Jessica Miller51 said:Haha, it's not just Hollywood. Back in November 2010, researchers at NASA actually managed to trap and study antimatter atoms for the first time. That crew pulled off trapping 38 hydrogen atoms within a complex magnetic field system for just over a tenth of a second. They cooled antiprotons down to half a degree above absolute zero in a storage ring, then forced them to react with positrons to create anti-hydrogen atoms. It all happened inside this specialized magnetic field setup that worked like a mirror: once the anti-particles hit the "wall," they bounced right back to the center. Through 335 cycles, they held onto those 38 hydrogen atoms for at least 172 milliseconds. Here’s the shot of an anti-hydrogen proton annihilating after hitting a regular matter proton: https://www.welt.de/img/channels-ext...thacht-jpg.jpg
On top of that, some scientists in Austria recently teamed up with researchers from China and successfully moved a photon into another dimension using quantum entanglement. I can dig into that too if you want.🙂
I honestly wonder how much someone has to lack basic intelligence to swallow this nonsense. CERN basically burns through massive amounts of money for absolutely nothing—total garbage. They just need to churn out some reports that don't mean a damn thing either. Organizations like CERN or HAARP wouldn't even exist if it weren't for people like you, who let them shove abstract jargon down your throat. Seriously, we both know what this is supposed to mean, but none of those words actually signify anything real. It makes zero sense. I don't get how anyone can buy into this just because it's uttered by some "scientific authority" or because it's "CERN." Screw CERN. Just watch any documentary, and when they ask those young, stoned "scientists" what's actually going on, it’s obvious they haven't a clue and couldn't explain it if their lives depended on it. Maybe you can try explaining to me what CERN actually is and what its purpose serves—without hiding behind abstract, meaningless "science" phrases like "particle accelerator." Seriously, give it to me straight: what does CERN actually do? I haven't been able to wrap my head around it for twenty-five years. Though, from the start, it was clearly all bunk; I'm just trying to figure out how lazy a person has to be to fall for it. "God particle," "Higgs boson"... they're just hollow buzzwords used to mask the emptiness. No sane person could fall for these stupidities and "sensational discoveries" used to justify their existence—what kind of actual contribution do these "discoveries" even make?
By the way, how is it possible to photograph a hypothetical particle when it's just hypothetical? Such a particle doesn't even exist. It's just the scientific community and the Nobel committee—followed by the general public—falling for sensationalism, just like they have so many times before. That’s part of the reason why it’s so hard to find any serious critique of CERN; massive piles of cash have been thrown away for nothing, and who would ever dare admit they were being played for fools... hahaha
The Higgs Fak : How Particle Physicists Fooled The Nobel Committee
Did The Nobel Prize in Physics in 2013 make Einstein Turn in his Grave? The Higgs Fak : How Particle Physicists Fooled The Nobel Committee is a merciless critique of The Large hadron Collider AT CERN and of the theoretical model on which The World ’ is built. Unzicker, German physicist and award-winning science writer , argues that The reaction of The Swedish Academy to last year’s announcement looks less like scientific triumph and more like they were simply hoodwinked by CERN's desperate need to justify pouring billions of taxpayer dollars into the void. The book starts OFF by claiming that The Greatest physicists such as Einstein , Dirac of Schrödinger would have considered The “ discovery ” of The Higgs particle ridiculous. According to the author, the logic is simple: "1) the so-called standard model has become absurdly convoluted, 2) we still haven't cracked any of the massive physics mysteries that have stumped us for a hundred years, 3) history tells us this current model is a total dead end, 4) because their experimental setups are getting so insanely complex, particle physicists are essentially tricking themselves with their own data, 5)
scientific convictions in the community are established by blind faith in expert opinions, group-think and parroting, and 6) the math behind the data analysis is so dense that no single person can actually oversee it." After walking through the history of the field, Unzicker wraps things up by calling particle physics—as it has been conducted since 1930—"a futile enterprise in its entirety."
