You have a technical mind, don't you? - page 28
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It's a good thing we stopped in time.
But with Nature, though, not everyone has always done well...
Don't look for unfinished mistakes of the past.)
Sorry corrected.
In general, this is a rather old story and dates back to pre-revolutionary times.
Why did the USSR change its mind about turning the Siberian rivers
Actually this is quite an old story and goes back to pre-revolutionary times.
At the end of the article it becomes clear that had it not been for a sharp deterioration in the economic situation, the project would have come to fruition. Unfortunately.
That is, it was not the scientists' arguments that stopped the "doers", but the emptying of their wallets. It is a pity.
...
:)
I don't know who has the goal of sowing mistrust of the connection of time and space. But one thing is clear, someone strongly wants to steer it in the wrong direction.
It's the number of videos on .tuba, articles of dubious nature.
Quite right. Moreover, according to modern thinking, any scientific theory must be falsifiable. This means that it must contain within itself the possibility of being disproved. In short, a fundamentally irrefutable theory is an unscientific theory (the TC theory seems so to me)
The stream of ignorance does not end.
Let me explain: falsification is deliberate falsification. Refuting a theory is not intended to hold one legally responsible for the theory being wrong. Stop spreading absurdity to the masses.
There is no such law in logic, don't make it up.
Oh, my God...
I'm getting sorry for my time.
"To have more than one meaning is to have no meaning; and if words have no meanings, then all possibility of reasoning with one another, and indeed with oneself, is lost; for it is impossible to think anything unless one thinks with one thing." - Aristotle, Metaphysics
You argue that space is matter. Hence matter is space. Space=matter.
In fact, space has no material properties and matter has no properties of space. They are two different physical objects, hence two different concepts, and so on, two different words.
You have one word that has two meanings: space is both space and matter. Matter is both matter and space. You don't know anything about logic! That's terrible.
The stream of ignorance does not end.
Let me explain: falsification is deliberate fabrication. Disproving a theory is not aimed at holding legally responsible for the fact that the theory turned out to be wrong. Stop spreading absurdity to the masses.
You are confusing falsifiability and falsifiability. There is a warning about this in the article in the link I provided at the very beginning. Or do you also suffer from dyslexia, in addition to not understanding logic and physics?
My goodness...
I'm getting sorry for my time.
"To have more than one meaning is to have no meaning; and if words have no meanings, then all possibility of reasoning with each other, and indeed with oneself, is lost; for it is impossible to think anything unless one thinks with one thing." - Aristotle, Metaphysics
You argue that space is matter. Hence matter is space. Space=matter.
In fact, space has no material properties and matter has no properties of space. They are two different physical objects, hence two different concepts, and so on, two different words.
You have one word that has two meanings: space is both space and matter. Matter is both matter and space. You don't know anything about logic! That's terrible.
Once again. There are no laws of logic stating anything about space and matter.
Your "proof" makes no sense and sounds like some kind of clumsy trolling.
Once again. There are no laws of logic stating anything about space and matter.
Your "proofs" are meaningless and look like some clumsy trolling.
Have you tried to get out of the shell of the existing real world of science or only on the basis of beautiful words of clever husbands your point of view is formed?