Hoax Museum Archives
Hoax Museum Hall of Fame
|
Angel Light Sees Through Walls
Troy Hurtubise claims that he's invented a machine, dubbed the Angel Light, that can see through walls. It doesn't really matter what the wall is made of: wood, ceramic, steel, tin, titanium, even lead. The Angel Light can see right through it, just as if a window had opened up in the wall. Of course, he built this thing in his garage (where else?). The idea for the invention came to him in a dream, and he built it without the aid of any blueprints, drawings or schematics. Although Troy may hope to one day be known throughout the world as the inventor of the Angel Light, he's already well known as the inventor of the URSUS MARK VII, a suit that can help a man withstand the attack of a Grizzly Bear (see that suit in the right corner of the thumbnail? That's the Grizzly suit). So from Grizzly Bear suits to Machines That Can See Through Walls. No one can accuse him of not having an interesting resume.
Listed in chronological order. Newest comments at the end.
Page 18 of 20 pages « First < 16 17 18 19 20 >
marvin said:
"I just wanted to point out that anybody who uses 'smileys' is either a retard or a 12 year old girl."
Although I am neither a "retard" nor a 12-year-old girl, I occasionally use a "smiley" because sometimes I'm not entirely sure that a point I'm making will come across as humor. Print can be a somewhat limiting medium at times. The smiley, while a wee bit dopey, is a good shorthand way to convey that you aren't serious. It sure helps to avoid extended arguments.
Posted by Cranky Media Guy on Sun Feb 05, 2006 at 11:59 PM
"I just wanted to point out that anybody who uses 'smileys' is either a retard or a 12 year old girl."
Although I am neither a "retard" nor a 12-year-old girl, I occasionally use a "smiley" because sometimes I'm not entirely sure that a point I'm making will come across as humor. Print can be a somewhat limiting medium at times. The smiley, while a wee bit dopey, is a good shorthand way to convey that you aren't serious. It sure helps to avoid extended arguments.
Anywho,
Thanks for the suggestion to check out Dr. Kaku.
The link you posted didn't work but a Goodle search quickly landed me on a BBC interview.
I must say I think he's getting a bit ahead of himself in the interview I saw. He says a lot of purely speculative things but phrases them as if they're practically proven, for instance:
One fine day the human race will be able to "go through the umbilical cord to travel to another universe", by "boiling space"
Claims that "listening" to the "songs" of sub-atomic particles (strings) is equivalent to "reading the mind of god"
Utilizes a double-standard approach to Intelligent Design: claims it's invalid when you apply it to eyeballs but is valid when you apply it to the overall architecture of laws of physics
States that science predicts that there "should" be abundant intelligent life easily detectable by our technologies. The reason it's not: other intelligences keep on self-destructing with wars before they can make themselves known to us. The unprovable assertions are really stacking up here.
Describes the universe as a physical manifestation of the resolution of the conflicting views of Christianity and Buddhism. (So...science is merging, marrying and providing resolution to the discrepancies between two mutually exclusive null theories? Wow.)
The only supporting theories he mentions have been old hat for a long time now: dark matter, the accelleration of the universe, the "membrane" theory of multiverses, white holes etc. None of these substantially support any of the wild claims itemized above.
This guy is smart, but from that interview I'd say he's not necessarily to be trusted with all of your metaphysical eggs, despite his contributions to science.
Remember the logical fallacy of appeal to authority: a position of knowledge and/or authority does not exempt anyone from the requirement of providing independantly verifiable facts to double-check their observations and confirm the results of supporting, repeatable experiments.
Personally, I'd like to see the experiment that proves that "listening" to subatomic particles is equivalent to "reading the mind of god."
Posted by intjudo on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 11:51 PM
Thanks for the suggestion to check out Dr. Kaku.
The link you posted didn't work but a Goodle search quickly landed me on a BBC interview.
I must say I think he's getting a bit ahead of himself in the interview I saw. He says a lot of purely speculative things but phrases them as if they're practically proven, for instance:
One fine day the human race will be able to "go through the umbilical cord to travel to another universe", by "boiling space"
Claims that "listening" to the "songs" of sub-atomic particles (strings) is equivalent to "reading the mind of god"
Utilizes a double-standard approach to Intelligent Design: claims it's invalid when you apply it to eyeballs but is valid when you apply it to the overall architecture of laws of physics
States that science predicts that there "should" be abundant intelligent life easily detectable by our technologies. The reason it's not: other intelligences keep on self-destructing with wars before they can make themselves known to us. The unprovable assertions are really stacking up here.
Describes the universe as a physical manifestation of the resolution of the conflicting views of Christianity and Buddhism. (So...science is merging, marrying and providing resolution to the discrepancies between two mutually exclusive null theories? Wow.)
The only supporting theories he mentions have been old hat for a long time now: dark matter, the accelleration of the universe, the "membrane" theory of multiverses, white holes etc. None of these substantially support any of the wild claims itemized above.
This guy is smart, but from that interview I'd say he's not necessarily to be trusted with all of your metaphysical eggs, despite his contributions to science.
Remember the logical fallacy of appeal to authority: a position of knowledge and/or authority does not exempt anyone from the requirement of providing independantly verifiable facts to double-check their observations and confirm the results of supporting, repeatable experiments.
Personally, I'd like to see the experiment that proves that "listening" to subatomic particles is equivalent to "reading the mind of god."
intjudo:
Dr. Kaku is not famous because he's the only one who works in String Theory -- but because he's made it his business to "bring it down" to interested laymen -- kinda like Carl Sagan did.
So, his analogies like "the music of the Universe" are really just a way for "the rest of us" to get an intuitive notion of what might be happening in quantum physics. As far as "reading the mind of God" -- that's a direct quote of Einstien. I think Kaku seeks to honor Einstien by inferring that at last maybe his dream is coming true.
Dr. Kaku's book "Parallel Universes" walks us lay-people all the way from high school physics to bleeding-edge quantum string theory (M-Theory).
It's VERY difficult for our 3-D carbon brains to concieve of a 12-D Universe in which we may be transmuting thru other instances of reality based on observer-based collasping wave functions. It's *SO* complex that Dr Wheeler and others offer "virtual" explanations. That in turn makes one wonder if holographic or simulation based realities should be considered. Either way -- a Theory Of Everything (TOE) is at least being sought. Meanwhile maybe some guy like Troy could still get lucky -- there's plenty of ignorance to go-around.
Posted by Anywho on Thu Feb 09, 2006 at 12:24 PM
Dr. Kaku is not famous because he's the only one who works in String Theory -- but because he's made it his business to "bring it down" to interested laymen -- kinda like Carl Sagan did.
So, his analogies like "the music of the Universe" are really just a way for "the rest of us" to get an intuitive notion of what might be happening in quantum physics. As far as "reading the mind of God" -- that's a direct quote of Einstien. I think Kaku seeks to honor Einstien by inferring that at last maybe his dream is coming true.
Dr. Kaku's book "Parallel Universes" walks us lay-people all the way from high school physics to bleeding-edge quantum string theory (M-Theory).
It's VERY difficult for our 3-D carbon brains to concieve of a 12-D Universe in which we may be transmuting thru other instances of reality based on observer-based collasping wave functions. It's *SO* complex that Dr Wheeler and others offer "virtual" explanations. That in turn makes one wonder if holographic or simulation based realities should be considered. Either way -- a Theory Of Everything (TOE) is at least being sought. Meanwhile maybe some guy like Troy could still get lucky -- there's plenty of ignorance to go-around.
Oh -- forgot -- "metaphysical" ???
No, Kaku is a real Phd Physicist. The real thing. Metaphysical folks do like him because they can get some good quotes from his distillations. Any Scientist would have the same problem with respect when trying to interpret Physics to laymen. His books are "hard-science" -- his interviews are "soft science". Hope that helps.
Posted by Anywho on Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 04:12 AM
No, Kaku is a real Phd Physicist. The real thing. Metaphysical folks do like him because they can get some good quotes from his distillations. Any Scientist would have the same problem with respect when trying to interpret Physics to laymen. His books are "hard-science" -- his interviews are "soft science". Hope that helps.
*OMG! -- LOOK AT THIS!!!* (NOT A JOKE!, see RE: )
A new optical effect has been created in a London laboratory that means solid objects such as walls could one day be rendered transparent, scientists report today in the journal Nature Materials.
Researchers from Imperial College London and the University of Neuchatel, Switzerland, have pioneered the technique which could be used to see through rubble at earthquake sites, or look at parts of the body obscured by bone.
The effect is based on the development of a new material that exploits the way atoms in matter move, to make them interact with a laser beam in an entirely new way.
The work is based on a breakthrough which contradicts Einstein's theory that in order for a laser to work, the light-amplifying material it contains, usually a crystal or glass, must be brought to a state known as 'population inversion'. This refers to the condition of the atoms within the material, which must be excited with enough energy to make them emit rather than absorb light.
Quantum physicists, however, have long predicted that by interfering with the wave-patterns of atoms, light could be amplified without population inversion. This has previously been demonstrated in the atoms of gases but has not before been shown in solids.
In order to make this breakthrough, the team created specially patterned crystals only a few billionths of a metre in length that behaved like 'artificial atoms'. When light was shone into the crystals, it became entangled with the crystals at a molecular level rather than being absorbed, causing the material to become transparent.
This new transparent material created by the entanglement is made up of molecules that are half matter and half light. This allows light to be amplified without population inversion for the first time in a solid. Professor Chris Phillips, of Imperial College London, says:
"This real life 'x-ray specs' effect relies on a property of matter that is usually ignored – that the electrons it contains move in a wave-like way. What we have learnt is how to control these waves directly. The results can be pretty weird at times, but it's very exciting and so fundamental. At the moment the effect can only be produced in a lab under specific conditions but it has the potential to lead to all sorts of new applications."
RE:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/icl-nmm021706.php
Posted by Anywho on Mon Feb 20, 2006 at 05:59 AM
A new optical effect has been created in a London laboratory that means solid objects such as walls could one day be rendered transparent, scientists report today in the journal Nature Materials.
Researchers from Imperial College London and the University of Neuchatel, Switzerland, have pioneered the technique which could be used to see through rubble at earthquake sites, or look at parts of the body obscured by bone.
The effect is based on the development of a new material that exploits the way atoms in matter move, to make them interact with a laser beam in an entirely new way.
The work is based on a breakthrough which contradicts Einstein's theory that in order for a laser to work, the light-amplifying material it contains, usually a crystal or glass, must be brought to a state known as 'population inversion'. This refers to the condition of the atoms within the material, which must be excited with enough energy to make them emit rather than absorb light.
Quantum physicists, however, have long predicted that by interfering with the wave-patterns of atoms, light could be amplified without population inversion. This has previously been demonstrated in the atoms of gases but has not before been shown in solids.
In order to make this breakthrough, the team created specially patterned crystals only a few billionths of a metre in length that behaved like 'artificial atoms'. When light was shone into the crystals, it became entangled with the crystals at a molecular level rather than being absorbed, causing the material to become transparent.
This new transparent material created by the entanglement is made up of molecules that are half matter and half light. This allows light to be amplified without population inversion for the first time in a solid. Professor Chris Phillips, of Imperial College London, says:
"This real life 'x-ray specs' effect relies on a property of matter that is usually ignored – that the electrons it contains move in a wave-like way. What we have learnt is how to control these waves directly. The results can be pretty weird at times, but it's very exciting and so fundamental. At the moment the effect can only be produced in a lab under specific conditions but it has the potential to lead to all sorts of new applications."
RE:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-02/icl-nmm021706.php
Direct news release from Imperial College, London
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/P7487.htm
(I'm not saying that Troy accidentally obtained direct matter-wave interference, but this shows that a theory does exist that would make solids "photon friendly")
Posted by Anywho on Mon Feb 20, 2006 at 08:39 AM
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/P7487.htm
(I'm not saying that Troy accidentally obtained direct matter-wave interference, but this shows that a theory does exist that would make solids "photon friendly")
Too bad I can't access the original article; it's subscription-required access on Nature Materials' Web site.
If I'm reading the press release correctly, they've apparently engineered a crystalline nanomaterial that can be rendered "invisible" to laser light. Unfortunately this is a rare, not a pervasive substance. Earthquake rubble, etc. would have to be made out of this stuff in order to be suseptible to the effect described.
It looks to me like an unfortunate choice of words on part of the Professor Chris Philips that was taken out of context and then exaggerated.
If I'm reading it correctly.
At this stage of this technologie's development I'd say grandiose headlines like "New optical effect renders solid objects transparent" and "New material means 'x-ray specs' no longer required" are premature, and somewhat irresponsible.
At this point I'd say the title of the original paper says it best: "Gain without inversion in semiconductor nanostructures." Note the words "semiconductor nanostructures," as opposed to "any and all solids."
That being said, the visual similarities between Hurtubises' contraption and the equipment pictured in the article referenced are quite striking (though purely visual and otherwise inconsequential, I'm sure). I would *love* to see and hear Troy's reaction to this.
Posted by intjudo on Mon Feb 20, 2006 at 08:50 PM
If I'm reading the press release correctly, they've apparently engineered a crystalline nanomaterial that can be rendered "invisible" to laser light. Unfortunately this is a rare, not a pervasive substance. Earthquake rubble, etc. would have to be made out of this stuff in order to be suseptible to the effect described.
It looks to me like an unfortunate choice of words on part of the Professor Chris Philips that was taken out of context and then exaggerated.
If I'm reading it correctly.
At this stage of this technologie's development I'd say grandiose headlines like "New optical effect renders solid objects transparent" and "New material means 'x-ray specs' no longer required" are premature, and somewhat irresponsible.
At this point I'd say the title of the original paper says it best: "Gain without inversion in semiconductor nanostructures." Note the words "semiconductor nanostructures," as opposed to "any and all solids."
That being said, the visual similarities between Hurtubises' contraption and the equipment pictured in the article referenced are quite striking (though purely visual and otherwise inconsequential, I'm sure). I would *love* to see and hear Troy's reaction to this.
Matter waves and the "wave-particle" duality of matter has been known for a very long time. However the scales involved are known as the Planck-Scale -- 10 x10-33. This has been far smaller than anything we've been able to measure directly in particle physics (10 x10-22).
So the real question for me is -- do they realy think they are "interfering" with matter waves? That would be a Nobel Prize winner all by itself. Of course we're also dealing at the scale of "String Theory" here -- branes and all that -- so there may be some supporting work from that field here too -- if its real (remember cold fusion?)
As far as being irresponsible in their claim -- I'd have to read the actual paper. If they really think they can manipulate matter waves -- then they are correct to assume the method will eventually be extended to all matter. That is MAJOR!
Posted by Anywho on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 08:03 AM
So the real question for me is -- do they realy think they are "interfering" with matter waves? That would be a Nobel Prize winner all by itself. Of course we're also dealing at the scale of "String Theory" here -- branes and all that -- so there may be some supporting work from that field here too -- if its real (remember cold fusion?)
As far as being irresponsible in their claim -- I'd have to read the actual paper. If they really think they can manipulate matter waves -- then they are correct to assume the method will eventually be extended to all matter. That is MAJOR!
The abstract of the paper:
When Einstein showed that light amplification needed a collection of atoms in 'population inversion' (that is, where more than half the atoms are in an excited state, ready to emit light rather than absorb it) he was using thermodynamic arguments1. Later on, quantum theory predicted2, 3 that matter–wave interference effects inside the atoms could, in principle, allow gain without inversion (GWI). The coherent conditions needed to observe this strange effect have been generated in atomic vapours4, but here we show that semiconductor nanostructures can be tailored to have 'artificial atom' electron states which, for the first time in a solid, also show GWI. In atomic experiments, the coherent conditions, typically generated either by coupling two electron levels to a third with a strong light beam2, 3 or by tunnel coupling both levels to the same continuum (Fano effect5), are also responsible for the observation of 'electromagnetically induced transparency' (EIT)6. In turn, this has allowed observations of markedly slowed7 and even frozen8 light propagation. Our 'artificial atom' GWI effects are rooted in the same phenomena and, from an analysis of the absorption changes, we infer that the light slows to approxc/40 over the spectral range where the optical gain appears.
Posted by Anywho on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 08:25 AM
When Einstein showed that light amplification needed a collection of atoms in 'population inversion' (that is, where more than half the atoms are in an excited state, ready to emit light rather than absorb it) he was using thermodynamic arguments1. Later on, quantum theory predicted2, 3 that matter–wave interference effects inside the atoms could, in principle, allow gain without inversion (GWI). The coherent conditions needed to observe this strange effect have been generated in atomic vapours4, but here we show that semiconductor nanostructures can be tailored to have 'artificial atom' electron states which, for the first time in a solid, also show GWI. In atomic experiments, the coherent conditions, typically generated either by coupling two electron levels to a third with a strong light beam2, 3 or by tunnel coupling both levels to the same continuum (Fano effect5), are also responsible for the observation of 'electromagnetically induced transparency' (EIT)6. In turn, this has allowed observations of markedly slowed7 and even frozen8 light propagation. Our 'artificial atom' GWI effects are rooted in the same phenomena and, from an analysis of the absorption changes, we infer that the light slows to approxc/40 over the spectral range where the optical gain appears.
Wikipedia explanation of EIT:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetically_induced_transparency
Posted by Anywho on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 08:30 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetically_induced_transparency
The above article refers to this one about "quantum dots" which is a pretty cool article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetically_induced_transparency
..."blue lasers" in PlayStations, "solid state quantum computation," quantum calculations, flourescence spectroscopy (detection of tumors), improved solar cells...quantum dots kick serious A**
It looks like the study at Imperial College basically involves the interaction of lasers and quantum dots under very specialized conditions.
Thanks for posting this Anywho! I'm not anticipating 20%-off-sales of Angel Lights at Radio Shack anytime soon but this stuff is damned interesting any way you slice it.
Now, if we could only get Hurtubise and Kaku, with about a six-pack of Moosehead in each of them, in the same room, talking about quantum dots.
Posted by intjudo on Tue Feb 21, 2006 at 11:19 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetically_induced_transparency
..."blue lasers" in PlayStations, "solid state quantum computation," quantum calculations, flourescence spectroscopy (detection of tumors), improved solar cells...quantum dots kick serious A**
It looks like the study at Imperial College basically involves the interaction of lasers and quantum dots under very specialized conditions.
Thanks for posting this Anywho! I'm not anticipating 20%-off-sales of Angel Lights at Radio Shack anytime soon but this stuff is damned interesting any way you slice it.
Now, if we could only get Hurtubise and Kaku, with about a six-pack of Moosehead in each of them, in the same room, talking about quantum dots.
Wow - physicists are manipulating de Broglie waves! and producing "atom lasers" and even "atom holograms". http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/12/8/8
Clearly science is about to create matter from its fundamental matter wave components. That matter can be made EIT compliant from the get-go -- transparent matter. It'll cost about a billion dollars per ounce and may be unstable -- but hey it's a start.
Troy may or may not have done anything other than stimulate some searching on our part -- but that alone has been very useful. I'm still reeling over the magnitude of whats happening in quantum condensed physics nowadays. This is Star Trek stuff.
(when matter can be manipulated as de Broglie matter waves -- we can start asking philosophical questions about the nature of our [4.5% baryonic] material universe.
Posted by Anywho on Wed Feb 22, 2006 at 04:26 AM
Clearly science is about to create matter from its fundamental matter wave components. That matter can be made EIT compliant from the get-go -- transparent matter. It'll cost about a billion dollars per ounce and may be unstable -- but hey it's a start.
Troy may or may not have done anything other than stimulate some searching on our part -- but that alone has been very useful. I'm still reeling over the magnitude of whats happening in quantum condensed physics nowadays. This is Star Trek stuff.
(when matter can be manipulated as de Broglie matter waves -- we can start asking philosophical questions about the nature of our [4.5% baryonic] material universe.
To the Forum in general, I wonder what would be the result if i were to say that i had found a technique or technology that would allow information transfer accross lightyears of space without any time lag.?
How about if i were to say that the Mass in our universe was not what produces gravity, even though mass and gravity ARE intertwined.?
I do understand the fact that people WANT TO SEE PROOF, but no proof does not mean that the info or technology is bogus. I myself am skeptical about his claims of the angel light. I want to see a demo too. but i am willing to give the benifit of the doubt. For a time anyway. If the device is indeed dangerous, as claimed, then he is smart to dismantle and discontinue his work on it. remember what happened to the Curie's
Of course, without any additional evidence, yes i would have to say, "in all probability this device is a hoax"
Hell, i will say right now that it probalby IS a hoax, but there is the SLIM chance that he actually stumbled accross some type of revolutionary discovery...
Now, that being said, someone said in a earlier post that if someone claimed that teleportation or star trek type beaming were real they would be a crank or loon( i am paraphrasing here, that is the gist of the post or at least part of it) Well, look up teleportation on google.
Scientists have successfully teleported photons from on place to another. Yes, a far cry from star trek, but the tech has to start somewhere...Oh and as for my first question, if you think that it is not possible and would violate the laws of physics, look up Quantum Entanglment on google. The military and nasa are currently researching both technologys(teleportation and quantum entanglement) for both travel and information transfer respectively.
And my second question, well that is something that is not currently provable with our tech, but it IS a intrical part of current theory(M-Brand theory) which states that gravity is actually leaking INTO our Brane(universe) from another Brane(universe). Why the gravity leaks more in a space occupied by mass is over my head, but it is part of current theory....
just a couple of thoughts and or points....
and speaking of star trek, i saw a article on transparent alluminum not too long ago...don't know the link, but u can look it up..
Posted by WARHAMMER in usa on Mon Mar 06, 2006 at 03:00 AM
How about if i were to say that the Mass in our universe was not what produces gravity, even though mass and gravity ARE intertwined.?
I do understand the fact that people WANT TO SEE PROOF, but no proof does not mean that the info or technology is bogus. I myself am skeptical about his claims of the angel light. I want to see a demo too. but i am willing to give the benifit of the doubt. For a time anyway. If the device is indeed dangerous, as claimed, then he is smart to dismantle and discontinue his work on it. remember what happened to the Curie's
Of course, without any additional evidence, yes i would have to say, "in all probability this device is a hoax"
Hell, i will say right now that it probalby IS a hoax, but there is the SLIM chance that he actually stumbled accross some type of revolutionary discovery...
Now, that being said, someone said in a earlier post that if someone claimed that teleportation or star trek type beaming were real they would be a crank or loon( i am paraphrasing here, that is the gist of the post or at least part of it) Well, look up teleportation on google.
Scientists have successfully teleported photons from on place to another. Yes, a far cry from star trek, but the tech has to start somewhere...Oh and as for my first question, if you think that it is not possible and would violate the laws of physics, look up Quantum Entanglment on google. The military and nasa are currently researching both technologys(teleportation and quantum entanglement) for both travel and information transfer respectively.
And my second question, well that is something that is not currently provable with our tech, but it IS a intrical part of current theory(M-Brand theory) which states that gravity is actually leaking INTO our Brane(universe) from another Brane(universe). Why the gravity leaks more in a space occupied by mass is over my head, but it is part of current theory....
just a couple of thoughts and or points....
and speaking of star trek, i saw a article on transparent alluminum not too long ago...don't know the link, but u can look it up..
though troy is the only one with a god-light, he has offerred $20,000 to anyone who can DISprove his claims! now here's why i have a problem with that: i go to my parish priest and say "father, i find myself doubting the exitence of god...please show me proof". and the priest replies "i don't want too, but i'll give you $20,000 if you can prove god does not exist" now how impressed would you be with this preacher?
Posted by geebs on Mon Mar 06, 2006 at 01:44 PM
Gents and ladies...having been around an inventor for the past several years, they can be an odd bunch. The fact that any of these inventors that claim they can see through walls have not demonstrated their wares to the public has obvious reasons. Inventions can be "stolen" or portions of them can be "borrowed" by unscrupulous companies. Not to mention that the military interest in these devices would easily quell publicity. The Hermosa, South Dakota company, Realtronics, has fulfilled contracts with the US military. This gives them some credibility, and their invention is not intended for public use but for military and police forces. I agree with those of you who say that you don't have to be from MIT to change the world.
Posted by SuperDave in SD on Tue Mar 21, 2006 at 11:44 PM
Indeed, you don't have to be from MIT in order to change the world. I think this discussion has de-generated into a series of truisms and tautologies.
Getting back to Troy and speaking of quantum entanglement, here's a funny quantum thought experiment:
Imagine what it would be like if Troy was offered $20,000 to prove or disprove this (his choice):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
Seriously now. I challenge anyone who has observed (or listened to) Troy in his natural habitat, and has read more than three paragraphs of the above link, to make a compelling case that Troy has a snowball's chance in hell of impacting the field of quantum mechanics in any way whatsoever.
Using anything besides truisms, tautologies and cliches ("TTC") to prove your point.
Preferrably with any sort of concrete basis in Troy's accomplishments.
Without making me laugh at you.
Building on my Rant Analyzer, I'm going to add a TTC analyzer to this thread.
You are warned.
Posted by intjudo on Wed Mar 22, 2006 at 08:54 PM
Getting back to Troy and speaking of quantum entanglement, here's a funny quantum thought experiment:
Imagine what it would be like if Troy was offered $20,000 to prove or disprove this (his choice):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
Seriously now. I challenge anyone who has observed (or listened to) Troy in his natural habitat, and has read more than three paragraphs of the above link, to make a compelling case that Troy has a snowball's chance in hell of impacting the field of quantum mechanics in any way whatsoever.
Using anything besides truisms, tautologies and cliches ("TTC") to prove your point.
Preferrably with any sort of concrete basis in Troy's accomplishments.
Without making me laugh at you.
Building on my Rant Analyzer, I'm going to add a TTC analyzer to this thread.
You are warned.
I have news for you idiots who think this guy is nuts. The science for his device has just been discovered.
read this:
http://www.royalsoc.org/exhibit.asp?id=4659&tip=1
Posted by JayCee on Fri Jul 07, 2006 at 09:19 PM
read this:
http://www.royalsoc.org/exhibit.asp?id=4659&tip=1
Two problems, JayCee.
First, that article is rather poorly written. Nowhere in it does it say that the scientists have actually produced a working model based on their "discovery." It's very unclear about exactly what they have accomplished.
Second, since Troy has been very secretive about things, how do you know that he even says that his device works along the same principles that these scientists claim to have discovered?
If Troy Hurtubise really HAS invented something that can see through solids (without using X-rays, of course), then he deserves all the acclaim he can get. It remains to be seen that he has done anything of the kind, though.
Posted by Cranky Media Guy on Sun Jul 09, 2006 at 12:52 PM
First, that article is rather poorly written. Nowhere in it does it say that the scientists have actually produced a working model based on their "discovery." It's very unclear about exactly what they have accomplished.
Second, since Troy has been very secretive about things, how do you know that he even says that his device works along the same principles that these scientists claim to have discovered?
If Troy Hurtubise really HAS invented something that can see through solids (without using X-rays, of course), then he deserves all the acclaim he can get. It remains to be seen that he has done anything of the kind, though.
`amused - noone caught the firepaste being called '1313'?
i'm guessing that #1) stuff like this has sorta been researched towards, but with failure
#2) that this guy & namely bay or whatevr is fraud
#3) the illuminati have planted this to find make intelligent people who ARE paying attention to look like gullible morons who listen & believe everything they hear.
#4) if you haven't noticed yet, you should definitely check out the game 'Illuminati - New World Order' that was PRINTED in 1995..
#5) also watch 'Loose Change 2'
#6) watch the pilot episode of 'The Lone Gunmen' (which aired 6 mos before 911)
#7) masonry has created mormons, jehovas witnesses, christian science & scientology (dont take my word for it, and dont be a moron - check it out) the illuminati use the masons alot.
#8) 'cyber wars' is sorta decent.. 'the legend of zoro' mentions the 'knights of aragon' who are trying to take over the world
alex jones i respect... thus far.
EVERYONE should see 'LOOSE CHANGE 2'.
Posted by reb with honor in us of a on Thu Aug 31, 2006 at 03:24 PM
i'm guessing that #1) stuff like this has sorta been researched towards, but with failure
#2) that this guy & namely bay or whatevr is fraud
#3) the illuminati have planted this to find make intelligent people who ARE paying attention to look like gullible morons who listen & believe everything they hear.
#4) if you haven't noticed yet, you should definitely check out the game 'Illuminati - New World Order' that was PRINTED in 1995..
#5) also watch 'Loose Change 2'
#6) watch the pilot episode of 'The Lone Gunmen' (which aired 6 mos before 911)
#7) masonry has created mormons, jehovas witnesses, christian science & scientology (dont take my word for it, and dont be a moron - check it out) the illuminati use the masons alot.
#8) 'cyber wars' is sorta decent.. 'the legend of zoro' mentions the 'knights of aragon' who are trying to take over the world
alex jones i respect... thus far.
EVERYONE should see 'LOOSE CHANGE 2'.
reb said:
"the illuminati have planted this to find make intelligent people who ARE paying attention to look like gullible morons who listen & believe everything they hear."
Uh oh, *someone* lost his tin foil hat!
Posted by Cranky Media Guy on Fri Sep 01, 2006 at 11:37 AM
"the illuminati have planted this to find make intelligent people who ARE paying attention to look like gullible morons who listen & believe everything they hear."
Uh oh, *someone* lost his tin foil hat!
Page 18 of 20 pages « First < 16 17 18 19 20 >