I have seen a paper on causality violation, that it can happen according to some test conducted where photons are reacting to something that hasn't happened yet.
Please share a link or doi if you have it, I like that fringe things a lot.
It's been a while, and it's not something I bookmarked. I think this may be it, but I'm not 100% certain: https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.090503
I think you hear nothing about it because people have offered other explanations. I have seen a paper on causality violation, that it can happen according to some test conducted where photons are reacting to something that hasn't happened yet. There's other explanations also.
Indeed, all this stuff about quantum everything is interesting, but nobody is really asking the big questions and trying to answer them. Our knowledge in the field is incredibly primitive, yet some people think we'll have machines that can do quantum computing any day now, when no one even knows how to engineer anything in that regard.
You'll probably enjoy these articles:
https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2019/01/15/quantum-computing-as-a-field-is-obvious-bullshit/
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-case-against-quantum-computing
https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-us-national-academies-reports-on-the-prospects-for-quantum-computing
https://www.quantamagazine.org/gil-kalais-argument-against-quantum-computers-20180207/
As you said, it's so important to research things than to take "common knowledge" about recent developments as accurate.
If you really want to lose faith, study all the crazy experiments that have been conducted in quantum mechanics, and you'll see no one can answer some basic questions about the entire concept. No one understands what's going on, and the so called "conclusions" of various experiments are just wild far-fetched guesses that sound nice on paper. Everyone is also afraid to ask the big questions behind the meaning of all the tests that have been conducted.
How is entanglement even possible? What does it mean about our reality if particles appear to share properties?
Why does every test conducted with "gates" result in confirmation? Is it possible to even achieve a negative result?
When multiple outcomes are possible, why are the ratios so perfect? How does this relate to the above question?
Are our experiments somehow flawed?
Are the particles aware they're being tested and necessarily react differently then they would if no one was looking?
Exactly. For 2021 the best achievement in over 20 years of quantum computing in breaking cryptograpthy is .... be ready .... integer factorization of the number 21 into primes 7 and 3.
They cannot even do that. It's all smoke and mirrors with QC.
Every so called quantum "computer" they've created isn't capable of actually computing anything. What they have done is essentially build in a table of primes up to 21, and can then verify according to the pre-built table that 21 does indeed consist of 7 and 3.
All they're doing is cheating on a test, and they cannot even get that to anywhere meaningful. They would need a Manhattan project kind of effort to even get it capable of actually being able to compute the factor of a small number, and even with that kind of effort, I'm not convinced it's possible to pull off.
The difference is that crypto currencies are in a sense finite. Most of them don't allow their Fed equivalent to just print off as much as they want whenever they feel like it.
Blockchains are not quantum secure. They can be unzipped by quantum computers that have a sufficiently high enough qbit processor; We don't know if NSA has a sufficiently high Qbit processor Quantum computer but the commercial quantum computers are already 3/4 of the way there, so they probably DO. Should NSA have a high enough quantum computer, they could unzip entire blockchains nearly instantly. If they don't have sufficent qbits, they could unzip wallets one by one, instantly. Their current linear computer facilities can unzip a wallet in a week to a month (or faster), but quantum is instant.
Quantum Computers don't exist, they're science fiction. Everything you see and hear about them today is nothing more than a scam to get people to invest in it. They haven't made any meaningful progress towards it in decades. Also, if you study the mechanics behind it, you'll see that it's likely not even possible. Our world would have to have a very different working to it than we we know in order for any of this to exist.
Even if QC did exist, all the algorithms they're proposing to run on these magical devices would be able to break the algorithms currently used for asymmetric cryptography, but not symmetric cryptography. Block chains are built upon symmetric cryptography, and therefore would not just be magically broken by a hypothetical QC.
Ohio's school board cut ties with the federal school board.
Maybe putting stuff into the water supply?
I noticed some time back that the water all around my area started tasting a little bit different.
Someone needs to put together an online automated self poll so people can find out which vaccine they are.
-You are Pfizer-Biontech, the great reviver of a dying company. You also kill humans without discrimination. You'd face justice, but that's what propaganda is for.
I'm not interested in debating 1000 different random pieces of evidence. If you have a top 3 points of interest, which you believe are the strongest factors for the DEW theory, we can limit our discussion to those.
There is no way to detect Covid, right?
But it seems to get worse and worse the more boosters they give out. They were doing fairly well prior to any shots were dispensed.
While some shots may be saline. The amount of people suffering from vax side effects right after getting it means that a good chunk of it is not just saline.
Broadly speaking, these camps can be qualified as follows: a) Standard controlled demolition; b) So-called "nano-thermite"; c) Mini-nukes or other unconventional nuclear weaponry; d) Exotic or "Directed Energy" weaponry.
A and B really aren't all that far apart. There's also no reason that for blowing up the various buildings they couldn't have used a combination of different kinds of explosives for different sections of the buildings. In fact, that's likely.
C and D on the other hand are really "out there". Nuclear weapons would've had far worse destruction on NYC than occurred. It's also less predictable, and therefore less likely if a government is trying to commit a false flag. An energy weapon is mostly science fiction at this point. Even if it does exist, there really isn't evidence for it here. All the things that people point to in videos that seem puzzling is cleared up if looking at another video of the same event from a different angle. For some of the other weird occurrences, it's more likely explained as the result of a variety of explosive residue. Since everything can be explained with more conventional types of explosives, we really don't need to consider nukes and energy weapons as likely here. It's also probable that these "out there" ideas were started by those trying to make the whole movement look foolish.
Lucifer is not mentioned ever in the Old Testament.
Your verse in Job uses the word מַזָּרוֹת (Mazaroth), which means constellations or perhaps a reference to the Zodiac ones. The verse in context is God asking Job whether he controls the universe, and essentially saying let God worry about how the world is ran.
Your verse in Isaiah says הֵילֵל (Heylel) son of שָׁחַר (Shachar). That first word is a proper name, which probably refers to the planet Venus, the second word there means daybreak. The verse in context is speaking about the eventual destruction of Babylon, and this verse specifically is a metaphor for how the impossible will happen to Babylon, despite their strength and position in world affairs.