• 0 Posts
  • 55 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: January 24th, 2024

help-circle
  • This isn’t debate class. Going against the consensus position requires greater proof. If you want to say pi has a determined end digit you need more than the fact that NASA only uses 15 decimals and calculating the circumference of a 46Billion light year spherical universe within the error of an atom requires 37. Pi and other irrational numbers still continue far beyond that. Regardless of additional digits being unnecessary/useless logically.

    1+1=2 sure but you’re arguing the same stuff that quantum theories have been showing time and again. Schrodingers cat example was originally a point about the absurdity of the seeming logical flaw of a molecule being in a state before observation. The cat is dead because of the poison regardless of when you open the box. Molecularly the measurements we have however show these differing states. Perhaps that is a measurement error but multiple measures, multiple people, and unless you have math or measurement otherwise the data shows this is what happens.

    You discount the counterfactuals and whoever Aaronson is. You discount the wavefunction theory collapse. You’re trying to argue from logic but without any real proofs of your assumptions.

    I’m not asking for belief much less faith. The quantum theory side has their arguments well-known and well-hashed at this point if you can’t bother to go beyond the chatbot and learn “why” thats on you not me. You apparently don’t understand the math well enough to explain it or show it so…whatever, feel free to rejoice in your arrogance towards everyone else.

    You random lemmy, you’ve figured out the universe and fixed quantum mechanics, the next Nobel Laureate, wow! we’ll all see your genius in 20y when the field catches up. /s


  • I mean you’re the one disagreeing with most of the field without actual proof on a tiny forum instead of publishing an opinion to Nat Comm or other actual journal. You give yourself no qualifications to be someone arguing against the field. You present to an audience containing a lot of non-physicisicts (who nonetheless can follow logic) but define pretty much none of the theories you reference while still dragging this out for 30+ paragraphs. There are multiple points where you outright dismiss contrary views without reason besides “I don’t like it therefore its stupid and wrong.”

    I’m not sure what response you are hoping for here. Unless you have an alternative with the logic and math behind it your opinion isn’t really worth anything.






  • Yet, hybrid vehicles and EVs continue to gain market share. Sure theres a lot of idiots who just want a big truck to stroke their own ego but even those are starting to become hybrid or electric. There’s been a downturn on full EVs after the tax credit expiration but hybrids are still growing strong and the only real benefit to a hybrid vs generic ICE is fuel economy.

    EVs need incentives and rebates because they are an extra consideration for other reasons, primarily range and charging availability remaining a concern. Also media scares of EV car fires and battery life, etc.