Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/29/24 in all areas

  1. Modern Scientist: "Now that I've explained game theory and how it applies to your unhappy marriage, are you willing to reconsider?" Unhappy Spouse: https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/154532e7-7d71-4e58-a610-3fa631b83e82
    1 point
  2. Thread bumping is something we discourage. Other people probably feel similarly about some of their own threads, and if they all get bumped, nothing changes - a thread on page 4 is still on page 4.
    1 point
  3. Scientists are responding with mainstream science answers to your questions. Humans have a vast repository of accumulated knowledge, things we've tested before so we can predict what they will do with great accuracy. Mainstream science is based on these best supported explanations for various phenomena. Your ideas are NOT based on mainstream science. You have chosen to make up other explanations that make sense only to you. This isn't how science is done, so you don't feel as if you're being helped. You should study more mainstream science.
    1 point
  4. It seems I was wrong about my previous observation. The OP is not a youngster, eager to learn, but rather a very immature person who thinks anyone who disagrees with his ramblings is deserving of a neg rep point. I guess it is less effort than making a valid argument. Tell me, Gioele, what new insights into nature does your classification system reveal ? This is not science ( which is what we try to do here ), and, if an attempt at philosophy, this is the worst kind based on the belief that the workings of the universe can be realized simply by thought in your own mind, with total disregard for observational evidence. If you learned some science you would know that the 'particles' that inhabit your atom environment, are a loosely defined concept until actually observed by an interaction. Prior to that, they are a mathematical construct of varying probability amplitudes, that could extend way outside what you consider their environment. The bonds that you say inhabit the environment of molecules, are actually the property of an energy deficit of atoms that does not allow them the possibility to escape; they are not a 'thing'. There are way too many misconceptions about science to list here. Please heed my previous suggestion to learn some actual science, and stop neg repping people who are trying to help you learn some. If, on the other hand, you'd rather continue in your blissful ignorance, keep neg repping people who try to correct your misunderstandings; I'm sure you won't be missed after you get banned.
    -1 points
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.