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.

 

Mind Movies, Faster Then Light, Higgs Boson, X-Ray Vision, Neurosynaptic Chips and More. Biggest Sci

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Biggest Scientific Breakthroughs of 2011




From law-violating subatomic particles to entirely new, earth-like worlds, 2011 was an incredible year for scientific discovery. In the past 12 months, scientific breakthroughs in fields ranging from archaeology to structural biochemistry have allowed humanity to rewrite history, and enabled us to open to brand new chapters in our development as a species. Here are some of our favorites.


titianmind

Pretty amazing stuff when you put it all under one post




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
One of your scientific technologies was not discovered in 2011, it was discovered in about 2004 by myself, and I have one or more videos showing what its like looking through walls with x-ray vision in videos dated 2009. MIT did not discover x-ray vision; I did, and years before they did. www.youtube.com...

As a matter of fact I have old e-mails talking about it with a physics proffessor at MIT at least a year or more before they supposedly discovered it and told everyone they discovered it. Further more, I believe that I told about it here on ATS way before that.

So... MIT didn't discover x-ray vision in 2011 as some people are lead to believe. As a matter of fact, their x-ray vision is junk compared to my x-ray vision system. I can look through hills and mountains, and deep into the earth to see stuff with my x-ray vision. I have found tunnels in the ground hundreds of yards in the distance with my x-ray vision system, and that was about 2005 when I was looking at caves and tunnels from any angle, deep into the earth. Cave and tunnels are outlined perfectly from any angle, distance detectable depends on what lense magnification you are using.

A six foot tall tunnel about 3 feet wide was first discovered from approximately 200 yards distance without any magnification; that is how good my x-ray vision system is. Full sized beer and pop cans that aren't crumpled are detectable deep in the ground to approximately 120 feet from any angle with 10x magnification lenses.

MIT has a piece of junk.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by RussianScientists
 


That youtube you posted was for some guy pointing at a whiteboard and writing some stuff about detecting earthquakes before they happen, i suspect you got the wrong link there. And other than that i see no attempts of proving what you are saying in your post (although i don´t doubt it). But please provide some proof of your x-ray machine so we know what you say is true. I find it mildly interesting at least.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by RussianScientists
 


Well they're not "mine", but a site I stumbled across and thought it was interesting to see some of the major scientific achievements for 2011 grouped together. We all hear about major discoveries every couple of weeks and tend to forget the one preceding. I think this was a banner year following our exponential growth over the past decade or 3.

If what you are claiming is true, many here would love to see your research. And if you're stating truth, I'd be talking to my lawyers for intellectual property, patent theft,etc


One of my favs was "Neuroscientists reconstruct the movies in your mind".....that truly is wonderful and frightening at the same time.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Faster-than-light Neutrinos. Not so fast!


The IceCube experiment in Antarctica provides an experimental check on Cowsik's theoretical calculations. According to Cowsik, neutrinos with extremely high energies should show up at IceCube only if superluminal neutrinos are an impossibility. Because IceCube is seeing high-energy neutrinos, there must be something wrong with the observation of superluminal neutrinos.


Link



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by flyingfish
Faster-than-light Neutrinos. Not so fast!


The IceCube experiment in Antarctica provides an experimental check on Cowsik's theoretical calculations. According to Cowsik, neutrinos with extremely high energies should show up at IceCube only if superluminal neutrinos are an impossibility. Because IceCube is seeing high-energy neutrinos, there must be something wrong with the observation of superluminal neutrinos.


Link


Excellent! That's what I'd I like, is for people with a decent knowledge in each individual field, to debate the examples represented. Facts with a "Yay or Nay"......are they over hyped or under hyped?



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


What I wrote about is true, its in one or more of those videos; which video(s) I'm not sure, but I know they are in the videos where there is lots of vegetation right behind me, and those would be the later videos somewhere around video number 17 or so if I remember right. Otherwise, I'm sure I posted it here on ATS many times before 2011 in different threads.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by RussianScientists
 

No there's not a single video like the one you described on that channel. Are you sure they are not private or non public. Could you share a direct link to the video perhaps?



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by RussianScientists
 


Did someone forget to go to the patent office?



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by RussianScientists
reply to post by NeoVain
 


What I wrote about is true, its in one or more of those videos; which video(s) I'm not sure, but I know they are in the videos where there is lots of vegetation right behind me, and those would be the later videos somewhere around video number 17 or so if I remember right. Otherwise, I'm sure I posted it here on ATS many times before 2011 in different threads.


This is ATS.....you must back up your claim, not us searching, to do so for you. Anyone who made such a discovery would be frothing at the mouth to show other people and would have tons of information to back up such a claim.

Why didn't you patent it and why aren't currently suing MIT? I call BS.....



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join