You are lying. People should not listen to you. You are just scamming people of their money using complicated language. You are delusional if you think the "alien" used here is a little green man from Mars or so. The "alien" used here is an adjective. You clearly don't know your grammar. You should go back to school and study more of English101. Use a dictionary to find out what is the meaning of "alien" in this context. Maybe your confused brain will enlighten a little and expose your lying statements.

You are lying again here. You stated, "end conclusion real science usually have doubts instead of being 100% sure." But the real conclusion of the experiment stated, "A general reflected-light view of one-half of the polished surface of the recovered specimen is shown in Fig. 1. Little if any transformation. Reflected light photomicrograph of shock recovery experiment S1230. Labels indicate direction of shock propagation and layout of discs of starting material in deformed cavity within container. The area of interest where layers mixed and reacted is near the center of the image. Dark areas are where material was plucked from the surface during polishing; there were no voids or vesicles in the sample as recovered." Where are the doubts in the conclusion of the experiment? Other people just make up whatever doubts they like regarding the experiment. You just don't admit you are full of lies.

You are making too many excuses just to type physical equations here. You can type physical equations here. Let me show you the mathematics of quasicrystals. Fibonacci tiling: a (mapsto) ab b (mapsto) a a (mapsto) ab (mapsto) aba (mapsto) abaab (mapsto) ... Example 5 to 2 cut and project set: Consider the subspace E of R raised to 5 generated by the columns of the matrix (1 : {cos(2π/5), cos(4π/5), cos(6π/5), cos(8π/5)}; 0 : {sin(2π/5), sin(4π/5), sin(6π/5), sin(8π/5)}) F (subset) π chosen appropriately, and W (subset) π the canonical window, which is the image under π raised to ∗ of the unit cube in R raised to 5. ...