So this is something I’ve heard stated many times in my life, but I’m not really clear on the statement.
The statement charges that we don’t understand exactly why or how the household Microwave Oven exactly works.
Fine, but what I don’t understand, if this is true, is what exactly do we not understand about it?
I’m just wondering if anyone around here knows of this statement and knows what exactly it states is the exact thing or condition that we lack an understanding of.
Thanks!
I would like to add that this isn’t only a mere question, but a paradox in my mind since, as far as I am aware, we understand Microwaves, so I’m not understanding why the confusion on this little oven thing.
Other considerations will follow dependent on the responses.
I heard that the first microwave ovens were taken from alien ships at area 51. Then we reverse engineered them and decided since bullets were cheaper, instead of using them for wars as weapons, we could just use them to heat up some chef boyardee or popcorn. Shit you might even throw a sandwich in there and melt the cheese.
The rest is history. Ever since then, no one has known how to cook. Women started getting jobs and exploiting themselves and destroying the American family.
It’s all part of corporate, government controlling, mind controlling processed food companies taking over the world and making us all slaves. They knew if they came out with a way for us to eat in under 1 minute, that next thing you know we’d all be getting overtime at work and paying more taxes which could be mishandled by politicians who were being exploited by private interest groups and before you know it it turns out to be true that the universe is meaningless and morality is a failure of man’s instincts and the only way to be survive is at the expense of others and the world comes to and end and finally it’s proven that religion is not only at fault for all the suffering in the world, but also completely false.
But besides all that philosophical stuff, and in response to the actual question in the thread, (however lacking the response may be)…yeah I think Xun is right. Waves and particles and all that. Excitement. Yeah.
Well, see, that’s what I thought, but that’s why I continue to be baffled by the statement.
I don’t really understand what in the microwave is the mysterious magical component that we don’t understand.
Is it that people think the microwave (the wave) itself is a mystery?
I don’t know if you are serious or joking…and I’m not looking poorly on either.
My wife is an alien pro perspective individual and she’s also one of the smartest people I know.
I’m not really pro-alien explanations personally, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous inherently either.
I think people think the microwave is a mystery for the same reason they thought science couldn’t explain how a bumblebee flies or that the Daddylonglegs spider has the most potent venom in nature but they can’t hurt us because they can’t puncture our skin. They were told these things by someone they mistook for an authority on the subject, accepted it, and didn’t bother to investigate further.
You’re probably right on that…that’s probably why I’ve never once gotten an answer from anyone that says that regarding what exactly we don’t understand.
Actually this was only worked out recently, so this one was hardly an urban legend. Science could not explain this for the bulk of many of our lifetimes.
The calculations were knowingly misapplied. I can’t find the paper, but there was one in first half of the 20th century (I’m honestly not sure where it was between 1901 and 1950) that did a very good job describing the flight of the bumblebee. The sources in that post should help find that paper but I’m honestly not in the mood right now to dig through them.
The supposed controversy surrounding it made entomologists and physicists refine how the bumblebee flies. In the process, they found some neat things (what with the vacuums and whatnot) and that was publicized as the solution to the myth because, well, press is important. Most science (and pretty much all basic science) is publicly funded, after all.
B) PNAS is a great society but peer reviewed it ain’t. As such, it is the perfect venue for what I am describing. Scientific American, on the other hand, is a secondary journal and (no matter how much I rail against other journals that are merely seeking to widen their membership) is therefore a purely journalistic rag.
What I meant was that I had certain sources of information that seemed to be saying the bee flight issue was not resolved earlier and I have you saying that it was resolved earlier. You said that PNAS is not peer reviewed and Scientific American is a rag. I balance these judgments with my not having any idea who you are, whether your ideas are peer reviewed and the fact that despite this you seem quite intelligent. So I consider the matter unresolved. I do not know if the bee flight thing was a mere myth or not. I am not taking your word for it and I am not dismissing your word.
As far as scientific theory vs. religion, it seemed like you were speaking as if the issue of bee flight was resolved quite a while ago. Without doubt on the issue. As a fact. Scientific theory may be unresolved, but people who advocate science are, like the rest of humanity, often utterly resolved and communicate this way.
PNAS isn’t peer reviewed. That is the point of the Journal. People who are in the National Academy can publish in it. That allows for a certain level of prestige and because of that prestige, it needn’t be peer-reviewed. But, as you say, scientists are human beings. So what gets published there tends to be what can’t be published elsewhere. Good work from good people, sure. But not nearly as ground-breaking as you’d like to believe either. Scientific American, on the other hand, is a magazine. So selling issues is the point.
I’m deadly serious TS, as the sudden surgence of technology in the last few decades warrants me to think along those lines I know a few people who think the same thing for the same reason…
I have yet to be presented with a piece of technology that I cannot understand it’s origin and rise.
And for the record, this doesn’t mean that I’m against the idea of aliens or not.
But before I grant anything of such caliber and weight, it must be critically considered.
And each instance of such (or, each piece of technology in this case) must be handled in this manner.
Well, in terms of technological progress, there are two paths that are obvious to me based on what my internet research tells me:
A) The acquisition of technology has been a gradual progression with some pitfalls and mistakes.
B) All of our technology comes from the Jewish Aliens!!! Waaaaagggg!!
I’d like to think that I’ve represented a false dilemma here. But I’ve yet to see a case where it doesn’t boil down to either a “sane” explanation or a completely “insane” explanation.
That’s dominantly the case, yes.
The unfortunate problem is that if there are good solid cases worthy of perplexing note to the cynic, they are buried amongst the grand volume of incredible disarrays of non-related and highly circumstantial hearsay allegations.
Even the cases with physical evidence of intrigue are taken so quickly to extreme conclusions that their rational consideration variants of explanations come much later, due to the slow nature of thorough examination and length of time it takes to sift through the above mentioned mess, that they are more typically less known after the attention of the radically expressed previous position or considered justifiable apologetic rationalization at the very best by many, and only really accepted by a lesser few that know of the cases and accept the appreciation for the careful diligence with the case handling.
This is, in part, why I consider Alien promotion to be a religion.
I know a few people who think the same thing for the same reason…