Is creating something in a lab and observing it, the same asobserving existing material?

Is it reasonable to assume what they create in collider is identical to what already exists but is invisible (at the moment?).

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-theory-...erse-mass.html

On 9/25/2015 4:56 AM, RichA wrote:
Is it reasonable to assume what they create in collider is identical to what already exists but is invisible (at the moment?).

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-theory-...erse-mass.html

This is the way science works. Observation leads to hypothesis which
leads to prediction which is then confirmed 0r denied by
experimentation. If confirmed it becomes a theory which must be tested
for some time before assuming anything..

Of course this is the way science is supposed to work, today it seems
most "scientists" start with the assumption and find ways to "prove"

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 8:28:39 PM UTC+1, David Staup wrote:

This is the way science works. Observation leads to hypothesis which
leads to prediction which is then confirmed 0r denied by
experimentation. If confirmed it becomes a theory which must be tested
for some time before assuming anything..

Of course this is the way science is supposed to work, today it seems
most "scientists" start with the assumption and find ways to "prove"

You are an empirical cultist or more like a trained monkey or a parrot who only repeats what has been drilled into him without the slightest notion or consideration as to what purpose the statement is supposed to serve.

The 'way science works' didn't begin as the 'scientific method' nor its format as the 'universal theory of gravitation', it began as 'rule 3' -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

The followers of this despicable creed do not even understand the awful attempt of Newton who loosely pointed in the direction of predictive astronomy, the one built on the calendar framework, to serve as a link between the fall of an apple (experimental sciences) to the motions of the planets and moon.

The devastation is total, not even the link between one rotation and one sunrise/sunset survives as a fact within the 'scientific method' community and bolstered by a few magnification hobbyists and their celestial sphere universe, together they have turned astronomy into a train wreck and disruptive the research of terrestrial sciences.

The 'scientific method' indeed ! - the most disruptive,long running and corrosive scandal ever to visit humanity and rotting Western civilization from the inside.

On 9/25/2015 2:59 PM, oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 8:28:39 PM UTC+1, David Staup wrote:

This is the way science works. Observation leads to hypothesis which
leads to prediction which is then confirmed 0r denied by
experimentation. If confirmed it becomes a theory which must be tested
for some time before assuming anything..

Of course this is the way science is supposed to work, today it seems
most "scientists" start with the assumption and find ways to "prove"

You are an empirical cultist or more like a trained monkey or a parrot who only repeats what has been drilled into him without the slightest notion or consideration as to what purpose the statement is supposed to serve.

The 'way science works' didn't begin as the 'scientific method' nor its format as the 'universal theory of gravitation', it began as 'rule 3' -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

The followers of this despicable creed do not even understand the awful attempt of Newton who loosely pointed in the direction of predictive astronomy, the one built on the calendar framework, to serve as a link between the fall of an apple (experimental sciences) to the motions of the planets and moon.

The devastation is total, not even the link between one rotation and one sunrise/sunset survives as a fact within the 'scientific method' community and bolstered by a few magnification hobbyists and their celestial sphere universe, together they have turned astronomy into a train wreck and disruptive the research of terrestrial sciences.

The 'scientific method' indeed ! - the most disruptive,long running and corrosive scandal ever to visit humanity and rotting Western civilization from the inside.


chuckle

you're an idiot

All pseudo scientists start with the same assumption: "I know I'm right"

dude the fact that you spew your drivel here with the other pseudo
science types, well that just says it all...you are just another idiot

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 9:14:53 PM UTC+1, David Staup wrote:
On 9/25/2015 2:59 PM, oriel36 wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 8:28:39 PM UTC+1, David Staup wrote:

This is the way science works. Observation leads to hypothesis which
leads to prediction which is then confirmed 0r denied by
experimentation. If confirmed it becomes a theory which must be tested
for some time before assuming anything..

Of course this is the way science is supposed to work, today it seems
most "scientists" start with the assumption and find ways to "prove"

You are an empirical cultist or more like a trained monkey or a parrot who only repeats what has been drilled into him without the slightest notion or consideration as to what purpose the statement is supposed to serve.

The 'way science works' didn't begin as the 'scientific method' nor its format as the 'universal theory of gravitation', it began as 'rule 3' -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

The followers of this despicable creed do not even understand the awful attempt of Newton who loosely pointed in the direction of predictive astronomy, the one built on the calendar framework, to serve as a link between the fall of an apple (experimental sciences) to the motions of the planets and moon.

The devastation is total, not even the link between one rotation and one sunrise/sunset survives as a fact within the 'scientific method' community and bolstered by a few magnification hobbyists and their celestial sphere universe, together they have turned astronomy into a train wreck and disruptive the research of terrestrial sciences.

The 'scientific method' indeed ! - the most disruptive,long running and corrosive scandal ever to visit humanity and rotting Western civilization from the inside.


chuckle

you're an idiot

All pseudo scientists start with the same assumption: "I know I'm right"

dude the fact that you spew your drivel here with the other pseudo
science types, well that just says it all...you are just another idiot

These issues don't involve a carbon copy empiricist who bought into or was subject to a rut ideology that is of recent origin.

No, I have other people in mind when I responded in the previous post for only very few ever admitted they hadn't a clue what Newton was doing even though I do. It is not an achievement to go into the historical and technical details of the entire scheme, and I say scheme in a pejorative sense, but there may be genuine researchers who realize the attempt of the guys in the early 20th century to escape the clockwork solar system made things worse.

"The demonstrations throughout the book [Principia] are geometrical,
but to readers of ordinary ability are rendered unnecessarily
difficult by the absence of illustrations and explanations, and by the
fact that no clue is given to the method by which Newton arrived at
his results. The reason why it was presented in a geometrical form
appears to have been that the infinitesimal calculus was then unknown,
and, had Newton used it to demonstrate results which were in
themselves opposed to the prevalent philosophy of the time, the
controversy as to the truth of his results would have been hampered by
a dispute concerning the validity of the methods used in proving them.
He therefore cast the whole reasoning into a geometrical shape"
Rouse Ball 1908

So, it is easy enough to stand at ground zero and survey the damage going forward to our century . What is not clear is who has the type of individuality to begin reconstruction using modern tools with a lot of forensics thrown in. I haven't met a single individual in over two decades capable of making that journey hence the concern.

You are right for once. At least in the first part of your post.

That was referring to David Staup as being right of course not Oriel. Unfortunately I'm restricted to using Google Groups because the iOS upgrade has killed my newsreader.

On 9/25/2015 5:30 PM, Mike Collins wrote:
You are right for once. At least in the first part of your post.

well, you're half right

There is no point whatsoever criticizing people who can't think for themselves however there may be decent people engaged in astronomy who wonder what is behind all that voodoo which seem to give mathematicians a better view of the celestial arena than anyone else even when imaging today exposes a terrible fraud.

The celestial sphere gives observers the advantage of using the calendar format to predict astronomical events but the RA/Dec framework is entirely homocentric in character and content and essentially worse than a flat Earth notion insofar as it makes no attempt to look beyond the local horizon. The damage is therefore total and as long as the issues are left unattended it will remain that way.

Read it again for those who can -

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

The reason cause and effect between planetary dynamics and terrestrial sciences was lost is directly due to the prevalent agenda in the late 17th century which shifted to the cause for planetary motions by subverting the antecedent methods and insights of the original heliocentric astronomers. If it wasn't a cult notion it would be utter criminality and wouldn't be tolerated in a normal healthy society much less taught through the education system.

On Saturday, September 26, 2015 at 1:25:44 AM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

There is no point whatsoever criticizing people who can't think for themselves...

.... which is why you get so few replies...