/sci/ - Science & Math

>Afterlife
no
>Hollow Earth/Moon
no
>Time Travel into the past
yes

/thread

>>5931339

>yes
no

Did I just get trolled by a samefag? :(

>>5931339
But wern't there substantial vibrations of the moon's crust during the moon landing that heavily suggest some hollow places inside of the moon?

>>5931347
Some scientists arbitrarily proport that antimatter is regular matter traveling through time backwards despite the fact that there's no evidence to suggest that.

>>5931353
Those are called caves bro, [spoiler]Earth has them too.

>>5931359
Yeah, I remember that now from watching some of Feynman's lectures on youtube. It seems like a useless and unfalsifiable claim.

>>5931353
What "moon landing"?

>>5931368
So earth has enough caves to allow seismic activity from a single spacecraft to persist for almost an hour whilst reverberating all throughout the globe.

>>5931347
Neutrinos were shown to be faster than light. This implies time travel. Also tachyons.

>>5931383
Where are you getting this information? I don't know anything about seismology but it seems like the moon being hollow is significantly less likely than the moon landing coinciding with a large moonquake or something.

>>5931378
It's like claiming that there are parallel universes. It can't be proven. It can't be disproven. Either way it's pointless because it's a completely nonsequitor conclusion drawn from absolutely no facts.

>>5931386
Aren't tachyons theoretical?

>>5931391
>what is quantum mechanics

>>5931386
OP called for evidence. None exists for tachyons, and the neutrino incident was found to be some faulty wiring, IIRC.

>>5931394
Explain how your comment is relevant.

>>5931398
>>5931396
>implying tachyons haven't been observed

Do you even physics?

>>5931403
Explain how you think you're qualified to post here if you don't even know babby QM.

>>5931400
Then, post some sauce to help your argument, I mean, do you have a singlicious satisfact to snack that up?

>>5931400
Would you like to back that up with a source?

>>5931405
Explain yourself or gtfo. You're the one misunderstanding QM. OP called for evidence, send us on our way with a link if you're so sure of its prevalence.

>>5931405
>"explain your argument"
>"You're too dumb. You should know it before talking!"
>"Then what would be the point of this thread?"

>ask for citation
>thread dies

/sci/

>>5931379

>>5931347
do you even oracle of ages?

>no
>no
>no

There is no debate about any of these. What was the point of this thread?

>>5932038
To prove, once again, that OP is a faggot. Mission accomplished.

>>5931386
>Neutrinos were shown to be faster than light
update the information you store in your head, dumb ass.