Quantum physics all wrong?

[XZeroII]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/renewable/Story/0,2763,1627425,00.html

Really cool. I can't wait to see this kind of technology get massive attention so that we can move forward on it.

It also could show that even modern science is not 100% accurate. Many people think that if a majority of scientists in the world believe it, then it must be true. Well...

 

[ntdz]

Wow, very interesting stuff. Wouldn't it be great if this is true and this comes to fruition?

 

[Todd33]

LOL.

One born every minute they say.

 

[kogase]

Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

 

[dannybin1742]

its been known for a while that quantum mechanic is not 100% correct, but it works for small things, hence lithography in the sub 90nm size, it does not work when paired with classical physics, hence the work on string theory. electrons are not in fixed orbits, orbits are based on the probability functions, so just cause something is unlikely, doesn't mean it can't happen or doesn't happen once in a while.

so goes abiogenesis as well

i would also wait until his research is verified by the academic community at large

 

[Rainsford]

Interesting...it certainly wouldn't be the first time an accepted scientific theory turned out to be wrong. And what is really cool is that if this guy turns out to be right, the rest of the scientific community will say "Hmm, well I guess we were wrong...good job". Politics could learn a lot from science

 

[dannybin1742]

Politics could learn a lot from science

very true

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

 

[OrganizedChaos]

the laws of physics don't apply to scientific crackpots and religious zealots.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I'm sorry but their are so many unexplained inconsistencies in this theory that I believe it must be the result of "intelligent design"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: OrganizedChaos
the laws of physics don't apply to scientific crackpots and religious zealots.

hehe, too true.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I'm sorry but their are so many unexplained inconsistencies in this theory that I believe it must be the result of "intelligent design"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...what?

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: ntdz
Wow, very interesting stuff. Wouldn't it be great if this is true and this comes to fruition?

Yup, but don't hold your breath. But it would be great.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

Yes, I did. I went and read the article. All I see are a bunch of claims. Like I said, I'll wait to see definitive validation of his research and prototype.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I have a hundred independent validation reports that says he doesn't.

Let's see MIT or a similar institution perform a rigorous and published trial. If it bears out, then I'll get excited.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I have a hundred independent validation reports that says he doesn't.

Let's see MIT or a similar institution perform a rigorous and published trial. If it bears out, then I'll get excited.

100 you say? Please give some links.

Why does MIT or a similar institution have to do it? MIT and other major institutions are politically affiliated and influenced. Personally, I trust independant scientists more than major ones.

 

[RampantAndroid]

Cold fusion...all...over....again. You can't pull energy out of your ass....the press fell for col fusion, and they've fallen for this.

How many people say all these drugs are perfectly fine, then they get taken off the market b/c they cause cancer. Independant scientists? Yeah, right. A bunch of twits all nodding b/c they have no clue what is going on doesn't make this valid.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I have a hundred independent validation reports that says he doesn't.

Let's see MIT or a similar institution perform a rigorous and published trial. If it bears out, then I'll get excited.

100 you say? Please give some links.

Why does MIT or a similar institution have to do it? MIT and other major institutions are politically affiliated and influenced. Personally, I trust independant scientists more than major ones.

I would like to see that guy in the article provide links as well. Can you provide them for me or can you contact him and have them fowarded to this site and post them ? Untill I see a working model that can be prodded, poked, broken down and rebuilt I'll have to pass on believing that guy's claims.


Some people are so naive it's not even funny.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I have a hundred independent validation reports that says he doesn't.

Let's see MIT or a similar institution perform a rigorous and published trial. If it bears out, then I'll get excited.

100 you say? Please give some links.

Why does MIT or a similar institution have to do it? MIT and other major institutions are politically affiliated and influenced. Personally, I trust independant scientists more than major ones.

Let's see his. After all he is making a claim which apparently sinks one of the most successful theories in all physics.

"independent"? What's that? Those are the guy's who give testimonials on infomercials. Dude, this sounds harsh, but you have no idea how academic research works. None at all.

Lets assume someone at MIT decided to look into this. Precisely what political affiliation are you talking about? What Smoking Man is going to go around dictating the results of the experiments? The MIT (or equivalent) physics doesn't give a rat's behind about politics. They are subject to peer review, and have their reputations at stake. They are going to screw up a hundred years of good reputation why? These people have enough brains, power and financial resources to own any corporation you can name and many countries if they so desired. That is not what drives them though. The goal would be to shred this into it's components and put it back together to see if it runs. It isn't that they might get that chance, but rather that their plate is full, and give as much credibility to the claim as if an auto mechanic had sworn that he had discovered that DNA is not the basis for heredity.

I've spent years in basic research at academic institutions, and I can tell you it's the most impartial, and verifiableway to get at the truth of these claims.

 

[bdude]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
http://www.guardian.co.uk/renewable/Story/0,2763,1627425,00.html

Really cool. I can't wait to see this kind of technology get massive attention so that we can move forward on it.

It also could show that even modern science is not 100% accurate. Many people think that if a majority of scientists in the world believe it, then it must be true. Well...

Modern science is never 100% accurate. This guy is just as much a product of modern science as any. He follows the same rules and regulations that govern how a paper is peer-reviewed and submitted.

As for the actual tech that is mentioned. I highly doubt it will lead anywhere. Closer inspection of the Blacklight website reveals little practical application.

 

[Kibbo86]

The practical application pales in significance vs upturning quantum mechanics on it's head. Of course, I'm not biting on this one until I see a review in a respected journal.

 

[cruiser1338]

You guys are forgetting, this is probably how most people felt about quantum physics. It's just a theory. Just because it is widely accepted, doesn't make it true. Just because Christianity is the most popular form of religion in the US at least, doesn't make it correct. I agree, take it with a pinch of salt, but don't just dismiss it.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Drift3r

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: kogase
Didn't read the article. It's a waste of time until the validity of his research and prototype have been verified.

Then you missed the part where it said he had 50 independent validation reports...

I have a hundred independent validation reports that says he doesn't.

Let's see MIT or a similar institution perform a rigorous and published trial. If it bears out, then I'll get excited.

100 you say? Please give some links.

Why does MIT or a similar institution have to do it? MIT and other major institutions are politically affiliated and influenced. Personally, I trust independant scientists more than major ones.

I would like to see that guy in the article provide links as well. Can you provide them for me or can you contact him and have them fowarded to this site and post them ? Untill I see a working model that can be prodded, poked, broken down and rebuilt I'll have to pass on believing that guy's claims.


Some people are so naive it's not even funny.

Look at the title of my post. IT ENDS WITH A QUESTION MARK! I'm not drawing conclusions. Other people in this thread are just like the majority of Americans and Scientists in the world. Closed minded and ignore evidence that contradicts what might make them look bad. It's all politics.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: cruiser1338
You guys are forgetting, this is probably how most people felt about quantum physics. It's just a theory. Just because it is widely accepted, doesn't make it true. Just because Christianity is the most popular form of religion in the US at least, doesn't make it correct. I agree, take it with a pinch of salt, but don't just dismiss it.

It's a widely accepted tested theory he claims to have disproven.

Imagine that I said I have proved General Relativity wrong, that I have independent scientists who agree. I have no background in relativity or physics. I'm a biologist by training (which is true enough).

It's on me to provide the grounds for that rather remarkable claim. Materials, means, methods. If the results of my experiments and my interpretation of the data is backed, then I have eclipsed Einstein, and am guaranteed a Nobel.

If he wants to surpass and show up the collective minds of Bohr, Schroedinger, Feynman, Murray Gell-Mann, and who knows how many others, plus the countless thousands of experiments done and reproduced, he had better be the greatest mind in all of history, and they idiots.

Possible? Sure. Likely? Nope.

If there is something to this (possible) I suspect his logic as to why it is so is incorrect.

 

[Perknose]

We've done a lot of testing. We've got 50 independent validation reports, we've got 65 peer-reviewed journal articles," he said.

I have to think that if this were true, we would have heard about it all long before now. Nevertheless . . .