Out of Pod Experience

This makes absolutely no sense. You have already declared the entirety of science to be questionable. This is before your attitude about methodology described here.

Whatever the outcome it's better than spending money on weapons of mass destruction and wars.
Oh wait.... The dark matter from Angels & Daemons! D:

The Standard Model is NOT a "theory of everything", because it can't describe gravitation.

scientific method:

(1) hypothesis
if hypothesis integrates in framework with existing theories, goto (2). otherwise goto (1)
(2) experiment
if experiment proves hypothesis, goto (3). otherwise goto (1)
(3) theory
if experimental evidence disproves theory, label theory hypothesis and goto (1)


So, obvious troll.
1/10 for skimming over an popular science article.

No. String theory and loop quantum gravity try to bridge the gap between the standard model and general relativity. The standard model is a theory of electromagnetic, weak and strong interactions on a quantum scale. It contains a unified field theory for electromagnetic and weak interactions, called electroweak interaction. There are efforts to find a unified field theory for all three of these interactions, which is termed "grand unified theory".

Physics is an exact science, which tries to describe the behaviour and interaction of inanimate objects in objective reality (provided such a reality exists, ofc) through mathematical constructs. You can't have a mathematical description without an exact definition of used signifiers. Semantics matters.

It's not about winning. I'm simply trying to correct your terminology to the current existing standard so that we actually can start to talk about the same thing.

Photons do have mass (and impulse, and energy, etc).
Photons have no REST mass, but they do have relativistic mass, and it depends solely on their frequency (m=frequency*h/c^2).


Or it could all be a 3D holographic projection of a 2D surface.
Or it could be interferences in the event horizon of a black hole.
Or it could all be a computer simulation.

Unless you can devise a conclusive experiment to test any of those outrageous hypotheses AND get a positive result, they're not worth significantly more than simple bovine excrement.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/relmom.html
etc

The theory that the forum rules actually govern this forum, is indeed based on proven facts. Lots of them.

I have removed some a lot of rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The rules:

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.

I am certain that my last two posts were deleted, and I do not understand why. It may have been three. All of my posts since I confirmed that I think the Nobel Peace Prize was warranted have been deleted.

I actually agree with Reaver Glitterstim his posts were the most respectful and ontopic of the entire thread




And For My Dear Akita


Though shalt not presume that Newtonian & Relativistic mechanics are not ultimately governed by the same forces. As I suggested previously, if you only read stuff that supports your own ides then you end up under-educating your own mind. Try this for example Link of actual scientists studying actual photons created by the big bang (not in a laboratory) Published in 2013.





Maybe since people seem to ignore me, and like to presume that I have no legitimate knowledge on the subject at hand... they will instead believe a PhD student at the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg, Germany. Unless of course you think Heeck is some how being miss quoted here, or is some how "not in the know"?


And then it addresses the Maxwell Equation a little bit:


Do you see the word IF? That is a totally different word than "does" or "sure" or "certain". It is in fact "IF" as in it is still in question and is not an absolute known.


It Also Claims That:


So you see my dear Akita, there is still more then one way to look at the universe. And just because light exerts a force on an object, and Mr. Maxwell creates an equation that describes it, much like Issac Newton who first described gravity, it does not immediately follow that we understand how it comes into being. If you presume that a photon has mass before you prove that it actually does (and all of the other things that comes with mass) you are shooting yourself in the foot. Because you would be then blind to alternative possibilities that might explain said phenomenon.

And this goes for the Higgs Boson too... a particle with absolutely no unique interactions whatsoever, that is now proclaimed to do some very unique things on a universal wide scale, without every witnessing it doing so. And all because someone's chalkboard says so....Bad... bad... science.