Anonymous at Thu, 31 Oct 2024 02:41:12 UTC No. 16456563

>>16456556
The solution is to ignore shekels and not do things for “return on investment” for mr shekelberg

Anonymous at Thu, 31 Oct 2024 03:48:49 UTC No. 16456633

>>16456556
Look it's this tard again. Point of science is that you discover everything you can, and then in the future some of it could be practical. Greeks invented steam powered machines and didn't use them as anything but a novelty at the time for example.

Stop guessing start learning at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 02:13:23 UTC No. 16457675

>>16456633
So ok Mr genius what can we do with black holes?

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 04:18:07 UTC No. 16457771

>>16456556
>Most new scientific theories are utterly useless.
No they aren’t. You just don’t have the technical understanding or the exposure to look at the hyper specific papers which drive normal science and are the most directly “useful” products of research.

In other words, you gets your news from 4chud and twitter like the frogposting retard you are. You don’t see the random papers on the advances in perovskites in thin film solar cells, or in the metallurgy of high end alloys, or in the computation of protein structures. Even if the progress in those areas is great, they don’t get clicks and you wouldn’t understand the significance of them anyways.

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 08:33:58 UTC No. 16457922

>>16456556
>Fusion/Quantum Computers
>Aren't profitable

You have to pick one

Stop guessing start learning at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 08:53:03 UTC No. 16457933

>>16457771
The problem is that science is just another religion but you're incapable of grasping that. So called "peer reviewed papers" are nothing but your holy scriptures, my point is that your religion (science) is deeply flawed when compared to mine

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:32:06 UTC No. 16457945

>>16456556
>hoping for a return
they make multi million soilent movies and tv shows for the irritated low iq mob this is a money machine nigger

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 12:31:05 UTC No. 16458073

>>16456556
our modern world is based on knowlage, we first need a understanding of the science, than we can build the tecnology and than we can turn a profit.

gps creates a lot of wealth but we could not have build it without a fundermental understanding of orbits and gravaty,understanding these concepts will lead you to understanding black holes as we do.
physics is integral to our modern life, think computer chips, mrt any wireless communications.

i other words: to contoll the world you need to understand it, there is much more usefull stuff to understand and understanding is the first step in makeing a profit later

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 12:32:46 UTC No. 16458075

>>16458073
the nations that do the most research are the richest nations too. you won't earn much with 100 year old tex and science

Stop guessing start learning at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 14:15:05 UTC No. 16458208

>>16458073
This is easy to say when it's not your money. Would you want YOUR money being wasted on useless non profitable ventures.

The us govetnment spends billions on unprofitable scientific research. Including blackholes. A conspiracy theorist could argue someone is scamming the government.

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 14:36:24 UTC No. 16458233

>>16458208
It is my money dipshit what do you think taxes are? We don't know if a field of study is useful until we study it and there are plenty of theoretical sciences that became applied then became profitable. You'd know this if you weren't a retarded frogposter

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 14:50:35 UTC No. 16458244

>>16457675
You can travel to the future at a faster rate

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:16:12 UTC No. 16458263

/pol/ bait threads are getting really lazy

you guys used to at least make an effort

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 19:36:37 UTC No. 16458746

>>16456556
If you cannot profit from black holes
use black scholes instead..

Anonymous at Fri, 1 Nov 2024 19:39:19 UTC No. 16458748

>>16458746
welcome to applied math and exclude physicshit

Anonymous at Sat, 2 Nov 2024 07:40:33 UTC No. 16459405

>>16456556
>Most new scientific theories are UTTERLY USEULESS
>lists fusion and quantum computers as examples

Fusion would literally everything you know so much cheaper to produce and greatly boost your living standards.
Quantum computers can perform ridiculously long calculations, like centuries, in just a couple of minutes. Black holes are kinda overrated, but the other stuff has so many applications.

Stop guessing start learning at Sat, 2 Nov 2024 07:50:39 UTC No. 16459412

>>16459405
Proof these machines work?

Quantum and fusion?

Or is it more techno optimism overpromising and underdelivering.

Anonymous at Sat, 2 Nov 2024 18:10:26 UTC No. 16459841

>>16459412
Both work.
Fusion reactors don't produce notable net positive energy yet.
Quantum computers however are increasing in Qbit capacity rapidly, and may very soon have a huge impact not only for constructive purposes, but also in break traditional non-quantum resistant encryption. (This could (and likely will) actually be really really bad for cyber security).

Anonymous at Sat, 2 Nov 2024 18:55:03 UTC No. 16459878

>>16458233
I don't think OP is arguing that "you can't bake a cake without cracking a few eggs". Obviously not every research project is going to be a miraculous paradigm shifting breakthrough, there might be some inconclusive results and dead ends.
I think OP is hinting at the alarming amount of projects that are designed in bad faith that only appear to be ""scientific"" using 'highly technical jargon' purely as a cash grab.
And it's a tough battle to fight, because the "peer reviewers" of these pseudoscientific projects place each other in positions of scientific authority, so they corroborate as a sort of 'cabal' which allows them to confirm this scam-consensus in perpetuity.

It's draining resources that could be used for groups that could use the finances for 'legitimate' science at best, and it's creating false data that is completely misleading scientific research at worst.

Anonymous at Sat, 2 Nov 2024 19:08:17 UTC No. 16459890

>>16456556
If le science le doesn't work then you should stop using your state of the art magic thinking rock.

Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 23:57:04 UTC No. 16461571

>>16459890
no scientists were involved in the invention of the computer, punchcard computing was a creation of the Lyonnaise weaving industry which is solidly in the arts category. coded electronic data transmission was made by Samuel Morse who was a portrait artist.
its cringe how scientists need to dishonestly claim credit for others' achievements, do they have no achievements or their own to brag about?

Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 00:03:48 UTC No. 16461573

>>16456556
>he thinks science has anything to do with money

Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 00:05:56 UTC No. 16461574

>>16456556
they're too busy trying to debunk the bible while taking dmt and ayahuasca
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R3pfsUgtL9A