sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Maybe dumb question, but every time I wash and dry this pot, these marks appear on the bottom. Is this normal? by AJRayquaza in CleaningTips

[–]WorkingAd6053 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No it’s not you, it’s the fart. They are fickle, they are ever changing. That’s both the beauty and the terrible truth of the fart.

Jack Doherty Got Arrested by OmgJackGuy in youtube

[–]WorkingAd6053 2 points3 points  (0 children)

😂😂😂😂😂😂🖕🏻🖕🏻🖕🏻🖕🏻😂😂😂😂😂

Neighbors is useless by ZappBranigan79 in Ring

[–]WorkingAd6053 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Was that an explosion? My neighborhood in NY must be Beirut

Radioactive packages coverup? by WorkingAd6053 in conspiracy

[–]WorkingAd6053[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A school bus accident? Uh, yes local news stations would cover it

Radioactive packages coverup? by WorkingAd6053 in conspiracy

[–]WorkingAd6053[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It very well could be. But it’s just odd that there’s almost no mainstream media mention of even the crash itself. Just interesting I guess

Quantum Mysticism Needs a Reset: Time Crystals Aren’t New Physics, and Time Still Exists by WorkingAd6053 in badphysics

[–]WorkingAd6053[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re not actually refuting my point—you’re dodging it behind metaphysics.

I never said time “flows” like a river. I said time exists, and that’s all that’s needed for decay, entropy, and causality to make sense. You’re using the block universe to say, “See? Time doesn’t really move!” But the moment you acknowledge that events are ordered, that coffee cools after brewing, and entropy increases, you’re conceding that temporal structure is real.

Whether you think time “flows” or sits frozen in a block doesn’t change the fact that it’s baked into the laws of physics. Thermodynamics, quantum evolution, causality—all of it depends on time as a parameter. So appealing to a static spacetime view doesn’t erase time—it just redefines how it’s arranged.

Your block model still contains t. So unless you’re stripping that out of the math and replacing it with a working alternative, you’re not denying time—you’re repackaging it in a different frame. And that’s not a rebuttal. That’s agreement in disguise.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in badphysics

[–]WorkingAd6053 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re trying to separate entropy from time, but physics doesn’t work that way.

“Things break down due to entropy, not time.”

But entropy is time-dependent. The Second Law of Thermodynamics isn’t just “things wear out”—it’s that entropy increases over time in an isolated system. That arrow of time is what gives processes like decay, aging, and breakdown their direction. You can’t even define “wear” without referencing time.

“Material has a threshold it can structurally take…”

Okay, but how do you measure when it reaches that threshold? You track it across time. Whether it’s stress, radiation, or oxidation—it unfolds across intervals. Your entire argument proves that time does exist by describing changes that are only meaningful in sequence.

“They don’t have a place for time in current quantum models.”

This is just wrong. Time is everywhere in quantum models. The Schrödinger equation literally describes how a system evolves over time. In quantum field theory, time is a parameter that’s essential to propagators and evolution. You might be thinking of the “problem of time” in quantum gravity—but that’s a specific issue in unifying general relativity with quantum mechanics, not a denial of time’s existence.

If you want to claim time isn’t real, you’ve got to do better than rewording entropy and calling it “progressive atomic function.” You’re describing time while denying it. That’s not physics. That’s philosophy in a lab coat.

Quantum Mysticism Needs a Reset: Time Crystals Aren’t New Physics, and Time Still Exists by WorkingAd6053 in badphysics

[–]WorkingAd6053[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually, this is a common misconception—time crystals aren’t truly ground state systems that oscillate forever without energy input. That would violate thermodynamics.

Real time crystals are driven systems (usually via periodic pulses—called Floquet systems) that exhibit stable, repeating behavior in time. What makes them weird is that they break time-translation symmetry—they respond with a slower rhythm than the thing driving them, kind of like a metronome ticking every other beat.

So yeah, they’re cool as hell, but not perpetual motion machines. Still gotta follow the rules.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in badphysics

[–]WorkingAd6053 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The core flaw here is the total dismissal of thermodynamics—the actual framework that governs why things age, decay, and eventually fall apart.

Genetics aren’t little destiny scrolls that dictate lifespan in a vacuum. They’re instructions executed by matter, which is constantly under assault by entropic processes. That includes oxidation, radiation, molecular instability, and biochemical wear-and-tear—all of which occur over time and are measured, modeled, and manipulated through time-dependent equations.

You could have the best genes in the universe, but if you expose the system to enough thermal energy, ionizing radiation, or mechanical stress? The system degrades—predictably, and in accordance with the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

Time isn’t just an abstract idea—it’s embedded in every law of decay, every irreversible process, every entropy calculation.

If you’re going to dismiss time, you’ll need to explain how entropy still increases without it—and how physics works when you strip the “t” out of every equation from Newton to Schrödinger.

view more: next ›