Lord, we thank you for all we have, let's remember those who are less fortunate than us, and yes, thank you for making dark matter, and knowing a whole lot more about it than we do.
Lord, we thank you for all we have, let's remember those who are less fortunate than us, and yes, thank you for making dark matter, and knowing a whole lot more about it than we do.
So, while we learn about the great mystery of the universe, it appears the New York Times is drifting away from basic sentence structure, as illustrated by these three phrases from the article:
thus determine whether collapse one day [missing "it would"]
quantum mechanics, , which showed [a double comma-space]
and a variety large astronomical projects [missing "of"]
At least the scientists seem coherent. Regards,
I guess I should have pinged you. :')
was what her unroyal lowness, her hideous heinous--Bwitch Shrillery Antoinette de Fosterizer de Machiavelli de Marx de Stalin de Pol Pot . . . de Sade
was running around loose on.
And, of course, creating all manner of dark matter in the process.
Shoot, if she keeps up at this pace, we could probably fertilize the Sahara with all the dark donkey matter she produces.
But methinks I've spring-boarded off onto a very spurious tangent from the thread topic . . .
I just couldn't think of much darker energy or matter than that associated with Shrillery.
Sean Carroll, a cosmologist at the California Institute of Technology who was not part of the team, said: “Had they found the evolution was not constant, that would have been an incredibly earth-shaking discovery. They looked where no one had been able to look before.”