It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MANDELA EFFECT - I just discovered a jaw dropping change

page: 23
19
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers




there can be no proof of the alternate timeline notion


do you sir not consider quantum computers as such?




posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:22 PM
link   
See post below.
edit on 6-8-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheMaxHeadroomIncident



There was nothing to correct.

I didn't say it was proven yet, I said "according to CERN", they obviously think these other dimensions exist.

You said,"According to Cern, other dimensions exist." That is incorrect, so I will correct it again.

According to CERN, other dimensions MIGHT exist.




It's only a small step further in its "ridiculousness". I mean the universe is made up of rubber band like vibrating strings you say?

No. String Theory is based on hard math. And it has elements that can be tested in particle accelerators, such as super symmetry. So it at least has some hope of being proven correct, or perhaps one day the testing being conducted on it might yield other scientific discoveries even if it continues to be "not even wrong." Furthermore, what's at stake, the Holy Grail of Physics, is worth investigating.



*points finger and laughs*

There is not even direct evidence for it, it is just a theory taking leaps of faith.

Now you're trolling, and doing it poorly. I said String Theory "wasn't even wrong," which if you were paying attention means it doesn't even qualify as science. Not yet. And that's per the standard definition of science, which says that all things scientific must be falsifiable. Ergo, I put zero faith in it, and I await the results of testing to see if anything scientific will come of it.



ME, on the other hand, produces nothing which can be tested scientifically. It is completely unfalsifiable. There is no way to prove it WRONG, and therefore it is not science, nor can I think of any conceivable way in which it might be made falsifiable.




So where does it become ridiculous? The existence of other dimensions or the shifting between them?

The idea that tiny, microscopic dimensions (smaller than an atom), rolled up in the fabric of space, of a finite (and relatively small) number, which hasn't even been proven, and isn't even FALSIFIABLE, being used as a spring board to posit that you're jumping from one timeline to another because of memory disceprencies which aren't even very interesting... That's where it becomes ridiculous.





It was just one of the things they are talking about in relation to their main focus with these specific experiments, which is their research into other dimensions.


Their research into other dimensions is BECAUSE of STRING THEORY. You think they are just groping around in the dark seeing if they can open a hole? That's not how it works. String theory makes certain predictions which can be tested via the results of particle collisions. That's WHAT they are testing, and WHY they are testing it.



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
a reply to: Greggers




there can be no proof of the alternate timeline notion


do you sir not consider quantum computers as such?


I want to be very clear here. In my post above, the "alternate timeline notion" refers specifically to the idea that people's differing memories are caused by slipping from one timeline to another.

But now that you mention it -- no, quantum computers do not prove the existence of alternate timelines. As of yet, we don't even have proof of alternate spatial dimensions, let alone alternate timelines, quantum computers or no.



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I believe its good to mention the catholic church is taking the bible changes seriously.

They are not considering bad memory when it comes to changes like lion to wolf. Of course its the same like I am shocked with the size of Mars now.

First couple of minutes are all on this :




edit on 6-8-2016 by heineken because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

Quantum computers are right now leveraging the power of parallel universes, some which are very similar to this one, with slight changes like I and others are experiencing now.

I'm not saying quantum computer cause this. They just proof that we all exist in different universes at the same time.

I love to believe this is a natural process of life. But I'm not so sure.



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
This introduction of the D-Wave quantum computer is a good watch.




posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers




other dimensions MIGHT exist.


your knowledge about this subject is years old.



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
a reply to: Greggers

Quantum computers are right now leveraging the power of parallel universes, some which are very similar to this one, with slight changes like I and others are experiencing now.

I'm not saying quantum computer cause this. They just proof that we all exist in different universes at the same time.

I love to believe this is a natural process of life. But I'm not so sure.


That's rubbish. Alternate universes have not been proven to exist. Quantum computers are based upon the notion that information can be processed much more efficiently at the quantum level because quantum bits have many more possible values than the two in standard bits, plus other quantum phenomena, such as entanglement, can be employed.

But no, there is no proof that any of this involves alternate dimensions, spatial or otherwise. If these things were already proven to exist, CERN wouldn't be trying to prove it.



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
a reply to: Greggers




other dimensions MIGHT exist.


your knowledge about this subject is years old.



No it's not. I think you've been watching too many youtube videos and reading too many quantum gurus.

There is absolutely no proof that alternate dimensions exist. If it is proven, it will be ground breaking, and will get a lot more press than even the discovery of the Higgs.

Show me one peer reviewed research paper in a mainstream physics journal that PROVES the existence of parallel universes.
edit on 6-8-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I hesitate to open this can of worms here, as I have no particular desire to connect my ATS identity to my life as an author, but I feel it's fair to mention that I published a science-fiction novel last September dealing with many of the issues discussed here. Quantum mechanics has always been of interest to me (I've read all of Brian Greene's books, for example), but in preparation for this particular book, I made it my business to bring myself up to speed on the latest developments in quantum mechanics. I studied the research at CERN. I watched the investigation of the Higgs with interest. I studied the point at which the theoretical became reality, and all the points inbetween where proof wasn't quite there.

That is to say, I can point you to some very interesting resources if you're interested in learning.



posted on Aug, 6 2016 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers


Furthermore, there can be no proof of the alternate timeline notion, as it's completely unfalsifiable and therefore not within the realm of that which can be established empirically.


Exactly!. This is why trying to use evidence collected solely from this timeline to prove the OP wrong is completely flawed. Sadly, most of the posters on this thread are ignorant to this obvious circumstance.
edit on 6-8-2016 by -mytym- because: Added correct quote formatting



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 01:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: -mytym-
a reply to: Greggers


Furthermore, there can be no proof of the alternate timeline notion, as it's completely unfalsifiable and therefore not within the realm of that which can be established empirically.


Exactly!. This is why trying to use evidence collected solely from this timeline to prove the OP wrong is completely flawed. Sadly, most of the posters on this thread are ignorant to this obvious circumstance.


You are correct, of course. I've pointed the same out to many in the past.



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 04:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Greggers




I published a science-fiction novel


With all respect sir, regarding parallel universes , I stand with the creator of the D-Wave computer. Did you at least watch his introduction?



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
a reply to: Greggers




I published a science-fiction novel


With all respect sir, regarding parallel universes , I stand with the creator of the D-Wave computer. Did you at least watch his introduction?


You can stand wherever you like. If you want to be taken seriously, you'll find a peer reviewed scientific article in a mainstream physics journal, with results reproduced by others, proving the existence of parallel universes. Heck, if you can find it, I'd love to see it, seeing as how it would turn the world on its head, and would greatly aid my own understanding of a subject I love.

Perhaps the proof you claim exists was in your original timeline.


edit on 7-8-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 04:20 PM
link   
For the record, in case anyone is interested, the Canadian company that created D-Wave has been the source of controversy for years. The scientific community has disputed that their processor uses true quantum computing.

We know for certain it's not a pure quantum computer, which could be expected to demonstrate much faster response times across a wide variety of computational tasks. This was proven here: physicsworld.com...

The D-Wave team responded by complaining that the wrong benchmarks were used, and later published findings for "quantum annealing," which did indeed show a tremendous increase in speed. Of course, since the chip was designed specifically for that type of task, it really doesn't provide proof that it uses quantum effects -- it just proves it's really good at one specific type of mathematical calculation.

So is D-Wave really a quantum computer? It's hard to say.

And therein lies the problem: D-Wave is a commercial venture, and their chipsets and algorithms are proprietary, and therefore only the team who made the chip really knows what's going on in there. It can be tested from the outside, but so far the results of independent testing have not been consistent with what we consider to be a pure quantum computer.

As far as the claim of "parallel universes," that's so far removed from any empirically verifiable reality that it's silly to bring it up. If they had PROOF that their chip accessed the "power of alternate universes," they would need to prove it by releasing the design of their chipset to independent physicists for analysis, along with whatever particle accelerator data they used to prove that the increase in speed was really due to these alternate realities and not to some other benefit of their chip design. This analysis does not appear to exist in any peer reviewed scientific journal that I can find.
edit on 7-8-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

The source provided is from 2014. And when also considering top companies of the world acquired one, I still stand with the D-Wave proofing many worlds, which is the statement from the guys who created it.


edit on 7-8-2016 by heineken because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 05:30 PM
link   
D-Wave Customers include :

Lockheed Martin
The Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab (Google, NASA and USRA Collaboration)
Los Alamos National Laboratory
USC Information Sciences Institute (USC-Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center)



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
a reply to: Greggers

The source provided is from 2014. And when also considering top companies of the world acquired one, I still stand with the D-Wave proofing many worlds, which is the statement from the guys who created it.



Yes, In 2014, a set of standard benchmarks was executed on the D-Wave, and it failed to show any noteworthy improvement over a traditional processor.

I explained quite clearly what happened after that, including the fact that the D Wave performed very well on the calculation for which it was specifically designed.

Those are the published results for the last two years. So far, it hasn't even been proven that it's a real quantum computer. It may be, but the fact that it appears to offer no advantage on the vast majority of known computer benchmarks doesn't convince.
edit on 7-8-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2016 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: heineken
D-Wave Customers include :

Lockheed Martin
The Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab (Google, NASA and USRA Collaboration)
Los Alamos National Laboratory
USC Information Sciences Institute (USC-Lockheed Martin Quantum Computation Center)





Yep. As I explained, the chipset is extremely good at a very specific type of solution analysis those companies are interested in, whether it's a real quantum computer or not.

Those companies are interested in application-specific processing power, not whether it's a real quantum computer.
edit on 7-8-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join