12-YEAR-OLD BOY GENIUS SETS OUT TO DISPROVE BIG BANG

  On 3/26/2011 at 2:44 AM, kaini said:

it's not the kid that's at fault for people being pissed off, it's the shitty journalism. but journalists don't exactly have a good rep when it comes to writing about science.

  On 3/26/2011 at 2:41 AM, karmakramer said:

  On 3/26/2011 at 2:36 AM, Indicator said:

  Quote

his IQ is higher than Einstein’s

 

WTF? As far as I know Einstein never took an IQ test in his life...

 

Weird, I wonder what that statement is based on then. I read some things saying they estimate his IQ was around 180, but I don't know how they would determine that.

 

And thanks kaini for those vids, great stuff so far

Nice quote by Christopher Hitchens:

“There is, and there always has been, an unusually high and consistent correlation between the stupidity of a given person and that person’s propensity to be impressed by the measurement of I.Q.”

  On 3/26/2011 at 3:27 AM, delet... said:

Both prove nothing, but say nothing. See orthodoxy

i am interested in your ideas for proving things that happened approximately 13.7 billion years ago, if they happened at all.

  On 3/26/2011 at 2:01 AM, Tamas said:

There was a kid who looked just like that in my highschool, was really annoying, he may have had decent knowledge of high level math but he certainly didn't have any social skills.

 

And that theory to disprove the big bang is worse (and less entertaining) than something that someone who's stoned would come up with!!

Sure, it's not articulated very well, but then again he has asperger's and he's 12. What really matters is the basic idea he is trying to put across, that the theories on the big bang and the theories for for how elements were dispersed throughout the universe don't match up according to him. If the his math works out then that is the only thing that matters.

sure, it's hard to like these guys in the presentation some way. But at least with experiments into plasma physics, we're not just playing around like cavemen in the dark with dodgy maths. Apparently anything can be said if it springs from the bow of the string theorists. Every non-realisable fantasy is nodded at with a knowing glance by those that it has transpired to be deemed worthy enough to get funding as they support the current orthodoxy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFEVM-IkXLA

with this you can see that the orthodoxy doesn't like to be crossed ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yTfRy0LTD0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deMPlC1rc7U

one of the more interesting ideas i've seen (not sure if it was in one of those horizon docs, i've seen a lot of horizon docs) was to apply the equations used in M-theory (the more popular branch of string theory) to the universe as a whole... to treat the entire universe as a single vibrating 11-dimensional string caused by the interaction of two 11-dimensional membranes. the maths works, but xkcd said it best really:

the holographic principle is also a very interesting idea, which can be explained with surprising ease. and most good science is simply explained and elegant.

string theory is about double guitars. You know like those double guitars?

  On 3/26/2011 at 4:06 AM, Rambo said:

You know like those double guitars?

does anyone remember laughter?

i'd quote ceephax on robert plant albums, paul mccartney playing with tapes, now and zen, and equipment seppuku, but he's taken the quote down and google can't unearth it. drat

It's like one level you have all this complex math but if you actually go a step beyond that it's basically just all about eternal hammer-ons with both hands. It transcends time. That's why LiquidJam Metalbox claim that their albums have no length. All their albums from 1987 onwards sound like harps melting backwards but at the same time NOT.

  On 3/26/2011 at 4:14 AM, Rambo said:

It's like one level you have all this complex math but if you actually go a step beyond that it's basically just all about eternal hammer-ons with both hands. It transcends time. That's why LiquidJam Metalbox claim that their albums have no length. All their albums from 1987 onwards sound like harps melting backwards but at the same time NOT.

and yngwie malmsteen is string theorists. it all makes sense now

WATTM DISPROVES BIG BANG

science is at its core based on experiment, and most of watmm's never had any sort of bang, let alone a big one.

  On 3/26/2011 at 4:14 AM, Rambo said:

It's like one level you have all this complex math but if you actually go a step beyond that it's basically just all about eternal hammer-ons with both hands. It transcends time. That's why LiquidJam Metalbox claim that their albums have no length. All their albums from 1987 onwards sound like harps melting backwards but at the same time NOT.

It's not about complex impregnable math !! That is to succumb to the con. We kill all that bS and just observe and theorize, and then discount all that disproves our wacky 60's sci-fi multi-verse bS theories.

  On 3/26/2011 at 4:19 AM, delet... said:

  On 3/26/2011 at 4:14 AM, Rambo said:

It's like one level you have all this complex math but if you actually go a step beyond that it's basically just all about eternal hammer-ons with both hands. It transcends time. That's why LiquidJam Metalbox claim that their albums have no length. All their albums from 1987 onwards sound like harps melting backwards but at the same time NOT.

 

It's not about complex impregnable math !! That is to succumb to the con. We kill all that bS and just observe and theorize, and then discount all that disproves our wacky 60's sci-fi multi-verse bS theories.

true, but again we're talking about something that happened even longer ago than the last boards of canada album.

it's very hard to work with anything even remotely definable as 'proof' when something happened that long ago. the best we can do is make observations about things like how we think stars work, the abundance of various chemical elements in the universe via spectrography, the measurement of cosmic background radiation, that sort of stuff - stuff we can prove or say with a fair degree of certainty.

then we work backwards from that. but the farther back we work, the greater the margin of error becomes - and that's without even taking into account that physics seems to break down entirely in the brief moments after the big bang - and that in itself is based on measurements that have a MASSIVE margin of error by my reasoning above.

tl;dr multiverse theory is exactly as plausible or implausible as any other theory.

  On 3/26/2011 at 4:15 AM, karmakramer said:

WATTM DISPROVES BIG BANG

nonsense/crap

lol

maybe the big bang was SO big it and combined those elements but then tore them apart again

sup is a tired meme now

youre a tired meme

Somehow I feel this kid will fade to obscurity among other child prodigies. How many have there been that show great potential, maybe they write some good papers, but nothing groundbreaking. IMO the genius tag is being used too lightly, this kid might be able to do high-level math at a young age, but he needs to create a totally new and creative idea to explain a natural phenomenon which can be verified by experiments. Until then I would be vary of calling him a genius, gifted sure, but the genius title should be reserved to the very few who created a totally new idea in their head. I will be well impressed if this kid manages to reconcile quantum mechanics with relativity.

I also think string theories are just fancy mathematical acrobatics. What use is a theory that can't be tested.

THE KWISATZ HADERACH

  On 3/26/2011 at 6:24 AM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

youre a tired meme

http://forum.watmm.com/topic/64790-usage-grammar-pet-peeves/

your just a cute lil girl

"“There are two different types of when stars end. When the little stars die, it’s just like a small poof. They just turn into a planetary nebula. But the big ones, above 1.4 solar masses, blow up in one giant explosion, a supernova,” Jake said. “What it does, is, in larger stars there is a larger mass, and it can fuse higher elements because it’s more dense.”

OK . . . trying to follow you."

This part of the article pissed me off. Throughout my whole college experience so far I've come to have a shit attitude against any form of writing or social science major because it's pretty much just easy-to-do bullshit.

"OK... trying to follow you." Fucking seriously? You never took any form of basic physics or chemistry? People fucking suck.

Maybe this kid will do something, maybe he won't. Hyping a person is almost always a stupid idea though and completely unnecessary.

In the news: "12 year old sets himself to disprove the big bang theory, watmm shits its pants after being confronted with its own incompetence"

There's no reason to shit your pants over this. The 12 year old has a valid point, which may or may not turn out to be complete nonsense. What sets him apart from the average 12 year olds is in the "how", not in the "know". At 12 he's going to try to form a valid scientific theory based on some observations about exploding stars. The world would look a lot better if more 12 year olds would have the guts and the discipline to put themselves to something like that. And if people wouldn't go apeshit about it.

Relax people, he's only 12. He's not going after your girlfriend. This is his LEGO. Let him play for god sake.