"Einstein's only flaw was thinking that the result was absurd."
Is it not absurd that spooky action at a distance removes locality and causality from particle behavior?
Certainly seems absurd! The only problem is, it is experimentally correct.
"exhaustively shown to be correct by experiment."
What about the "worst prediction in the history of physics"? Why does quantum mechanics predict that dark energy should be 10^120 times greater than observed?
What, vacuum energy? It's only a "worst prediction" when you try to fold general relativity into QED. Without Einstein's field equation, in QM vacuum energy is irrelevant, since only differences in energy are measurable.
"RGB" is not a synonym for "Colored LED lights."
QM and the interpretation discussed in the article has never really been proven.
exhaustively shown to be correct by experiment. The interpretations of quantum mechanics, on the other hand, aren't susceptible to experimental tests.
You will get people pointing at the electro-weak force predictions and how accurate it is.
You're a little confused here. Electro-weak unification fits within the framework of quantum mechanics, but no more and no less than everything fits within the framework of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is just the tool by which you make the calculations.
To suggest whether quantum mechanics is correct, you need an alternative hypothesis, one that explains fundamental things like the Stern-Gerlach experiment, two-slit electron diffraction, semiconductor physics, the spectrum of the hydrogen atom, and, yes, the Aspect experiment.
Bellis inequality seemingly discredited Einsteins EPR.
To the contrary. Bell's inequality theorem showed that EPR was indeed inherent in quantum mechanics, couldn't be explained away by any hidden-variable theory... and (with the Aspect experiment) was experimentally verified.
Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen's analysis was spot on: quantum mechanics really did predict that. Einstein's only flaw was thinking that the result was absurd.
But it's an election year, and the Democrats are pretty desperate.
The company lied. The FTC called them on it. Barely even news, and certainly not about to change any election results.
No reasonable person would expect a clownish RGB-festooned facial covering to filter viruses.
Just as a reminder, face masks don't filter viruses. They filter the small droplets which carry the viruses.
Which is, for example, why surgeons wear them in operating rooms.
Just like the N95, it's only useful against much bigger particles.
Exactly. That was the confusion early on in the pandemic, people not understanding that if you filter out the droplets, the viruses are filtered out with them.
The persistent myth was created by physicists
No it wasn't.
who would tell their students not to work on the foundations of QM because Bohr and his ilk had the answers. It wasn't a myth you would have heard outside of physics.
It wasn't heard inside of physics, either. Yes, I'm a physicist.
And until recently, there was definitely a bias against doing anything on the foundations of QM.
If by "foundations of quantum mechanics" you mean addressing the question "what does it mean?", you're right, physicists mostly addressed that question only in long discussions in the bar. But the "bias" was practical, not conceptual: quantum mechanics worked. Do the calculations, get the answers, compare them to measurements. "Foundations" questions never seemed to give you any way to do experimental confirmations. They were always more considered questions of philosophy, not physics.
No shit Sherlock, we're not talking AAA batteries, how brilliant of you to have noticed.
You were the one who said that the reason you knew cheap batteries can't exist was because you can't buy them in the local hardware store. That was trolling, pure and simple. You even got that badge of honor, "-1 troll," so you can tell people how awful slashdot mods down people who are only trolling, can't they take a joke? And you drew the response you wanted, so you are probably feeling pretty smug.
In fact, batteries have been getting better at a remarkable rate. Sorry you haven't noticed.
The universe doesn't rotate because there is no reference frame for it to rotate in, if there were then the universe wouldn't be the universe.
In General Relativity, rotation is not relative. You can tell if you're rotating without reference to the outside universe, and in fact Gödel showed a solution to the Einstein field equations for the case of a rotating universe (...and the solution was pretty weird).
But, sufficiently precise astronomical measurements have looked for whether the universe is rotating, and it turns out it isn't.
in recognition of the fact that what the various inventors are really claiming is a means of bypassing Newton's third law.
> Oh, Newton made law that says propellant free drives do not exist?
Yes, Newton' third law: every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In physics, usually phrased as "law of conservation of momentum": if you push mass in one direction, you have to push other mass in the other direction such that the sum of the momentum is zero.
> How does a Mag Lev Train work then?
Magnetic fields push down on the Earth.
> How does an MHD submarine drive work?
Electromagnetic forces push water backwards
> How the fuck does a railgun work?
Electromagnetic fields push the acceleration magnets backwards
> Newton never made/found/imagined a law of physics that forbids propellant free engines.
He did; Newton's third law.
> What the funk are you learning in your schools? Physics.
If The FBI has such specific information ("23 pipeline operators"), then it should be easy to inform the companies and support them in fixing the problem.
It is not the holes that have already been identified that are the problem. It is the fact that the existence of some holes that have been found implies that a other attack vectors exist that have not been found. The best personnel to find these holes is the cybersecurity teams in charge of the systems being attacked, not the FBI.
Honestly, knowing the FBI, this is more likely about justifying their own existence. Ask them to show the evidence, and have a third-party check it out.
You're suggesting that the FBI tell the bad guys how they found what they do, and how they identified the attackers?
Good idea. Let the bad guys know what the bad guys need to do to hide their tracks, and tell them which systems we know are compromised, so they can know which systems they've compromised we don't know about.
Not mutually exclusive, you know.
Instead of saying, "Oh noes! China is going to hack us in a devastating cyber Pearl Harbor! We know they're in all these systems!", how come they don't just do their real job and have these systems cleaned up and locked down?
Why do you think that they aren't doing that?
The difficulty is that the exploits they have found and the systems that are known to be compromised imply the existence of exploits we haven't found and systems we don't know are compromised.
We've known for years our infrastructure is vulnerable. Why have they seemed to do nothing about it?
Maybe, by telling people that the infrastructure is likely to be attacked?
No they should send a nice little not over to the State Department detailing their evidence and what laws the threat actors have already broken.
How do you know that this hasn't been done?
In general, however, anti-espionage agencies don't like to "detail their evidence" in public because this will, of course, reveal how they have gathered their evidence, leading the black hats to stop doing those things and hide the leaks showing what they did and who they are.
The state department should then recommend the FBI prosecute these individuals and assist them by arranging for extradition
Are you really so brain-dead that you believe that the FBI has the power extradite foreign citizens working in a foreign country for a foreign government, for a US crime that probably isn't against the law in that country?
Even aside from the point that knowing what country the attacks originate from is a far cry from knowing the names and addresses of the individual coders who are doing the attacks.
if that diplomatically makes sense.
Which it doesn't.
Real Users know your home telephone number.
