The experiment has to be reproduced and measured by others.
Then we will know.
The experiment has to be reproduced and measured by others.
Then we will know.
According to the tweet in question, YH Kwon had samples with him and was willing make them available for investigation but they didn’t have the tools for.
this is Satoshi/Wright all over again. All Wright had to do is sign a document with the original key to provide (reasonably) plausible proof that he was indeed Satoshi.
Behavior of grifters always has this constant: infuriate your peers by making excuses and dazzle the outsiders/media with techno-babble. Sit back and watch both camps fight in social media, from where it infects MSM. Once it takes off the 2 camps battling another ensure it stays in the news and the cult that was created ensures their idols (gods) are protected. The public can no longer tell truth from fiction because as they understand "where there's smoke there's fire". At this point the suits and corporate talking-heads promise big returns, so there is no stopping it because money is being made regardless from it being real.
replicate || GTFO
> Following a three-week trial in late 2021, a jury found Wright liable for conversion but awarded Kleiman's estate US$100 million in damages while Kleiman's estate had sought upwards of US$25 billion at trial. Wright took the position that verdict served as a vindication of his role in inventing bitcoin and stated that he would not appeal the jury's findings
Really childish stuff.
Related Twitter space recording available https://twitter.com/andrewmccalip/status/1685465431317114880
(That's the only one I'm aware of. There may be more)
Twitter is members-only, a private site. Better to post the primary, public, source.
Do room temperature semi conductors break physics as we know it? I didn’t think they contradicted known physics, which is why so many people were researching them.
What known physics do they break?
“Breaks physics as we know it” seems very much to imply “perpetual motion machine” sorts of claim, that violate pretty strongly held physical laws.
Anyway, this is more a minor quibble with the specific language, rather than a broader disagreement, but just a heads up that to me (and I’m guessing many others), that specific phrase holds a far broader connotation than it seems you intended.