Skip to comments.
Experiment Confirms a Crucial Property of Electrons, Unfortunately
Gizmodo ^
| 10 Oct, 2017
| Ryan F. Mandelbaum
Posted on 10/11/2017 7:35:44 PM PDT by MtnClimber
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
To: MtnClimber
The Standard Model is surprisingly accurate.
2
posted on
10/11/2017 7:36:33 PM PDT
by
MtnClimber
(For photos of Colorado scenery and wildlife, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
To: MtnClimber
“Proving theories wrong has led to entirely new fields of study”
Unless you’re talking climate science.
3
posted on
10/11/2017 7:41:17 PM PDT
by
Raycpa
To: MtnClimber
But...but that was settled science!
4
posted on
10/11/2017 7:42:15 PM PDT
by
Hootowl
To: MtnClimber
The Standard Model is surprisingly accurate.
So was Newton's until Einstein came along.
To: Raycpa
Climate change is an anti-civilization religion of the left. Those in this religion do not believe data or real science. They do believe in repressing advanced society.
6
posted on
10/11/2017 7:45:58 PM PDT
by
MtnClimber
(For photos of Colorado scenery and wildlife, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
To: MtnClimber
Help me out here Climber.
I’m going out to the sub-ether. How does a wave always match polarity guidance regardless of bounce or distance?
7
posted on
10/11/2017 7:46:08 PM PDT
by
eyedigress
((Old storm chaser from the west))
To: eyedigress
I speak of the + vs - effect and it always works?
8
posted on
10/11/2017 7:47:23 PM PDT
by
eyedigress
((Old storm chaser from the west))
To: MtnClimber
I vision a round polarity that matches my radio waves.
9
posted on
10/11/2017 7:49:10 PM PDT
by
eyedigress
((Old storm chaser from the west))
To: eyedigress
I took a class in wave particle duality in college, but that was long ago and I do not know the details of current research.
10
posted on
10/11/2017 7:49:59 PM PDT
by
MtnClimber
(For photos of Colorado scenery and wildlife, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
To: Raycpa
Climate science is only a conjecture.
To: MtnClimber
I wonder what Dr. Sheldon Cooper has to say about this.
12
posted on
10/11/2017 7:50:34 PM PDT
by
july4thfreedomfoundation
("You can't fix America without pissing off the people who broke it".....Bill Mitchell)
To: MtnClimber
Didn’t the recent Higgs Boson particulars show that it has an unaddressed discrepancy?
13
posted on
10/11/2017 7:52:02 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is either satire or opinion. Or both.)
To: MtnClimber
It’s just another step in the process ...
(see tag)
14
posted on
10/11/2017 8:01:49 PM PDT
by
plsjr
(<>< Mankind "knows" by trial and error; Only the CREATOR really knows His creation.)
To: MtnClimber
I’ll share something with you.
There is NO calculation that explains the reason why it works.
15
posted on
10/11/2017 8:04:58 PM PDT
by
eyedigress
((Old storm chaser from the west))
To: Raycpa
You beat me to it.
Proving theories wrong has led to entirely new fields of study. The fruits that come from wrongness can be so rewarding that scientists devote a considerable amount of time to probing well-known theories, hoping to find a crack.
None of the above applies the the #FakeScience of Climate Change.
16
posted on
10/11/2017 8:11:02 PM PDT
by
TigersEye
(0bama. The Legacy is a lie. The lie is the Legacy.)
To: akalinin
So was Newton’s until Einstein came along.
...
Or until somebody noticed Mercury’s orbit wasn’t what it was predicted to be.
This anomalous rate of precession of the perihelion of Mercury’s orbit was first recognized in 1859 as a problem in celestial mechanics, by Urbain Le Verrier. His reanalysis of available timed observations of transits of Mercury over the Sun’s disk from 1697 to 1848 showed that the actual rate of the precession disagreed from that predicted from Newton’s theory by 38 (arc seconds) per tropical century (later re-estimated at 43” by Simon Newcomb in 1882).
17
posted on
10/11/2017 8:16:01 PM PDT
by
Moonman62
(Make America Great Again!)
To: MtnClimber
You could call climate change Islam and it would basically mean the same thing.
18
posted on
10/11/2017 8:21:10 PM PDT
by
libh8er
To: akalinin
Everybody wants to be the next Einstein.
19
posted on
10/11/2017 8:44:11 PM PDT
by
ctdonath2
(It's not "white privilege", it's "Puritan work ethic". Behavior begets consequences.)
To: Moonman62
I can't put my finger on my notes at the moment, but I believe James Clerk Maxwell had already fired the first salvos against Newtonian Physics a few years before that. Very close to 1859, it became obvious before Maxwell first published his unified theory of the electromagnetic field that electromagnetic induction was what would later come to be known as Lorentz Invariant and that Newtonian Mechanics was not.
There was even a period before the Special Theory of Relativity when physicists would say "everything obeys Newtonian mechanics, except for electric current."
20
posted on
10/11/2017 8:55:17 PM PDT
by
FredZarguna
(And what Rough Beast, its hour come 'round at last, slouches toward Fifth Avenue to be born?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson