• Tedesche
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 days ago

      In my experience, people with rational reasons for rejecting claims can articulate said reasons, rather than simply calling them bullshit and telling other people to fuck off. I’m not convinced of the article’s claims, but I’m also not convinced you know what you’re talking about either. The difference is that the article admits its claims are speculative and hypothetical, while you’re just slinging insults.

      • @eran_morad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -2
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Rejecting causality IS the rational reason. It is you who is irrational. When one scientist brings forth a claim that breaks ALL of physics, with ZERO empirical evidence support such an astounding theory, it is not the ones who doubt that are likely to be wrong.

        • Tedesche
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 days ago

          It read to me like they provided a reason for denying causality though: that the associative breakdown in entropic state suggests causality can be violated. I don’t have the expertise to evaluate that claim, but if you do, why don’t you just explain to me why it’s wrong? Or is that demanding too much of a random person on the internet?

          • @eran_morad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -32 days ago

            Uh, because the entire field of physics is completely fucked if causality is violable? I’m really done with you.

            • Tedesche
              link
              fedilink
              English
              32 days ago

              That’s good, because I’m pretty sick of you too. What an arrogant POS.