HexHammer

No, Newton didn't explain it at all. Dark matter is still unexplained. No. Einstein wouldn't come up with anything if he was born in the rainforest and had no access to school, Newton's writings etc etc. Every step are always build upon something else, only super genius pushes things forward with great inventions. So you makes no sense. Failing at philosophy. You sure sound like you don't do your own lawsuits. I make assumptions and theories based on what I've learned along the way. It's not that I'm forcing you to be here and endure the torture of my silly theories.

Making equations isn't in itself pioneering, discovering new geographical areas are pioneering, no math involved necessarily, so your definition is off. Uhmm is this supposed to be the solution? ..if so it's utterly bad at best, it's vague and doesn't fully explain the actual mechanics https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.4616

Yes but nor does any model fully explain how a galaxy are hold together, where the "black matter" are theorized. Thanks for explanation. SORRY!!!!! ...the features on this site are horrible, I am used to sites having color coding for which posts I have watched @_@ too much going on, too confuzzled, but thanks!!!

If a BH can store information, then maybe there can in certain cases be entanglement then what is in the future can root back the past, so both ends can be manipulated. I have nothing solid, only theories. Yes maybe my theories are just post-hoc stories, but if you are so wise then solve the double slit experiment yourselves, since it still stands unsolved.

I'm sure least black holes can manipulate time, by pushing and pulling fabric of space to make time go both ways. Maybe this also applies for neutron stars and magnetars, who knows? If I have to confess to the really mad thoughts then maybe black holes can partially act like a conscious observer since it can store information and spins so fast that it can act like a computer. Happy now? Your explanation of quantum tunneling doesn't explain anything about what actually is going on, only a vague surficial description, but thanks anyways. I prefer often to make my own deeper explanations because the current are insufficient, sure it rubs you guys the wrong way to have some stirr.

If multiple sources speak of looping path integral, then maybe there's something about it that you don't see or want to see. What you do, takes high skill. But just because you have high skills in 1 area of quantum, doesn't mean you have equally high skills in all areas of quantum mechanics. I don't doubt you have high skills in your field of expertise. I am a pioneer, it's very obvious since you doesn't seem to take black holes into your equation. But I do. Better try and fail, than not try at all. Yesyes, but then oh wise one! Please explain quantum tunneling?

No, nor your qualifications, it's the complexity of quantum mechanics, it seems you are very good at what you do, and you know the laws of quantum mechanics very well, but you are not the "pioneer" that wonders why the photon can go through none of the slits in superposition, and I must disagree with you where you claim that the looping paths isn't real in Path Integral, which I think it is since it may be the lead/hint to why the photon can go through none of the slits in superposition. Rigid thinking doesn't lead to pioneering.

On a 2nd read it seems he doesn't understand my point, he jumps to conclusions and doesn't seem to wield his moderator badge well, surely doesn't do his own lawsuits. Never claimed infallibility, but I never question swansont's skills, but merely that there has been some measurement differences in the old quantum experiments, like 1 experiments stated that photons are particles, other experiment stated it was waves, so each experiment can show different results. Same with people claiming super strings doesn't exist, then can't explain the background noise or whatever it's called. I'm the obnoxious kind of person that doesn't take things as face value, i need things confirmed and reconfirmed. Sorry.

..............maybe it would be a good idea to read the full context?

I know lots of PhD not exactly infalible people.

Tyrannical argument and non admissible.

That doesn't explain the difference between photon going through either slit with observer effect, and without, so you fail at your own game. That's with observer effect, and you still can't explain why the photon can act so differently in superposition. Oh yes, like you "debunked" by claim by greater dilation without observer effect with your homebrew evidence that are unconfirmed from independent sources, so it still stands unverified as I understand it? I must ask for a better qualified to judge my work, I'm sorry especially when you just make the poor statement of the photon being particles that's why it makes the interference pattern, that explains exactly nothing, it's something I would expect from a 14 y old kid. Then please reprimand Strange for continuously bashing and verbally abusing me with unprofound accusations.

I dunno, I'm not a scientist, only a "sofa professor" what do I know?

Einstein's 2 clocks experiment where the 1 would be normal, other would go a bit slower, that's may qualify as going backwards due to dilation, so you don't win this one sorry! When Darwin first proposed his theory, it wasn't proved by mainstream science, but rideculed, so you are wrong again.

If it's truly just because the photon is a wave, then why are there a difference in when the camera is on, and off? When on it just makes 2 lines, when off it make an interference pattern. I can't prove it beyond reasonable doubt, I have only theories. https://youtu.be/A9tKncAdlHQ?t=456 "according to the laws of physics, this can happen!" patience my padawan, just watch a few more sec.