4 ms·
You're essentially suggesting 'maybe the laws of physics would stop applying here for unknown reasons', but it's not plausible that would happen absent evidence
by ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
You're essentially suggesting 'maybe the laws of physics would stop applying here for unknown reasons', but it's not plausible that would happen absent evidence.
- neom 2y agoI was trying to elegantly hint there is probably lot we don't understand. :) https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936 / https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10671017/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10671017/
- ImPostingOnHN 2y agoThat is true (in that it is a statement always true of all subjects), and I don't think anyone was disputing that. Simply pointing out that we don't know of any reason an identical copy in an identical state wouldn't obey the laws of physics and perform identically.