OT. The Big Boy's Back in March!

Where are you #Sisu ?
These last few posts form a paradigm of scientific theory and argument.
Two rival factions using the same general theoretical model and the same observable data and coming to two completely opposing conclusions according to their own desired outcomes.
Both of which are an equal amount of bollocks, because they're based on an entirely specious premise.

 

I've been very active in other threads how much time do you want me to commit to Not06 !

Besides, if you think I am going to partake in a round of Sisu is wrong, or childish ridicule, you are sadly mistaken

Lastly, RHC does not want this thread to turn into a stupid schoolyard argument where non experts debate the finer points of things they only vaguely understand

 

Not at all, did you read my post properly?
I just thought you might be amused by the "science" going on on this thread.

 

Ahh, I never read the posts before yours and expected the usual diet of tomfoolery

 

In your humble opinion

 

What makes you think that?

 

Haha. You don't really want me to go into why it's a load of old bollocks, do you?

 

I hadn't you in mind when I said that btw.

 

Having read this properly, I agree with all of it.
#allaboutinterpretation

Lets raise 2 trillion to do experiments no one else can do, and make claims with our findings, no one else can afford to disprove it. Can you already smell the Nobels


After having to put up with UIR for 2 hours I was not in the mood saint

 

Fanny

 

Screw you stupid science flanders.

I am just saying that you have data and two different interpretations and absolutely no fracking way of determining which interpretation is correct. No one else can repeat said work cos they got no LHC.


If you can't see an issue with that then what can I say

I am not making any judgement calls here on who is right ffs.

 

That's the whole ****ing idea of cutting-edge experimental science

 

I always assumed that this thread was just a bit of silliness, created for some amusing pseudo-scientific banter.

I'm not so sure any more.

 

What is? that only one group can do the experiments, claim they are right, cannot be challenged, and collect Nobels?

No, if the majority of science goes down that route, it only slows progress. A cornerstone of science is being able to reproduce and confirm results

It's different with say the stuff NASA does because the results of their work can be applied. If cutting-edge science produces tangible benefits that can be applied then that is confirmation that said results were indeed correct.

When said cutting-edge scientific results remain in the domain of theory, nothing can be proven, it still amounts to theory, yet success is claimed and awards collected thereafter.

Big differece mate.

Now if the results of the work can be applied to the real world, like the way relativity has been applied to GPS and the whole time dialation thing with clocks in space, then that is different.

So if or when they can apply any results to the real world in some application, that would validate the theory. Until then, it's theory with differing interpretations.

This is why relativity is partially theory and partially proven, time dialation can be calculated with relativity and has ben applied to the physical world, though black holes are still highly theoretical.

 

Red gets science rage when you question the LHC or the H-B

 

I don't know enough to question the activities of the LHC or the existence of the Bison, but the correlation between these things and the fortunes of a football club is clearly absurd.

 

I can tell you now, Bison exists

please log in to view this image

As for the Higgs Boson, Neither can I, but I do like throwing spanners in the works.

 

It could be a Buffalo- it all depends on your interpretation.

 

I was referring to Bison from Streetfighter video games Yeah there's that other Bison too

 

please log in to view this image