WOW!
1 posted on
03/28/2003 5:49:29 PM PST by
vannrox
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
To: vannrox
I hate to say I told you so...
2 posted on
03/28/2003 5:50:20 PM PST by
IncPen
(Get 'em, boys!)
To: VadeRetro; jennyp; Junior; longshadow; *crevo_list; RadioAstronomer; Scully; Piltdown_Woman; ...
Cosmic ping.
[This ping list is for the evolution -- not creationism -- side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. To be added (or dropped), let me know via freepmail.]
3 posted on
03/28/2003 5:54:48 PM PST by
PatrickHenry
(Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
To: vannrox
Yea yea whatever(humor)
4 posted on
03/28/2003 5:55:15 PM PST by
Mister Baredog
((They wanted to kill 50,000 of us on 9/11, we will never forget!))
To: vannrox
this measurement constrains the quantum gravity theory to certain parameters These pesky observational astronomers, always putting constraints on otherwise perfectly good theories.
5 posted on
03/28/2003 5:55:33 PM PST by
RightWhale
(Theorems link concepts: Proofs establish links)
To: vannrox
If this continues to prove out, they'll have to rename the Max Planck Institute.
6 posted on
03/28/2003 5:57:02 PM PST by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: vannrox
Wasn't Einstein very unhappy with quantum theory?
To: vannrox
Quantum bits. Faugh!
When I was a kid, things were made of atoms, and I don't remember anyone complaining!
13 posted on
03/28/2003 6:05:56 PM PST by
merrin
To: vannrox
I keep reading suppositions that denote time a quality when it is no more than an observance.
Time is nothing more than measurement relative to observation.
14 posted on
03/28/2003 6:10:39 PM PST by
freedom9
To: vannrox
Human curiosity (and human nature) always seeks neat models. The history of science demonstrates the hubris, however, in assuming that our models are absolute.
In this experiment, what is clearly proven (to me) is that there is a far deeper structure to the Cosmos than can be specified by quantum theory. The Eye of God and the photographs of Hubble behold a clarity beyond our understanding.
17 posted on
03/28/2003 6:15:18 PM PST by
friendly
To: vannrox
I knew it!!!
This is why my beer is always empty before I'm done being thirsty.
22 posted on
03/28/2003 6:21:38 PM PST by
soycd
To: vannrox
To look for the quantum blurring effect the European team used a parameter from optics, the Strehl ratio, to calculate how sharply the telescope should be able to resolve an image of the distant light source and its first Airy ring - a signature of the interference of the rays of light entering a telescope.They are now asking that not enough time has been spent looking for these effects. They are saying that the blurring inspectors be given another miilion years or so to confirm the blur.
To: vannrox
Does this mean that that guy who says he traveled in time actually did?
26 posted on
03/28/2003 6:23:54 PM PST by
Only1choice____Freedom
(Again, protestors have NO RIGHT TO BE HEARD, only a freedom to speak.)
To: vannrox
This may be one way to prove we actually exist as we perceive we do, rather than being stuck in some sort of virtual reality machine.
If we were stuck in a virtual reality machine using highly advanced forms of current technology then the computer would have a clock cycle (corresponding to a quantum of time) and resolution (corresponding to quanta of distances.)
But it seems this is not the case. We are not stuck in The Matrix!
Unless of course those sneaky computer bastards are using asynchronous clocking!
To: vannrox
Since the expected blurring "signature" of quantum space time isn't seen, however, it might mean that time isn't made of quantum bits, and neither are space or gravity.Great. Now what? Where did this come from?
28 posted on
03/28/2003 6:26:45 PM PST by
AndrewC
To: vannrox
To: vannrox
Huh?
To: vannrox
This sucks. The idea that the Universe is a finite-state machine was one of my favorites. I had no evidence for it of course, but it was a cool idea. |
33 posted on
03/28/2003 6:37:49 PM PST by
Nick Danger
(More rallys planned! www.freerepublic.net)
To: vannrox
It seems to me a quantum fluctuation might affect the brightness, but not the sharpness.
38 posted on
03/28/2003 6:41:51 PM PST by
djf
To: vannrox
Time to dust off my old college paper on the long range stabilization of interstellar vacuum fluctuations by cooperative macroscopic effects of virtual rotating wormholes. Maybe they'll pass it now.
To: vannrox
How will this affect "StarTrek" ? Can we still go Warp?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson