Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 03/10/2024 21:10, Brett wrote:

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 03/10/2024 05:58, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 01:45:36 -0000 (UTC), Brett wrote:
 

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

 
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 23:33:57 -0000 (UTC), Brett wrote:
 

Sky Scholar just posted his latest mockery of modern physics:

 
Is this a particularly believable and/or coherent mockery?

 
He invented the MRI machine and the Liquid Metallic model of the sun ...

 
And Linus Pauling got the Nobel Prize and went nuts over Vitamin C.
 
In science, we don’t go by “this guy has a legendary reputation and/or
sounds like a credible witness, let’s believe him”, we go by evidence.

 
Indeed.
 
Also note that the two guys who won the Nobel Prize for the development
of MRI - the /real/ inventors of the MRI machine - are both long dead.
 
But this particular crank is mad enough and influential enough to have a
page on Rational Wiki, which is never a good sign.  (It seems he did
work on improving MRI technology before he went bananas.)
 
<https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pierre-Marie_Robitaille>

 
One day I will be on rational wiki. ;)
 
Watch his videos and try to debunk what he says.
 
Good luck with that. ;)
 

 
There are more productive uses of my time which won't rot my brain as
quickly, such as watching the grass grow.
 
A bit challenge with the kind of shite that people like this produce is
that it is often unfalsifiable.  They invoke magic, much like religions
do, and then any kind of disproof or debunking is washed away by magic.
When you make up some nonsense that has no basis in reality or no
evidence, you can just keep adding more nonsense no matter what anyone
else says.
 
So when nutjobs like that guy tell you the sun is powered by pixies
riding tricycles really fast, he can easily invent more rubbish to
explain away any evidence.
 
There's a term for this - what these cranks churn out is "not even
wrong".  (You can look that up on Rational Wiki too.)
 
And while the claims of this kind of conspiracy theory cannot be
falsified, there is also no evidence for them.  Claims made without
evidence can be dismissed without evidence - there is no need to debunk
them.  The correct reaction is to laugh if they are funny, then move on
and forget them.
 
We are all human, and sometimes we get fooled by an idea that sounds
right.  But you should be embarrassed at believing such a wide range of
idiocy and then promoting it.

A gas cannot emit the spectrum we see from the sun, liquid metallic
hydrogen can.

Gases do not show the pond ripples from impacts that we see from the sun
surface.

And a long list of other basic facts Pierre-Marie_Robitaille goes over in
his Sky Scholar videos.

Stellar science is a bad joke, such basic mistakes should have been
corrected 100 years ago.