABLE data. So while neutrinos seem a more likely explination than most, it is perfectly fine to question...

Every neutrino detector ever made produces the same radiation that its designed to detect. On top of that, they detect way less "neutrinos" than is necessary to say that what they're detecting isn't just radiation from the machine itself. Until that problem is corrected, neutrinos are a fancy...

Probably. Their existance is tenuous enough that I don't consider them factual yet.

nobel prize is a meaningless piece of drivel. That said, the research these guys did is fine.

Who didn't see this shit coming from a light year off? Kick starter for a space game. First thing you do to make said space game is spend all your time developing a shitty FPS. Is it too much to ask for fucking space in my space games now adays? Yea right.

One crack is peanut butter. One cracker is fluff. In between their meeting, banana.

Lets be fair here. The refs didn't call it to save the lions fans the pain of their own team fucking it up.

I'd have to do the math, but 2-14 might win our division.

Yep. cowboys are toasted. Without lee their defense looks like crap, and garret is a shit eating retard. 2-14

wtf is this game.

The cowboys are fucking retarded, but the saints are giving them a run for their money in the stupid plays department.

Awesome time management by the saints.

holy shit

holy fuck he tried to throw the ball forward, what is this sort of play even called.

still better than cowboys playcalling. You ready for some fucking 1st down running bitches.

cowboys have to have some of the most retarded playcalling ive seen in the history of mankind. run the fucking ball every god damn play no matter what unless you want to throw it outside to run it from there. Holy fuck i want to shit on garrets lawn.

First one was because there was no real contract. Second was prolly cause ball was overthrown. Thats definitely some sloppy as shit corner play. A good receiver would of abused that.

fake fg incoming

LET WEEDEN THROW THE BALL YOU USELESS PIECE OF SHIT COWBOYS COACHES. FUCKING SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!

Will his kid be one of the retards who got too many concussions?

What, people agreeing with me in the science thread? Tell lumie its time.

Original sensitivity I read was calculated at 1 event/ year, and at some point it was upgraded to what you said (10 events per year). I never checked the exact numbers myself though. There's also a high variation in the sensitivity of the machine due to numerous factor in how ideal the...

I'll agree as far as this. Gravity waves aren't completely excluded yet. They are simply to the level of 'unlikely' to be detected. Mathematically, the certainty is about 99% that waves should have been detected, but to exclude them reasonably, certainty must reach ~2x10^-7 that the results are...

cause gravity waves and QE is ALL OF SCIENCE!!!!

Why should I care about or try to explain this? Some parts are observationally true, yet this one appears to likely be observationally false. It would mean the theory is observationally broken, but I'm not here to do anything other than say that part of the theory appears to be observationally...

The funny thing is, There literally is no examples of anything except gravity being 100% instantaneous action in observed science. It is always calculated in applied math as instantaneous action. The existence of gravity waves is a huge mathematical mess where gravity is allowed to act...

That's the majority of my position. I believe that gravity waves are a neat idea until they are proven to exist. I won't accept indirect evidence, especially when its indirect evidence from HYPOTHESIZED SYSTEMS, because indirect evidence like that is not trustworthy scientifically for numerous...

Correct, they are. That's why they did calculations to estimate how often we should we be detecting them. Do you think these calculations were wrong when they predicted how often we should detect something with current and historical detection capabilities? I already covered that detection isn't...

I'm not saying GR is wrong, many parts of it appear to be very true and have been quite experimentally verified enough that doubting them is wrong. That's really just an attempt at deflection. I am talking about and only about gravity waves specifically in this situation. What other...

The only reason the machines wouldn't work is either A: the theory is wrong, or B: No natural events that are detectable have occurred. Do you have an alternative explanation? Almost every scientist agrees the machine should work according to theory. So do you think they just fucked up? What...

Gravity wave events have different intensities, and different directions of propagation. We've increased the number of facilities to eliminate the directional part of the problem. That mostly leaves the intensity part of the equation. We're at a point where we should randomly be detecting events...

Me a raccoon? No thanks. predators or get out. Also, you seem to be omitting the part where machines that read these signals like already exist man.