Recent content by Misericorde

"The human rectum is almost nightmarishly elastic..." -Patton Oswalt

Ditto.

Uh huh, yet they predict and let us develop technology for all that it lacks the elegance you seem to want.

The laws of physics seem just fine, but our understanding of them leaves something to be desired. Why is that surprising, and why do you think the solution is anything other than the natural evolution of existing theories and development of new ones? Where does metaphysics enter the picture...

I'd agree with that; it's hard not to become enamored with these ideas, but it's also hard not to fall out of love with them given time and reading. It's one of the joys of science that you get these amazing concepts to bat around, but the other side is the need for rigor. Without any hope of...

It's not 100%, but it's pretty fat nail in that coffin. A lot of the "Dark" stuff other than matter is used to justify any number of pet theories; tread with care.

That kid is either a budding genius, or in desperate need of prozac! Possibly both... “The atomic bomb made the prospect of future war unendurable. It has led us up those last few steps to the mountain pass; and beyond there is a different country.” (Oppenheimer)

Can you gain information that a pair of particles is entangled by running this test, or would the test lead to decoherence?

I was under the impression that 'Dark Flow' is at the level of, "might be something, might be an irregularity on the image."? It seems everyone uses this one to justify some claim, from colliding universes and more. In terms of established science, you seem to be going on with a bit of nonsense...

How can a multiple universe theory of dark matter POSSIBLY be LESS complex? You'll need to include all of the elements of the a one-universe cosmology, and in addition you have to figure out how two spatially and temporally separated bubbles interact in what seems like a pretty uniform manner...

I don't know, but I get the point, and it's a good one. "...in the Twilight there is no difference between the absence of darkness and the absence of light." (English translation, Sergei Lukyanenko)

A quantum of time doesn't fit into any theory I'm aware of; what are you talking about? Time is either a measurement, or a dimension; you might as well ask for the quanta of length. These are not things which ask for or require quanta, even if they have a limit to their divisibility.

A cosmic string would be a potential 'real world' example which is a strange shape with strange consequences, don't you think?

"...That you could check" is exactly right. When people talk about observers, it's the "could" that really matters, not that a real person or cat or atom is around to do it.

I'm not sure you have a viable model of anything without presupposing the vacuum. If you don't have it, then you're breaking QM statistics from the get-go.