>Where the dark matter particles aAAAAAACK
All of the physics discoveries in the last decade are "may have"s and "potentially"s
>>17069665that's how science work. anyone saying shit with certainty is selling you an idea rather than postulating it.
>>17069665>bro just 20 more years i swear to god broEven the engineering side of physics is funny
>>17069674I don't know man, Hans Christian Ørsted in 1820 didn't say "electric current may potentially create magnetic field"
They found an ammonolysis reading. Keep them funded!
>>17069661>glimpsebut>has never been directly observedwhich one is it? did they or didn't they see it?>indirectlythat's not "seeing" it, as in detecting *it*.
>>17069661LUX-Zeplin (LZ) is doing a funding gambit with this crap media storm. I posted about this before: they have literally ONE event that can’t be explained by their background models, and it is probably some detector noise or their software garbled the data and nobody went back to double-check the grad student who fed it into their vibe code. Because if they were honest about it then the Trump cuts would probably be cancelling LZ already. (the trump NSF+DOE has been slashing a lot of good science that they shouldn’t be and some of us have considered desperation options like LZ is obviously doing). It’s a nothing burger, aside from the fact that LZ has lower morals than the plethora of good experiments that didn’t fabricate shit science and in return got penalized, whereas LZ will get rewarded for being fibbing cunts
>>17069661inb4 it's a loose cable again
>>17069996LZ’s one event literally very well could be a loose cable. Easily. They haven’t posted anything in the last month about checking for little issues like that. Nor have they mentioned any checks of their software, firmware, hardware issues, possible hardware single-event-upsets (SEUs, common in the field). And nothing on trying to investigate this one event even assuming all that has been checked already. Crickets from LZ. Makes you wonder
>>17069661So when are they seeing dark energy?
>>17069682>may>appear>it seems>we may conclude
>>17069974>oh maaah, the Trump cuts!!!!!DOE funding by year:2024: $50.25 billion2025: $50.17 billion2026: $49.1 billionOh nooooo, only 49.1 billion instead of 50 billion, what a horrible day! Science is cancelled! All the programs are cancelled, Trump is destroying science!!!111!! #resist, #inthishousewebelieveinscience
>>17070436They don't show up in the budgets because they failed to pass them. The Trump admin still propose gutting every program though. Year after year.And what's not shown is the bullshit OMB is pulling, to try to force agencies not to spend allocated money.
>>17070453>>17070436Pic related shows how few grants are being approved. Yeah, there are no approved cuts, but they're not actually handing out the money. Deep cuts which have no legalisative mandate.
>>17070436Adjusted for inflation it's now $3.50. Coincidence? I think not. The researchers are actually about 8 stories tall and crustaceans from the protozoic era.
>>17070436>DOEMost of that money is going to nuclear weapons
>>17070453>the graph starts at 0 for one of them but doesnt for two of them
>>17069661>>17069661^^
>>17069661How can they have a glimpse of it, if the dark implies it can't be seen? The absolute state of scientific journalism xd
>>17069661The universe is blacked
>>17070433>Hans is Swedish for JohnMind = Magnetised
>>17069661>single event>may have>could be>need more datathis is something that aspires to be clickbait but just can't quite make it.
>>17069665they need to release these articles otherwise the gov will cut funding
>>17070510Negative, compadre. The DoE's nuclear weapons budget is in the subset for the National Nuclear Security Administration.
>>17070462Maybe they moved some of the NSF funding directly to the DoD? If you aren't aware, a metric shitload of NSF cheese is really DoD cheese in disguise. I wonder if there is percentage breakdown of NSF money that goes to DoD university laboratory affiliates for (((science)))
