Bountiful Precipitation and Full Reservoirs in California

Lord Kanti

Lord Kanti

Well-Known Member
Roger A. Shrubber said:
does it not occur to you that if a state that has been in a drought for years suddenly has full reservoirs...that might be the beginning of a new problem? doesn't it seem strange that it can happen so quickly? here's a leading question....what's going to happen if the rain keeps up at the rate it's currently collecting at? how long till the reservoirs are too full? how long till we have catastrophic flooding? how long till the little bit of topsoil left in California is washed out to sea and the whole state becomes a parking lot? till all the low lying areas become new lakes? how will all the flora and fauna that have adapted to dry conditions deal with the new weather patterns? are people going to have to buy boats to get back and forth?
do some people ever think about consequences?
Click to expand...
God, that sounds like heaven! They should market desert lots as future beachfront property in California.
 
zeddd

zeddd

Well-Known Member
Bugeye said:
Whatever the communication method is between entangled pairs, it is instantaneous, is it not? That would be faster than light.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t disprove SR which has been experimentally confirmed many times. Einstein didn’t like entaglement, at all, but it is also experimentally confirmed and is being developed for comms. They are both true and non contradictory simultaneously. Science is harsh man
 
TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
zeddd said:
It doesn’t disprove SR which has been experimentally confirmed many times. Einstein didn’t like entaglement, at all, but it is also experimentally confirmed and is being developed for comms. They are both true and non contradictory simultaneously. Science is harsh man
Click to expand...
He's a fucking idiot.

Entanglement doesn't deal with travel. That's the entire point: The electrons are connected via entanglement to begin with. That's why the transfer is nearly instantaneous across great distances.

A buddy of mine who is a physicist at Georgia Tech dumbed it down for me this way so I could grasp it: It's much like the nervous system of the human body, only it transfers signals faster. Imagine if your arm were, say, 240,000 miles in length so you could just reach up and grab a moon rock. You would still feel that moon rock in your hand instantly as you grabbed it even though the rest of your body was back here on earth.

There is no travel in entanglement. It's an instantaneous signal sent over an existing connection.
 
Bugeye

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
zeddd said:
It doesn’t disprove SR which has been experimentally confirmed many times. Einstein didn’t like entaglement, at all, but it is also experimentally confirmed and is being developed for comms. They are both true and non contradictory simultaneously. Science is harsh man
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I understand there are 4 states: true, false, both true and false, neither true nor false. So I can deal. Have a great day!
 
Bugeye

Bugeye

Well-Known Member
TacoMac said:
He's a fucking idiot.

Entanglement doesn't deal with travel. That's the entire point: The electrons are connected via entanglement to begin with. That's why the transfer is nearly instantaneous across great distances.

A buddy of mine who is a physicist at Georgia Tech dumbed it down for me this way so I could grasp it: It's much like the nervous system of the human body, only it transfers signals faster. Imagine if your arm were, say, 240,000 miles in length so you could just reach up and grab a moon rock. You would still feel that moon rock in your hand instantly as you grabbed it even though the rest of your body was back here on earth.

There is no travel in entanglement. It's an instantaneous signal sent over an existing connection.
Click to expand...
It is the travel of the signal I am referencing. I don't think it can be explained. So speculating that the signal has no mass isn't too out there. Feel free to correct me. I also understand that entaglement is instantaneous, not nearly instantaneous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top