Why are you playing the apologist for this blatant crap?

Your cousin’s Facebook friends are probably going nuts over this image that claims to show how the early history of Arabic geometric design informs how we write numerals today.

Where did the image from the Facebook post originally come from? It’s really weird. It’s clearly not based on anything historical, which, post-internet, anyone can quickly research and verify

Cool counterargument.

Call it a highest level fuck-up if you will, but at least they patched it quickly. I’ve gotta say, I’m super impressed with Windows’ dedicated security service. I must’ve had Windows 7 for about six years now, and my machine’s never developed a single problem. A pretty huge difference compared to what computers used…

We’ve had orbital mechanics down for pretty much half a century, now...

You don’t actually need a camera to see this. When the moon is a thin crescent on the night time horizon like that, you will be able to see the rest of it as faintly illuminated.

Um... I’m pretty sure doctors are educated in the difference between medicine and pseudoscience.

The landing failed in pretty much every way it was possible to fail. I wish people’d stop calling it an amazing achievement, it’s kinda weird.

Somebody else bizarrely lacking in the ability to distinguish between “contacting alien life” and “listening for alien life”.

Somewhere in the cosmos, perhaps, intelligent life may be watching these lights of ours aware of what they mean

Well that comment made no sense.

You don’t seem to have addressed at all the problem in my comment.

You’re misunderstanding. I’m talking about their historical origin. Obviously complex numbers have since been used to model all kinds of real phenomena.

Myeah you have a complete misconception of physicists’ culture. Also the history of physics. Also you don’t seem to have much understanding of what dark matter is.

Ah, but the nature of th Alcubierre Drive is... well... that it warps space-time and gives us the capacity to control how that space time is warped.

I understood your position from the outset. Reasserting it won’t move the conversation forwards.

1. “Matter” is an informal term, but it’s taken to include composite particles. That’s an issue of semantics, though, so I’ll stick with how you were using it. Why does it matter that it’s not ‘matter’?

What? This article is about the LHC proving a theory.

Why are you talking about the perceptions of “pop culture” when you are clearly a layman in this field? The random nature of quantum mechanics is the default view in academia.