Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 22:55:41 UTC No. 16265087

>>16265077
it's not
>the reconstruction
they might as well say "artists impression"

Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 22:57:15 UTC No. 16265089

>>16265087
>the reconstruction
my question is what would it looks like in another construction? is there anything that is consistent across all reasonable construction? if so, what is it?

Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 23:03:26 UTC No. 16265095

https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.13046

Here's the actual paper.
Image on page 6.

Anonymous at Tue, 2 Jul 2024 23:31:19 UTC No. 16265153

>>16265077
>soientists make shit up, news at 11
Why is "science" journalism even a thing? This isn't what the paper says, and these dumbass sites NEVER link to the actual fucking paper for some reason.

>>16265087
That's literally what it is.

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 00:40:45 UTC No. 16265200

They deliberately pumped that image onto the prootons, see >>16265095

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 00:54:15 UTC No. 16265216

>>16265077

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 12:33:55 UTC No. 16265860

>>16265077
how do you even test for entanglement

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 13:18:35 UTC No. 16265909

>>16265077
https://youtu.be/ayQ4IaAMr5Y?si=3DSP9Fnl_Uj08WzA

So entangment is a toroidal resonance condition?

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 13:23:04 UTC No. 16265914

>>16265077

Fundamental symmetry.

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 13:57:26 UTC No. 16265950

>>16265077
not to sound /x/, but when I did DMT in 2014 and closed my eyes, I saw so many yin-yangs. I would become a Christian but that symbol being everywhere will always confuse me

Anonymous at Wed, 3 Jul 2024 17:03:45 UTC No. 16266200

>>16265077