Ok - I understand...


As you're mentioning that now - did you watch the film "What the Bleep do we know?". It's about quantum physics and their meaning and is quite interesting. There also is this animated bonus film which I think is done pretty well and also describes what you just did:
English:
Dr. Quantum - Double Slit Expermint
Dr. Quantum - Flatland

German:
Dr. Quantum - Doppelspalt Experiment
Dr. Quantum in Flachland


Enjoy your meal
Toast

Dr Quantum is cool!

I was familiar with the concepts of "flatland" and the "dual-slit experiment" already.
But I didnt know that the Dual-slit tests had "changed" whrn measured... Wow...

Yes, I've seen both movies from them, but about half-way through the first movie I really couldn't help but wonder why they rip so much out of it's true context.

Basically that movie tries to promote a certain philosophical idea, rather than explain how it all works scientifically. That's a bit of a shame actually.

They sort of go ten steps too far with their extraordinary interpretations.

http://xkcd.com/638/

Well I don't think it's a shame - there's just nothing else one could do here. I've got some small insights in this topic and to say the truth it's something you don't really want to explain to "normal people"...

Especially not as a video that has to fit on one DVD...

So in the end you just can talk of results on a level that has a "trivial" niveau ending up in daily experiences using easy to understand examples. I found the result pretty entertaining and those who aren't too much into science get quite some insights that way like the example with touching the basket ball and telling people they don't ever really touch the ball itself...

Explanations like that are even beyond most good science shows you see on TV (and I'm not talking of weekly shows or something like that)...

Enjoy your meal
Toast

Evilsob, i have to comment, i know you sort of believe.. but i will talk about it.

You said, u tube is not trusted, So i think Google video too, and anyother video hoster!! BEcause thats the only way people can Host thing., for people to see them, otherwise there was no need to post.

Also i saw a discovery channel documentary/program and i think is trust-able,Oh! but its on youtube, ehh. ok i wont be so sarcastic, but. Because what you see on TV is not the truth! its Filtered.. So its easy to think that Gov and other powers censure things.

And you tube is like freedom thats the thing, of course alot of wasted space, but there are good things.

That Discovery thats Yes there is alien space crafts , we studied it, we believe , there is life out there, its a fact. Now like you say ( i never heard of project disclosure) thats sort of ur problem, people have to know things by their own, if they want to. So if i say i know there is ALIEN, its a fact, and im 100% sure, its because i know. Now because you don know, or live hided from the reality, and for you its not a fact, its doest mean that my fact is wrong.

I had contact with ALIEN, i saw i know what i saw, its like some abduction, there are alot of them, and people still questioning, there is UFo?? like Duuhh just because they think that stories are fake? well i saw, my father saw, my ucle saw, in many different situation. And the ship was something like floating 10 meters from me? i dont know any US tecnology like for example.

but i have no fact, i have no pic, but if you there you would know it true.

PS: do you want me to go screea, everywhere, OH GOD.. what go to TV, make myself victim? lool thats just crazy, let live with it.

You had to comment, so I have to reply.

Here is what I believe. Based on my life's experience and intermittant research. I can only state what I believe from
educated conjecture as I have never had a 'close encounter', but I have on many occasions seen 'lights in the sky'.

1> Extra-terrestrial intelligence exists. Ita a mathematical certainty.
2> Extra-terrestrial 'visitations' are possible but EXTREMELY unlikely, due to distances and "needle in a haystack" syndrome.
3> If any Extra-terrestrial 'visitations' HAVE occured, then they will be very rare because they serve little (observable) purpose.
4> Extra-dimensional intelligence is highly likely, based on my own derived theory of the structure of space-time.
5> Extra-dimensional intelligence is likely, based on publicly accepted theory of the structure of space-time.
6> Extra-dimensional 'incursions' are possible but EXTREMELY UNEXPLAINABLE, due to our lack of knowledge/understanding.
The only proof we could gain would be that something solid 'materialised', moved inexplicable, then vanished again.
7> Extra-dimensional 'visitations' by travellers from "another" dimension are nearly impossible. (too long to explain reasoning)

Well, I suppose that pretty much sums up my beliefs in "aliens", most with reasons.

Now, the idea of what is "fact" is debatable.
It wasnt THAT long ago that it was a well-known FACT that the earth was flat, or that the earth was the center of the universe.
PUBLIC fact can be wrong, but they are 'what is generally accepted to be true". Still pretty weak though.
Basically, a FACT is a 'personal opinion' that you have enough 'personally experienced' proof for YOU to consider it FACT.

Now, with 'public release' systems like youtube (and yahoo-video) and the number of hits they get,
any "one-mans fact" can get accepted by millions in time, and a well-produced video can do it fast.
So anyone could put together a Ufo animation in, say, 3DGS.
Use something like Windows Movie Maker to blue-screen it onto live-action video.
Then record that with a handycam aimed at the monitor and post it on youtube, easy...
Almost instant proof that aliens have visited, and stole the Statue of Liberty...

So youtube and the like cant be trusted as proof cause its easy for people to fake for fun.
BUT REAL STUFF IS DEFINATELY IN THERE, somewhere, you just have to use your own intelligence
to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Real TV isnt much better. Its 'facts' are largely based "popular opinion" and
then filtered by the "angle" that the TV station wished to promote.
(please insert 'Government Conspiricy" here if YOU choose to)

So what is all boils down to, I feel, is this.

The word FACT is usually used wrong, and it should be internationally-illegal to be used by ANYONE
unless they hold a (internationally-regognised) university degree or diploma or some-such.

As is stands now, one man's fact is ONLY another man's opinion.

Well i agree of with, i think your a man with brains. People are just different, one have a different way to believe, some people need alot proofs other not, depends alot.

Im not sure about the time travel problem, they (visitors) and i dont mean only Aliens, lol thats a half of it, but actual humans from the future, traveling to now, to fix some things.. like, changing the path of something, that will avoid a World war 3, and if its isn't happened,(now a little of speculation:) maybe its because they fix it, because, the survivurs got alot of mutation, from DNA, that in some centuries, it will cause a massive genetic problem, caused by a NUke, some centuries ago ( which is now) so they just came, to fix it, to change their own future, our future.

And time travel, its a thing that is possible, with portals, its something now yet very well known.
The other way, is... Jump rooms right? like jump rooms to mars, perhaps.
Anyway i must say it. NASA, officially published, a article about..what they found, a sort of portal on the earth atmosphere. Which can teleport matter, sun injectio matter, which they studies the portal dimensions, etc etc.. Which opens every 7 minutes etc etc.. So its possible, it exists, and we can use, it, we just didn't know it.

So most the problems of aliens you stated, will be neutral. and if they are more advanced, why not consider it as a probability.

Alot of same, and only us on earth, well like on the movie , than it would be a wast of space.

Well, thanks for the compliment.
Im unfortunately one of those people who need a lot of proof, connected to other proofs etc, connected to other proofs etc.
"You cant build a solid house without a solid foundation, and you cant have a solid foundation without solid ground beneath."
But I also need a serious amount of proof to DIS-believe in something too. And proof that something DOESNT exist is hard to come by.

As for time-travelling visitors, I almost dis-believe in that, and you may have seen why in the second half of THIS post from another thread.
Its my belief that travelling back in time CANNOT change anything....
After all, knowing human beings, you can be certain that if a time machine exsisted ANYWHERE in time,
then SOMEONE would think "wouldnt the world be a better place if this had been invented 100 years ago?".
He then take the design back and 'invents' it then, AND any other technology required to get it going.
Then someone ELSE from 'then' would think "wouldnt the world be a better place if this had been invented 100 years ago?".
Ad infinitum....
Therefore its likely that IF a time machine were EVER possible, it would already exist everyWHEN.

As for portals, well yes. Ive been under the suspicion that there is a floating 'rip' in space/time that
drifts around inside the Bermuda Triangle. Randomly opening and closing.
And has been for at least as long as shipping records have been kept.

But I dont think the "solar portals" are what they seem. I have a suspicion that the percieved speed of the
flares is not a "portal" as such, but a relativity-effect caused by a mixture of time-dialation and gravity waves.
Im waiting in more "measurements" to be taken before I hypothesize any further.

Regardless of the 'aliens' level of technology, the 'problems' I stated a still apply.
And you may need to read them over again if you think I dont "consider it as a probability".
I just believe that due to the problems stated, it is a very low probability.

And this little snippet as lost me completely. What is it in relation to?

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. I guess that's true, but then again, scientific workings and it's evidence isn't exactly what this movie was about, but more so explaining a quite specific philosophical theory, suggesting the evidence for their theory is out there.

That's basically foul play.

A non-scientific person can be easily fooled into believing all those claims are true, where in reality there's a lot to be discovered yet, let alone proven.



True, then again, when science becomes commercial, it's usually a bad thing caused by people with an agenda.



Right, except in that particular movie, quite a lot of things were taken out of context.



Actually, you are touching the ball itself, after all movement changes by forces caused by you. The thing they were trying to explain is the locational existence on a sub-atomic level is something non-deterministic and based on (random) chance.

Obviously the basketball example makes a good visual representation of that idea, but in a practical sense the ball is not really 'everywhere'. (It's perhaps also where a multi-dimensional idea conflicts with our every day practice of a single dimensional life (we can currently only go forward in time, in 3D).)

This and many other examples do take science and change it into something else. (For example the idea that thoughts and / or (mental) energy can influence physical objects and it's behavior as well. Great, but total new age science bs. )



Perhaps, but I think an easy example in most cases can't truly encompass everything a very complex subject is really about. A good teacher makes sure to give an easy example so a student can understand the next steps more easily, but in just about all cases an easy example doesn't change the complexity of the original subject itself. What I'm trying to say is that that movie tries to bend the examples into something that it's not, without being honest about it.

For one the practical implications. For example the basketball idea. IF it would really be both everywhere and nowhere at the same time, you wouldn't be able to even play that game.



You're confusing theories with facts here again. NASA speculates about such things all the time. Doesn't mean there actually IS a portal anywhere. They say the same things about black holes and it's theoretical probability of being a inter-dimensional portal.