Nobel photos

BB said:
hang on, they caught a wierd image of a wave from 380,000 years ago ...

and they hang it out like some proud fisherman?

that's notin' - them swiss nut jobs are planning at causing liddle innocent black holes under the alps - luckily they have worked out the chances of destroying the planet are slim ...

y'know ... i think i prefer the nerd fishermen! :nerd:
Click to expand...

No, from 380,000 years after the big bang, in other words about 13.5 billion years ago.

them swiss nut jobs are planning at causing liddle innocent black holes under the alps - luckily they have worked out the chances of destroying the planet are slim
Click to expand...

Angels and Demons -- Dan Brown.
 
chcr said:
Umm... a theorem is something else, Gonz.

A real theory has to be testable and furnish reproducible results.
Click to expand...


A theorem is a math or logic formula which is based on several other formulas. I assume that would entail the Big Bang. Either way...

A theory may be tested once or a thousand times & prove itself useful. One failure & the whole ball of whacks(...big bang...get it) must be thrown out. As often as theories change, they ought to all be called hypotheses.

I like science to a point. It's terribly interesting until the expert comes along & as you listen in wonderment when suddenly your eyes begin to glaze over because you realize you are out of your element & have no idea what in the hell this guy is talking about. I have a couple of Hawkings book on tape. They are great to listen too & ocassionaly I even learn something.
 
Gonz said:
A theorem is a math or logic formula which is based on several other formulas. I assume that would entail the Big Bang. Either way...
Click to expand...
Well, you're right about what a theorem is. The big band is still a theory, not a theorem though.
Gonz said:
A theory may be tested once or a thousand times & prove itself useful. One failure & the whole ball of whacks(...big bang...get it) must be thrown out. As often as theories change, they ought to all be called
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not true. A failure of the test of a theory (especially one that has been verified by numerous other tests) usually means that errors were made in the failing test. Almost always in fact. Theories are generally abrogated due to the discovery that one of the basic assumptions of the original hypothesis was wrong, not that it failed a test. Note that sometimes it's in testing that these flaws in assumption are discovered though. Do you see the difference?
 
That is part of a problem with this...they test a theory with pre-conceived notions, thinking they know the answer & looking for that answer, not necessarily the one before them.
 
Gonz said:
That is part of a problem with this...they test a theory with pre-conceived notions, thinking they know the answer & looking for that answer, not necessarily the one before them.
Click to expand...

1. Theories are actually not overturned very often.
2. Usually, other people than those who postulate the theory are looking to disprove it in a test, not to support it.

I'm afraid your view of what constitutes science is skewed by what I call "pop" science. Say anything that will get you on TV and try to back it up later. It's one of the reasons the US is no longer on the cutting edge of science (if we ever really were).
 
The US was only ever on the cutting edge thanks to imports from countries where "research" was either state controlled ... or unhealthy.
 
Sing, Sing, Sing is in my workout mix.

So is So Long, Toots by Cherry Poppin' Daddies. ;)
 
All the southern rock bands had a bunch of extra guys cause half the band would fall off the barstool & be at the ER during the show. In metal bands...they just played while they bled.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top