whats up

hey yo sup cool story n stuff

Glad you like the strategy guides, even if they could be better I feel that they help out newer players out enough who are late to the Dodonpachi party to stand a fighting chance in at least the 1st loop.

Actually it shows that they have no mass. All it shows is E^2=p^2c^2+m^2c^4 is consistent with his model of general relativity. In this case, m=0 => E=pc, and the energy is added to his energy density formula.

And yes, every physicist knows about entanglement. Its quite an interesting phenomenon, unfortunately I watched the Dr. Quantum video presenting it and I had to stop and cringe. You don't "do" anything to the entangled particles.

The concept is simple. Spin is conserved, like momentum. The entangled particles have total spin 0, but must either have spin -1 or spin 1 (say, for a massless boson). When you measure one, it has to collapse into either -1 or 1. But, by doing so, it has also collapsed the entangled particle's wavefunction to the opposite of it. That is all it is.

Dr. Quantum's Double Slit animation is interesting; and especially to a lay person. Of course duality has long been known. Einstein prooving light is 'bent' passing a large gravitational pull shows photons have mass. What do you know about 'entanglement? That blows my mind; and it sure casts suspect on "c". Also wonder if you've heard of the "multiverse" theory?. Saw a video and he used a roomfull of balloons; each being an observable universe?

Sorry, but I'm not as young, nor inexperienced as you think I am. :) As a physicist from a mathematics background, my skill-set is far larger than your average climatologist. You're still using arguments by authority I'm afraid, not mentioning the science and now attacking (though lightly) the opponent of the debate. There is no need from me or anyone to develop "theories" when the null hypothesis fails for the "man-caused global warming via CO2 amplification" theory. I wish you laymen had some idea how much work goes into to proving a single theory at this large a scale (the entire planet). A few decades won't do, quite often this sort of work spans several lifetimes.

IPCC is a political group otherwise they'd follow the scientific principle. There are excellent scientists amongst them, but their reasoning doesn't show up in any conclusion.

P.S. Don't make any assumption about grant funding until you've been through it. My grant statement stands.

There is a long list of historically reliable institutions. They span the globe and decades of research.
I can provide many of them for you but I think you would try to find a flaw in each to justify a predisposition.
You may be early in your career. Great. I'll bet there will be a long and interesting road ahead for you. So if and when you develop a well supported theory that is contrary to what ALL of our reliable institutuions have been saying please send me a copy. Until then I'll continue to rely on what the best science available has concluded. I recommended that you not jump to conclusions without first developing your own skill-set.

P.S. Excuses like grant funding are transparent. Labeling the IPCC purely a political group is false and ignores the FOUR consecutive studies they made.

Thanks Momo! :) Inspiring videos.

Thanks for subscribing !
Have a Great Day !

Momo