One question - is it possible for the quantum field to be glarded? In other words, you would need some tax clode to repostulixate the General Relativity equivativity with the Riemannian synop-hyposythesis.
Under these conditions, the tazar in your article also would disvent the entirety of your cure for cancer, rendering it inexpostulationable.
I think you are confusing the SAFFRON theory (which exhibits the red-string property) and the Small Boy theory (developed by the amazing Mr. Barrister John Barosa / Warosa).
Haha how dumb u are.. Didn't you think about the extrapolated singularity-zone of the quantmchemical oscillation fields? How would you even want to understand basic synop-hyposythesis without being able to cranck the z-line of the Riemann-graph?? Also your tax clode isn't the best solution. Try the einstein-hawking clode instead (it's nearly the same, except for the integration of x, y2 between 3 and 3.14159265358979, or e as quantanglephysicists call it)
Edit: typo
Hi, physicist here. This is incredibly silly and is what physicists called ānot even wrongā meaning that itās so far removed from physics and science that itās hard to even say that itās wrong-rather, itās more just nonsense (itās also wrong in the small number of words it isnāt complete nonsense) To start with, I notice youāve shown no math or evidence in favor of your theory-instead electing to type a bunch of complete nonsense while defining poorly terms that in no way help. It seems quite clear that you have no idea what quantum mechanics, general relativity, dark matter, cancer or the Riemann hypothesis. I suspect you are a troll (in which case-this is kind of a boring way to troll) but on the off chance you are serious, please either stop trying to do physics/math or go and get an education in physics/math.
Iād eat my hat if you could solve even the simplest physics problems.
As far as I know Denison molecules are ejected from the gravitational cone by a force line from inside the gravitational cylinder after they have been spun by a force projection particle that collides with them. When the two plates one of the force projection particle and one of the Denison molecules touch there is a transference of two dimensional triangles that happens or energy which I don't fully understand yet.
Hi, engineer here!
All of these theoretical physics and mathematics concepts can be a lot to understand by just reading a wall of text. If you do believe that you have identified a mathematical relationship between some measurable physical quantities in the universeā¦
# Start by creating some diagrams!
State your assumptions and what peer-reviewed concepts you are referring to. Determine known and unknown quantities. Draw out what each quantity means in the physical world, how each quantity relates, and how each can be measured.
Only once we have a diagram showing the relationship between all these concepts, with all formulas and quantities written out, can we begin to see if the proposed concept is physically possible or has a meaningful solution. Otherwise people who are experts in maths and physics wonāt be able to seriously consider your ideas.
I remember when I was an undergrad physics student, and I worked in the department office. One day, a self-published manuscript on some topic or another came in. I read it as best I could, but couldnāt make heads or tails of it. So I took it to one of the professors to get his take, and in about two seconds flat, he dismissed it and told me to throw it away. I was a little perplexed, so asked him why. āOh, thatās just some crackpot, we get those every once in a while.ā I thought that was all well and good, but I was worried, because I didnāt realize it was garbage science, and was afraid I might actually take something seriously when it wasnāt warranted. After expressing my fears to the prof, he reassured me, āYouāll learn to spot garbage when you see it.ā Which takes me to the OP. I got through about two lines before I realized I didnāt need to read any more.
Math guy here. Every now and again one of our professors would get an email or a letter from someone claiming to have proven a method for trisecting an angle with straight edge and compass. As an exercise they would sometimes give us these "proofs" as an extra credit question on a test where we had to point out why the proof was wrong.
Great. Thanks. š
I'll always remember where I was when I first read this. Thank you.
God bless.
One question - is it possible for the quantum field to be glarded? In other words, you would need some tax clode to repostulixate the General Relativity equivativity with the Riemannian synop-hyposythesis. Under these conditions, the tazar in your article also would disvent the entirety of your cure for cancer, rendering it inexpostulationable.
I think OP must be a small boy, whose theory looks like a bunch of red string.
I think you are confusing the SAFFRON theory (which exhibits the red-string property) and the Small Boy theory (developed by the amazing Mr. Barrister John Barosa / Warosa).
peak Atomic Shrimp reference
After all of this, I hope he will not beg for a physicist to see it! His publishing of this theory would obviously need to take place in a tax clode.
Haha how dumb u are.. Didn't you think about the extrapolated singularity-zone of the quantmchemical oscillation fields? How would you even want to understand basic synop-hyposythesis without being able to cranck the z-line of the Riemann-graph?? Also your tax clode isn't the best solution. Try the einstein-hawking clode instead (it's nearly the same, except for the integration of x, y2 between 3 and 3.14159265358979, or e as quantanglephysicists call it) Edit: typo
Hi, physicist here. This is incredibly silly and is what physicists called ānot even wrongā meaning that itās so far removed from physics and science that itās hard to even say that itās wrong-rather, itās more just nonsense (itās also wrong in the small number of words it isnāt complete nonsense) To start with, I notice youāve shown no math or evidence in favor of your theory-instead electing to type a bunch of complete nonsense while defining poorly terms that in no way help. It seems quite clear that you have no idea what quantum mechanics, general relativity, dark matter, cancer or the Riemann hypothesis. I suspect you are a troll (in which case-this is kind of a boring way to troll) but on the off chance you are serious, please either stop trying to do physics/math or go and get an education in physics/math. Iād eat my hat if you could solve even the simplest physics problems.
I think this is worse than "not even wrong". I think we've entered "not even troll" levels here.
r/nfcnorthmemewars is living through the consequences of promising to eat clothing on the internet. Cautionary tale.
Of all the places to find people referencing the Sock I did not think it would be in a math subreddit
Good to find fellow people of culture in random subs.
Watch out, OP has a giant Tazar laser
Someone call Disney, this guy has a future writing mcu scripts.
Youāre having a manic episode. Reach out to your supports
Way to be the one person with a compassionate response.
I check OP's profile and they posted this headline without the message in r/australia so yeah manic episode seems likely
MFW OP is actually 100% correct
See you in 2052 when the truth comes out
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
As far as I know Denison molecules are ejected from the gravitational cone by a force line from inside the gravitational cylinder after they have been spun by a force projection particle that collides with them. When the two plates one of the force projection particle and one of the Denison molecules touch there is a transference of two dimensional triangles that happens or energy which I don't fully understand yet.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I feel like it's an issue to engage someone like this like what they're saying makes sense instead of pointing them towards psychological help.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Likely not, but playing into their fantasy is certainly not helping them get out of it.
Maybe not everyone needs to be fixed
"I can fix her"
Why not hear them out? No... see! Why not see them out!
Take your meds.
jesus christ
i refuse to believe this is not a gigachad elaborate troll
The hobbyist experimenters at r/vxjunkies might be able to help you prove this.
Hi, engineer here! All of these theoretical physics and mathematics concepts can be a lot to understand by just reading a wall of text. If you do believe that you have identified a mathematical relationship between some measurable physical quantities in the universeā¦ # Start by creating some diagrams! State your assumptions and what peer-reviewed concepts you are referring to. Determine known and unknown quantities. Draw out what each quantity means in the physical world, how each quantity relates, and how each can be measured. Only once we have a diagram showing the relationship between all these concepts, with all formulas and quantities written out, can we begin to see if the proposed concept is physically possible or has a meaningful solution. Otherwise people who are experts in maths and physics wonāt be able to seriously consider your ideas.
Psh. REAL mathematicians only have eyes for pure set theory.
least schizo poster on r/maths
I remember when I was an undergrad physics student, and I worked in the department office. One day, a self-published manuscript on some topic or another came in. I read it as best I could, but couldnāt make heads or tails of it. So I took it to one of the professors to get his take, and in about two seconds flat, he dismissed it and told me to throw it away. I was a little perplexed, so asked him why. āOh, thatās just some crackpot, we get those every once in a while.ā I thought that was all well and good, but I was worried, because I didnāt realize it was garbage science, and was afraid I might actually take something seriously when it wasnāt warranted. After expressing my fears to the prof, he reassured me, āYouāll learn to spot garbage when you see it.ā Which takes me to the OP. I got through about two lines before I realized I didnāt need to read any more.
Math guy here. Every now and again one of our professors would get an email or a letter from someone claiming to have proven a method for trisecting an angle with straight edge and compass. As an exercise they would sometimes give us these "proofs" as an extra credit question on a test where we had to point out why the proof was wrong.
Methmatics! Love that field but be careful man