Anno Domini 36 – A gresit Einstein?

25 octombrie 2011 de Edmond Constantinescu 136 comentarii

Filed under Video Tagged with Einstein, Neutrino, Relativitate, Stiinta

136 Responses to Anno Domini 36 – A gresit Einstein?

furtuna dragos says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 20:48

SMP pe tine te-a facut religia mai bun ?

Vrei sa faci un lucru bun,
Din om bun ajungi nebun,
Din om bun care ai fost,
Ajungi sa te ia de prost …

E rau sa fi bun,
sau e un lucru bun sa fi rau?
Codrut says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 21:55

Eddie, te rog sa-mi spui daca ai citit vreo carte despre Rudolf Steiner, si ce parere ai in general/particular despre ea/el.

Este foarte important.
Anubis says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 22:24

Nea ghelasie lua Dima trei voturi pozitive pe baza la rastalmacirea exemplificarii? Lol
ghelasie says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 22:46

da frate anubis da.asta m-o surprins.de aici se vede ca prostia nu e neaparat religioasa.
furtuna dragos says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 22:53

Aia e mâna lu dumnezău la lucru.
ghelasie says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 23:08

4 voturi acum…
spirit sfant ce alta data inspirasi regi si profeti..
io te rog de asta data pe atei tu sa-i indrepti….
furtuna dragos says:

31 octombrie 2011 la 23:24

şi să-i faci mai înţelepţi,
creştinii să devină ai lor adepţi.
@lm@ris says:

1 noiembrie 2011 la 17:20

„Cuvantul «dumnezeu» nu este nimic altceva pentru mine decat expresia si produsul slabiciunii umane, Biblia este o colectie de legende onorabile, dar primitive, care sunt, in orice caz, destul de copilaresti. Niciun fel de interpretare, indiferent cat de subtila, nu-mi poate schimba opinia”

Ianuarie ’54,

Albert Einstein

In urma cu ani de zile citeam brosurele in care unii mai aveau putin si faceau din Einstein un fel de al 13-lea ucenic spunand cum ar fi fost convins de existenta lui Dumnezeu prin simpla interpretare la vioara a unei piese de catre un mare violonist rus. Ma intreb daca nu e tot o anecdota in genul celor ce au aparut dupa disparitia lui Darwin.
@lm@ris says:

1 noiembrie 2011 la 17:22

#7 | Written by ghelasie
#8 | Written by furtuna dragos

Dupa ce scoate Edi carte despre Geneza, s-ar impune si un volum de poezii al forumistilor O2… :laugh:
furtuna dragos says:

1 noiembrie 2011 la 22:23

Eva a fost creata din coasta lui Adam,
Lupu e din coasta lui – Ham Ham!
aveau acelasi ADN,
unii strigau: – iarta-ne!
ceea ce inseamna ca aveau aceasi cromozomi sexuali,
erau cam nazdravani,
de fapt Adam si Eva erau gemeni.
doi frati care si-o puneau,
in sodoma si gomora nu ardeau.
furtuna dragos says:

2 noiembrie 2011 la 00:10

#10 @lm@ris pt un volum fiecare postare tre’ transformata in versuri …

Pro ROck-ul!

Din haos facea teorie,
teorie din prostie,
crestinism cu palarie.
Richard says:

2 noiembrie 2011 la 18:37

Codrut, am indoieli ca Edi are vreun interes pt Steiner.
Codrut says:

2 noiembrie 2011 la 18:46

Richard, de ce ai avea indoieli?
danut says:

3 noiembrie 2011 la 07:52

raspund eu pt richard, pt ca stiu ca nu se supara 🙂
rudolf steiner e un autor neomistic in directia newage-ului. adica o noua tentativa de a face metafizica intr-o epoca in care aceasta a devenit caduca.

p.s. pt richard : chiar nu ai nimic de comentatla emisiunea despre geniul einsteinian ?! 🙂
Codrut says:

3 noiembrie 2011 la 12:23

danut, nu trebuie sa raspunzi pentru richard, ci pentru tine insuti!

eu vreau parerea personala a fiecaruia, pentru ca edi stie sa gandeasca cu propria minte, asa cum si voi cred ca o faceti deja.

imaginea/afirmatia ta despre rudolf mie personal mi se pare eronata pentru ca am studiat despre tip si citit carti de ale lui cateva; la Rudolf este vorba despre antroposofie (stiinta spiritului) – in centru il are pe Isus ca si spirit Hristic, evanghelia lui Pavel (bine inteleasa) si celelalte Evanghelii.

Sincer, este greu de digerat ce scrie el acolo. Si probabil Edi ar putea intelege aspectele fine mult mai bine decat altii.
Martin Luther says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 19:30

Şi totuşi, e posibil ca Einstein să fi greşit. Dar asta nu o să fie acceptat de cei care privesc ştiinţa ca pe o religie cu una cu două. Aşa cum până mai ieri susţineau trinitatea cu dinţii şi ghiarele, azi preaslăvesc teoria relativităţii mergând până în pânzele albe pe mâna lui EInstein. Aceeaşi Mărie cu altă pălărie…
Nu ştiu cum se face, dar experimentele de la Cern repetate mai atent au dat aceleaşi rezultate din septembrie care aruncă în aer „infailibila” ştiinţă. Ai dreacu’ neutrinii ăştia, domnule pastor. Fac ei ce fac şi le dau bătăi de cap savanţilor…Exact la fel precum dă trinitatea bătăi de cap religioşilor…
http://www.descopera.ro/dnews/8987122-particulele-neutrino-au-depasit-din-nou-viteza-luminii
http://grenzwissenschaft-aktuell.blogspot.com/2011/11/uberlichtschnelle-teilchenmessung-am.html
Anubis says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 19:49

Frate Luter dupa ce treceti examenul de la ladita cu nisip va asteptam ca sa va explicam „paradoxul” care va scapa. Dupa ce raspundeti cu succes la urmatoarela intrebari va ajutam sa intrati pe usa din fata in biserica scientologica, asa sa ne ajute Bunul;

1. Cine a creat lumea
2. In ce zi?
3. Cine a creat pe cel care a creat lumea?
4. In ce zi?
5. Ce zi e mai importanta, cea in care lumea a fost creata sau cea in care Creatorul lumii a fost faurit?
6. Daca pe cel care a creat Creatorul il chema Gheorghitza cui se cuvine sa ne inchinam mai degraba, Creatorului sau lui Gheorghitza?

Asteptam sa vedem rezultatele chestionarului de la ladita frate Luter si dupa aceea vorbim despre lucruri care momentan va depasesc.

PS. Cat despre linkurile de limba germana menite sa va aduca un plus la imagine avem si noi un plus pentru imaginea dvs chiar aici:
Martin Luther says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 20:41

Anubis, îmi e milă de tine. Nu ai IQ nici cât un copil de 6 ani.
Cât despre linkurile de limbă germană, Edy ştie germană, dacă am înţeles eu bine. Iar tu nu trebuie să le ştii ( şi citeşti)pe toate atât timp cât te comporţi ca băieţelul ăla din clip.
Anubis says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 20:54

Nu trebuie sa-ti fie mila de mine frate Fartin. O rugaciune la Bunul si ma scapa de neputinta….daca ai avea credinta cat un graunte de mustar (din ala care-ti iese pe nas cand te prefaci crestin) bwahahahahaa
Anubis says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 20:54

Ah am uitat sa adaug la postul de mai sus:

:sick: 😛 :pain: :rotfl: :silly: :beauty: :hugleft: :hugright: :cow: :cow2: :goat: :hippo: :panda: :pig2: :sheep: :sheep2: :reindeer: :snail: :zombiekiller: :doctor: :devil:
CJ says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 20:59

Fartin Luzer, mars in gatu’ ma-tii de bigot prost sa nu te luam la suturi!
Ma plictisesc comentariile imbecile ale unora ca tine. Troll infect, cu gandire superficiala tipic creationista.
Si mai aveti tupeul sa va numiti crestini. Jet ma, ca mi se face sila!
Martin Luther says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 22:08

Cj şi Anubis,
Că voi şi alţii de pe aici sunteţi scursuri umane care ştiţi numai să daţi în cap celor care gândesc diferit nu mă miră. Ce mă miră e că Edi pastorul îngăduie asemenea specimene neevoluate pe lângă el. În numele a ce?!? A libertăţii de a înjura birjăreşte? Giv mi a breik, domnu Edi. Cine se adună, se aseamănă. Altă concluzie LOGICĂ nu poţi trage dacă te uiţi pe forumul ăsta. Sau forumul nu aparţine proiectului oxigenat?
Anubis says:

19 noiembrie 2011 la 22:14

sau..poate ca nu te obliga nimeni sa-ti dai cu parerea (de sectant semi-retardat care nu e in stare sa inteleaga secolul in care traieste, daramite alte secole) si apoi sa plangi ca un copilash la mamica lui, eh?
Eugen Bostan says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 17:46

Has the Big Bang theory been busted?

WHAT if we told you the Big Bang was a myth?
That’s right. Everything we know about the universe may be wrong.
Cosmologists have speculated that the universe was created after a star collapsed into a black hole – a theory that helps to explain why it seems to be expanding in all directions.
The Big Bang theory suggests that the universe was created from a single point in the universe but despite years of research, nobody yet knows what triggered the eruption.
It also fails to explain why the Universe has an „almost completely uniform temperature.”
„There does not seem to have been enough time since the birth of the cosmos for it to have reached temperature equilibrium,” researchers explain in the scientific journal, Nature.
Astrophysicists from the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada have released a paper discussing a previous theory out of Germany that posited that the universe is a three-dimensional „membrane” floating through a four-dimensional „bulk universe”.
A bulk universe is a very complicated concept out of string theory that puts forward the idea that space is a plane of infinite dimensions through which other planes of infinite dimensions float.
The team claimed that if the „bulk universe” contained four dimensional stars, some of them could collapse and cause black holes in the same way that stars in our universe do – they turn in supernovae, ejecting their outerlayers while their inner layers collapse into the black hole.
Black holes in our universe are spherical in shape and possess some kind of „membrane” that keep them that way. These „membranes” are known as „event horizons”. Anything that passes through this event horizon is done for, because the gravitational pull is so great it makes escape impossible. In our universe only a two dimensional object is capable of becoming an event horizon within a black hole, Nature explained. Whereas in a bulk universe, the event horizon of a four dimensional black hole would have to be three dimensional, known as a „hypersphere”.
Confused yet? We don’t blame you.
In a nutshell this means that a star floating through a multidimensional plane got sucked into a black hole, half of it got swallowed up and the other half that survived spawned the creation of the universe.
The fact that our universe is expanding in all directions could be a sign simply of cosmic expansion, rather than as the origin of the universe itself, the researchers suggest.
„Astronomers measured that expansion and extrapolated back that the Universe must have begun with a Big Bang – but that is just a mirage,” said team member Niayesh Afshordi.
However, the theory has some holes. (Get it, holes?)
So far it doesn’t entirely answer how the expansion of the universe occurred.
The European Space Agency recorded slight fluctuations in the temperature of the universe and found that the cosmos contained imprints of radiation that matched predictions made in the Big Bang theory. Obviously this creates a discrepancy in the astrophysicists’ research.
The scientists say they’re going back to the drawing board to adjust their model.
Stay tuned. Everything we may know about the universe may be wrong.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/sci-tech/has-the-big-bang-theory-been-busted/story-fn5fsgyc-1226721187118#ixzz2fMTcWbpy
Ianis says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 17:58

Eugene
Linkul indicat de tine vine de pe un site din retea FOX. Un tabloid precum Libertatea/Can-Can.
Eugen Bostan says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 18:17

Pentru Ianis

The Big Bang theory might be myth

What if we told you the Big Bang was a myth?
That’s right. Everything we know about the universe may be wrong.
Cosmologists have speculated that the universe was created after a star collapsed into a black hole – a theory that helps to explain why it seems to be expanding in all directions.
The Big Bang theory suggests that the universe was created from an a single point in the universe but despite years of research, nobody yet knows what triggered the eruption.
It also fails to explain why the Universe has an “almost completely uniform temperature.”
“There does not seem to have been enough time since the birth of the cosmos for it to have reached temperature equilibrium,” researchers explain in the scientific journal, Nature.
Astrophysicists from the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada have released a paper discussing a previous theory out of Germany that posited that the universe is a three-dimensional “membrane” floating through a four-dimensional “bulk universe”.
A bulk universe is a very complicated concept out of string theory that puts forward the idea that space is a plane of infinite dimensions through which other planes of infinite dimensions float.
The team claimed that if the “bulk universe” contained four dimensional stars, some of them could collapse and cause black holes in the same way that stars in our universe do – they turn in supernovae, ejecting their outerlayers while their inner layers collapse into the black hole.
Black holes in our universe are spherical in shape and possess some kind of “membrane” that keep them that way. These “membranes” are known as “event horizons”. Anything that passes through this event horizon is done for, because the gravitational pull is so great it makes escape impossible. In our universe only a two dimensional object is capable of becoming an event horizon within a black hole, Nature explained. Whereas in a bulk universe, the event horizon of a four dimensional black hole would have to be three dimensional, known as a “hypersphere”.
Confused yet? We don’t blame you.
In a nutshell this means that a star floating through a multidimensional plane got sucked into a black hole, half of it got swallowed up and the other half that survived spawned the creation of the universe.
The fact that our universe is expanding in all directions could be a sign simply of cosmic expansion, rather than as the origin of the universe itself, the researchers suggest.
“Astronomers measured that expansion and extrapolated back that the Universe must have begun with a Big Bang – but that is just a mirage,” said team member Niayesh Afshordi.
However, the theory has some holes. (Get it, holes?)
So far it doesn’t entirely answer how the expansion of the universe occurred.
The European Space Agency recorded slight fluctuations in the temperature of the universe and found that the cosmos contained imprints of radiation that matched predictions made in the Big Bang theory. Obviously this creates a discrepancy in the astrophysicists’ research.
The scientists say they’re going back to the drawing board to adjust their model.
Stay tuned. Everything we may know about the universe may be wrong.

http://nypost.com/2013/09/17/the-big-bang-theory-might-be-myth/
Eugen Bostan says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 18:20

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/people/niayesh-afshordi
Eugen Bostan says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 18:24

Goodbye Big Bang, Hello Black Hole? A New Theory Of The Universe’s Creation

uld the famed “Big Bang” theory need a revision? A group of theoretical physicists suppose the birth of the universe could have happened after a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole and ejected debris.
Before getting into their findings, let’s just preface this by saying nobody knows anything for sure. Humans obviously weren’t around at the time the universe began. The standard theory is that the universe grew from an infinitely dense point or singularity, but who knows what was there before?
“For all physicists know, dragons could have come flying out of the singularity,” stated Niayesh Afshordi, an astrophysicist with the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada who co-authored the new study.
So what are the limitations of the Big Bang theory? The singularity is one of them. Also, it’s hard to predict why it would have produced a universe that has an almost uniform temperature, because the age of our universe (about 13.8 billion years) does not give enough time — as far as we can tell — to reach a temperature equilibrium.
Most cosmologists say the universe must have been expanding faster than the speed of light for this to happen, but Ashford says even that theory has problems: “The Big Bang was so chaotic, it’s not clear there would have been even a small homogenous patch for inflation to start working on.”
Representation of the timeline of the universe over 13.7 billion years, from the Big Bang, through the cosmic dark ages and formation of the first stars, to the expansion in the universe that followed. Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team.
Representation of the timeline of the universe over 13.7 billion years, from the Big Bang, through the cosmic dark ages and formation of the first stars, to the expansion in the universe that followed. Credit: NASA/WMAP Science Team.
This is what the physicists propose:
The model they constructed has the three-dimensional universe floating as a membrane (or brane) in a “bulk universe” that has four dimensions. (Yes, this is making our heads hurt as well, so it might be easier to temporarily think of the brane as two-dimensional and the “bulk universe” as three-dimensional when trying to picture it.) You can read the more technical details in this 2000 paper on which the new theory is based.
So if this “bulk universe” has four-dimensional stars, these stars could go through the same life cycles as the three-dimensional ones we are familiar with. The most massive ones would explode as supernovae, shed their skin and have the innermost parts collapse as a black hole.
The 4-D black hole would have an “event horizon” just like the 3-D ones we are familiar with. The event horizon is the boundary between the inside and the outside of a black hole. There are a lot of theories of what goes on inside a black hole, although nothing has ever been observed.
In a 3-D universe, the event horizon appears as a two-dimensional surface. So in a 4-D universe, the event horizon would be a 3-D object called a hypersphere.
So basically, what the model says is when the 4-D star blows apart, the leftover material would create a 3-D brane surrounding a 3-D event horizon, and then expand.
The long and the short of it? To bring this back to things that we can see, it is clear from observations that the universe is expanding (and indeed is getting faster as it expands, possibly due to the mysterious dark energy). The new theory says that the expansion comes from this 3-D brane’s growth. But there is at least one limitation.
This artist’s impression shows the surroundings of the supermassive black hole at the heart of the active galaxy NGC 3783 in the southern constellation of Centaurus (The Centaur). New observations using the Very Large Telescope Interferometer at ESO’s Paranal Observatory in Chile have revealed not only the torus of hot dust around the black hole but also a wind of cool material in the polar regions. Credit: ESO/M. Kornmesser
This artist’s impression shows the surroundings of the supermassive black hole at the heart of the active galaxy NGC 3783 in the southern constellation of Centaurus (The Centaur). New observations using the Very Large Telescope Interferometer at ESO’s Paranal Observatory in Chile have revealed not only the torus of hot dust around the black hole but also a wind of cool material in the polar regions. Credit: ESO/M. Kornmesser
While the model does explain why the universe has nearly uniform temperature (the 4-D universe preceding it would have existed it for much longer), a European Space Agency telescope called Planck recently mapped small temperature variations in the cosmic microwave background, which is believed to be leftovers of the universe’s beginnings. (Read more about the CMB here.)
The new model differs from these CMB readings by about four percent, so the researchers are looking to refine the model. They still feel the model has worth, however. Planck shows that inflation is happening, but doesn’t show why the inflation is happening.
“The study could help to show how inflation is triggered by the motion of the universe through a higher-dimensional reality,” the researchers stated.
You can read more about their research on this prepublished Arxiv paper. The Arxiv entry does not specify if the paper has been submitted to any peer-reviewed scientific journals for publication.
Source: Nature

Read more: http://www.universetoday.com/104863/goodbye-big-bang-hello-hyper-black-hole-a-new-theory-on-universes-creation/#ixzz2fMeQpTww
Eugen Bostan says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 18:30

Did a hyper-black hole spawn the Universe?
Big Bang was mirage from collapsing higher-dimensional star, theorists propose.

It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye. Cosmologists have speculated that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole — a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.

The standard Big Bang model tells us that the Universe exploded out of an infinitely dense point, or singularity. But nobody knows what would have triggered this outburst: the known laws of physics cannot tell us what happened at that moment.

“For all physicists know, dragons could have come flying out of the singularity,” says Niayesh Afshordi, an astrophysicist at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada.

It is also difficult to explain how a violent Big Bang would have left behind a Universe that has an almost completely uniform temperature, because there does not seem to have been enough time since the birth of the cosmos for it to have reached temperature equilibrium.

To most cosmologists, the most plausible explanation for that uniformity is that, soon after the beginning of time, some unknown form of energy made the young Universe inflate at a rate that was faster than the speed of light. That way, a small patch with roughly uniform temperature would have stretched into the vast cosmos we see today. But Afshordi notes that “the Big Bang was so chaotic, it’s not clear there would have been even a small homogenous patch for inflation to start working on”.

On the brane
In a paper posted last week on the arXiv preprint server1, Afshordi and his colleagues turn their attention to a proposal2 made in 2000 by a team including Gia Dvali, a physicist now at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany. In that model, our three-dimensional (3D) Universe is a membrane, or brane, that floats through a ‘bulk universe’ that has four spatial dimensions.

Ashfordi’s team realized that if the bulk universe contained its own four-dimensional (4D) stars, some of them could collapse, forming 4D black holes in the same way that massive stars in our Universe do: they explode as supernovae, violently ejecting their outer layers, while their inner layers collapse into a black hole.

In our Universe, a black hole is bounded by a spherical surface called an event horizon. Whereas in ordinary three-dimensional space it takes a two-dimensional object (a surface) to create a boundary inside a black hole, in the bulk universe the event horizon of a 4D black hole would be a 3D object — a shape called a hypersphere. When Afshordi’s team modelled the death of a 4D star, they found that the ejected material would form a 3D brane surrounding that 3D event horizon, and slowly expand.

The authors postulate that the 3D Universe we live in might be just such a brane — and that we detect the brane’s growth as cosmic expansion. “Astronomers measured that expansion and extrapolated back that the Universe must have begun with a Big Bang — but that is just a mirage,” says Afshordi.

Model discrepancy
The model also naturally explains our Universe’s uniformity. Because the 4D bulk universe could have existed for an infinitely long time in the past, there would have been ample opportunity for different parts of the 4D bulk to reach an equilibrium, which our 3D Universe would have inherited.

The picture has some problems, however. Earlier this year, the European Space Agency’s Planck space observatory released data that mapped the slight temperature fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background — the relic radiation that carries imprints of the Universe’s early moments. The observed patterns matched predictions made by the standard Big Bang model and inflation, but the black-hole model deviates from Planck’s observations by about 4%. Hoping to resolve the discrepancy, Afshordi says that his is now refining its model.

Despite the mismatch, Dvali praises the ingenious way in which the team threw out the Big Bang model. “The singularity is the most fundamental problem in cosmology and they have rewritten history so that we never encountered it,” he says. Whereas the Planck results “prove that inflation is correct”, they leave open the question of how inflation happened, Dvali adds. The study could help to show how inflation is triggered by the motion of the Universe through a higher-dimensional reality, he says.

Nature doi:10.1038/nature.2013.13743
Ianis says:

19 septembrie 2013 la 23:11

N-am timp sa citesc ceea ce tie ti-a luat 20 de secunde pentru copy-paste.
Poti face un rezumat de cateva fraze, cu propriile tale cuvinte si idei, cu privire la ceea ce crezi ca ai descoperit citand acele minunate websituri?
gigialuarvinte says:

20 septembrie 2013 la 04:49

Ianis,

E un articol din Nature preluata de mai toata lumea cu titluri dintre cele mai bombastice. Si, probabil, va fi o noua fantosa pentru tot felul de nechemati, de ambele parti ale baricadei.
Eugen Bostan says:

21 septembrie 2013 la 12:22

E simplu, Ianis… mai sunt si alte teorii care ar putea pune in umbra pe cea a Bing Bang-ului.

Ceea ce vad pe acest forum este faptul ca unii din voi acordati un credit de 100% teoriilor stiintei care se pot schimba intr-un anumit timp, se pot demoda. Mai sunt si oameni de stiinta care cauta o teorie alternativa la cea a Big Bang-ului, voi nu, Sunteti „mai catolici decat papa”?
Si aici discutam de oameni de stiinta „adevarati”. Apropo, Edi numeste oameni de stiinta doar pe cei care accepta teoria evolutiei, ceilalti nu stiu unde ii baga…desi au si ei aceleasi studii si cercetari si pe de-asupra si publicatii…
Ianis says:

21 septembrie 2013 la 12:51

Eugen Bostan
Sigur ca mai sunt si alte teorii cu privire la originea universului: miturile sumeriene, cele evreiesti, cele grecesti, japoneze, mayase…
Pe de alta parte, evident ca pot aparea teorii stiintifice mai bune decat Big-Bang, prin natura lor ele vor ramane stiintifice, construind peste ceea ce deja stim despre univers.
Fii pe pace, indiferent de cat de plictistita va fi, omenirea nu se va intoarce la testoase primordiale.

In privinta dilemei tale: oamenii de stiinta sunt aia care fac stiinta. Evolutia (biologica sau a universului) este fundamentul stiintei.
Ceilalti pot fi numiti shamani, voodoo, guru, creationisti 🙂 Au si ei studii si cercertari si publicatii, e suficient sa consulti arhiva Can-Can, Libertatea, Evenimentul Zilei, OTV…
Eugen Bostan says:

22 septembrie 2013 la 18:44

Ianis, nu uita ca miturile sumeriene, grecesti, japoneze, etc, aveau acelasi statut pentru ei asa cum au teoriile stiintifice astazi, bine-nteles avand conotatii religioase… asta era explicatia lor cu privire la univers, in care aveau incredere 100% . Trebuie sa recunosti ca suntem foarte limitati, ne-a trebuit mii de ani ca sa intelegem o infimitate din univers. Planeta noastra este un fir de nisip de pe plaja necuprinsa a universului, si cred ca ceea ce cunoastem despre acest univers este ca o picatura de apa intr-un ocean.
gigialuarvinte says:

22 septembrie 2013 la 19:31

Cum ‘profeteam’ deunazi, toti nechematii balesc ideologic pe aici, de ambele parti ale baricadei prostiei.
Ianis says:

22 septembrie 2013 la 20:13

Schema asta cu rabbi cel intelept, care nu se amesteca in balele ideologice ale goimilor, nu se termina cu replica You are right too? Indiferent de situatie, banca (evreul) castiga 🙂

Eugen Bostan
Faci o mica mare confuzie. O teorie stiintifica inseamna una (mi-e lene sa iti dau, din nou, linkul spre wiki), un mit transformat in ideologie pentru controlul unei mase de creduli si naivi este altceva.
Sau poate crezi ca piramidele au fost construite prin invocatii, rugaciuni si tumbe in jurul focului sacru…