It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: vasaga
Self-ordering phenomena should not be confused with self-organization. Self-ordering events occur spontaneously according to natural “law” propensities and are purely physicodynamic.
To play devil's advocate, would self-organization be explained by natural selection? If self-ordering events happen a lot, certainly natural selection would bring forth self-organization?
originally posted by: solomons path
originally posted by: vasaga
a reply to: GetHyped
Are you saying that an abstract does not represent the paper?
As explained to you many times . . . the abstract is just that an abstract. It does not speak to the validity of the claim, just as getting accepted in a journal doesn't automatically speak to validity. That is found in recreating and confirming the results . . . to which your paper has none.
Hard test something that has no experimentation or data, and only rests on assertion.
I've read so many times in this forum, that in science you only need a single proof of something that contradicts the current theory and that the theory needs to be adapted or discarded. But now that it's something you don't like, you want to make up excuses to discard it.