Spacetime: A smoother brew than we knew

Aug 23, 2012 By Marcia Goodrich
Gamma-ray burst

(Phys.org)—Spacetime may be less like beer and more like sipping whisky.

Or so an intergalactic photo finish would suggest.

Physicist Robert Nemiroff of Michigan Technological University reached this heady conclusion after studying the tracings of three of differing wavelengths that had been recorded by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray in May 2009.

The photons originated about 7 billion light years away from Earth in one of three pulses from a gamma-ray burst and arrived at the orbiting telescope just one millisecond apart, in a virtual tie.

Gamma-ray bursts are short-lived bursts of gamma-ray photons, the most energetic form of light. They can originate far across the universe, and astronomers believe many are caused by collapsing, often billions of years before the Earth was formed.

"Gamma-ray bursts can tell us some very interesting things about the universe," Nemiroff said. In this case, those three photons recorded by the Fermi telescope suggest that spacetime may not be not as bubbly as some scientists think.

Some theories of say that the universe is not smooth but foamy—made of fundamental units called Planck lengths that are less than a trillionth of a trillionth the diameter of a hydrogen atom. Planck lengths are so small that there's no way to detect them, except via photons like those that make up gamma-ray bursts.

Here's why. The wavelengths of these photons are some of the shortest distances known to science—so short they should interact with the even smaller Planck length. And if they interact, the photons should be dispersed—scattered—on their trek through Planck length–pixilated spacetime.

In particular, they should disperse in different ways if their wavelengths differ, just as a ping pong ball and a softball might take alternate paths down a gravely hillside.

You wouldn't notice the scattering over short distances, but across billions of light years, the Planck lengths should disperse the light. And three photons from the same gamma-ray burst should not have crashed through the Fermi telescope at the same moment.

But they did, and that calls into question just how foamy really is. "We have shown that the universe is smooth across the Planck mass," Nemiroff said. "That means that there's no choppiness that's detectible. It's a really cool discovery. We're very excited."

With graduate students Ryan Connolly and Justin Holmes and physics professor Alexander Kostinski, Nemiroff coauthored an article on the team's results, "Bounds on Spectral Dispersion from Fermi-Detected Gamma-Ray Bursts," published June 8 in Physical Review Letters.

A story on their work, "Cosmic Race Ends in a Tie," appeared in the news section of the journal Nature on January 10.

Explore further: 'Perfect storm' quenching star formation around a supermassive black hole

Related Stories

Tracking the Riddle of Cosmic Gamma Rays

Aug 23, 2005

First simultaneous observation of a gamma-ray burst in the X-ray and in the very high energy gamma ray band. For the first time a gamma-ray burst (GRB) has been observed simultaneously in the X-ray and in the ...

Recommended for you

The hot blue stars of Messier 47

Dec 17, 2014

Messier 47 is located approximately 1600 light-years from Earth, in the constellation of Puppis (the poop deck of the mythological ship Argo). It was first noticed some time before 1654 by Italian astronomer ...

Why is space black?

Dec 16, 2014

Imagine you're in space. Just the floating part, not the peeing into a vacuum hose or eating that funky "ice cream" from foil bags part. If you looked at the Sun, it would be bright and your retinas would ...

User comments : 53

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
3.8 / 5 (8) Aug 23, 2012
While three phortons is not really a statistically significant sample this is indeed intersting

(somewhat disappointing on another leveö, because LQG just seemed such a neat idea. Oh well, back to the drawing board)
casualjoe
2 / 5 (12) Aug 23, 2012
Three photons? Out of how many radiated from a gamma ray burst?

These three photons could have dispersed, only to end up at the same place (the Fermi telescope). We only get to measure the end of their trip.
El_Nose
4 / 5 (4) Aug 23, 2012
out of the countless decllions three made it -- just three --- only three from the same instant -- out of the gigillions 'shout out to Pr. Doc Brown' of photons three made it and because three made it at the same time -- spacetime must be smooth -- or they had a very oppertunistic path
abledoc
1.4 / 5 (11) Aug 23, 2012
@natello Interesting!
For one three photons cherry picked from many is insufficient to throw out theories. Also could these photons have been emitted in separate events and then came together.
Since gravity is dependent on the energy-momentum tensor and since even photos also have energies and since high energy photons like these extreme gamma rays have a lot of energy in a small space due to short wavelengths, do we need to invoke any new theory to explain their gravitational field.
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (22) Aug 23, 2012
Wow. The cranks are out in force today.

For one three photons cherry picked from many is insufficient to throw out theories

Three photons of differing energies SHOULD have arrived spread out over time if the universe is granular at the Planck scale. They didn't, so this indicates that space isn't as granular - or at the very least that photons don't interact with any existing granularity as expected. There's no 'cherry picking' of data going on here.

because three made it at the same time -- spacetime must be smooth -- or they had a very oppertunistic path

With three the coincidence factor is already very much less likely than with two.
Deathclock
3.7 / 5 (24) Aug 23, 2012
They measured these down to 1 millisecond... is a gamma ray burst really less than 1 millisecond in duration? What I mean is, the photons were emitted by the GRB, but if the GRB emits photons for longer than 1ms then we can't make any statements about the homogeneity of space that they traveled through due to the fact that we don't know WHEN each of the photons was emitted during the GRB event.
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (19) Aug 23, 2012
Space-time, the idea of combining a physical entity with a measurement of perspective is soooo 16th century. The philosopher Boskovic who originally came up with space-time continuum would have been proud of the meta-physicist Einstein for using his ideas.
As Tesla once said;
"...the relativity theory, by the way, is much older than its present proponents. It was advanced over 200 years ago by my illustrious countryman Boskovic, the great philospher, who, not withstanding other and multifold obligations, wrote a thousand volumes of excellent literature on a vast variety of subjects. Boskovic dealt with relativity, including the so-called time-space continuum..."

Einstein being so clever once said;
"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
LagomorphZero
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 23, 2012
A millisecond difference in the photons arrival time is also a 300 km difference in space at light speed.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 23, 2012
I never understood why "quantum froth" or "quantum gravity" models have such an appeal, considering that we observe special relativity on all scales and the Planck scale is originally a bound on particle behavior.

@ antialias_physorg, Deathclock:

"While three phortons is not really a statistically significant sample".

"we don't know WHEN each of the photons was emitted"

But the paper analysis pulses, as the paper says. The 3 pulses gives the best resolution, but including all 4 supernovas doesn't lower the significance below 3 sigma. They look at 11 photons altogether, and they show how a Poisson process statistics makes it significant. They also note that other papers use different methods but non-conservatively probe the Planck scale to ~ 0.01 as well.

If supersymmetry is true, polarization measurements on these photons will lower the limit to ~ 10^-4, IIRC.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 23, 2012
@ natello:

"The formation of photon clusters actually doesn't violate neither the LQG theory,".

Your handwaving doesn't save "lumpy space" theories, not the current ones and not against the simplest physics (of special relativity on all scales).

Besides, gravity is too weak to act as observably keeping particles clustered even during these long spacetime distances. We observe photon pulses every day, they are easily produced by various mechanisms. (Scattering by moving objects, say.)
ValeriaT
1.4 / 5 (10) Aug 23, 2012
I never understood why "quantum froth" or "quantum gravity" models have such an appeal
Because the world is not driven with general relativity - but with quantum mechanics too - and this theory is not consistent with general relativity at all.
Your handwaving doesn't save "lumpy space" theories, not the current ones and not against the simplest physics
It's not my intention to save silly formal theories, the LQG is not any better than string theory in this extent. I'm just explaining, why/where/how these theories work together and why/where/when they don't. For now you can just believe, that the synchronous arrival of gamma ray photons means the confirmation of special relativity - but you can be fooled with it in near future.
Torbjorn_Larsson_OM
4.6 / 5 (9) Aug 23, 2012
@ Valeria/natello:

Quantum mechanics is perfectly compatible with special relativity, or we wouldn't have either relativistic quantum field theories or Bell test experiments showing no hidden variables. With that observation it is not surprising that we already know that QM is perfectly compatible with general relativity - we can quantize GR at low energies. [Ref: http://golem.ph.u...639.html ]

What happens is that this breaks down at high energies, GR isn't renormalizable, but that is because GR is an effective theory, not because QM and GR is incompatible as such. What theoretical physicists are (mostly) careful to point out is not that QM and GR is inconsistent at all scales (which it isn't, see above), but that they currently have no consistent QM GR theory at all scales (high energies).

Then again, this erroneous conflation is behind much of the "quantum froth" ideas, and also behind many crackpot ideas as a basis to launch off of.
ValeriaT
1.7 / 5 (11) Aug 23, 2012
Why some physicists are obsessed with "stringy" and "loopy" theories could be understood easily with this picture. It illustrates the interior and exterior of black hole with some particle falling into it from outside from perspective of emergent particle model (the foam structures in it are formed with density fluctuations of many tiny particles). Both quantum mechanics, both general relativity describe well the nearly homogeneous interior/exterior (denoted with blue-red colors) correspondingly. But how to reconcile these two views? Apparently between these two phases the granular foamy character of space-time will be pronounced most apparently.
ValeriaT
1.7 / 5 (11) Aug 23, 2012
Quantum mechanics is perfectly compatible with special relativity, or we wouldn't have either relativistic quantum field theories or Bell test experiments showing no hidden variables.
But is the quantum mechanics compatible with general relativity? If not, how is it possible, when the special relativity is just a special case of general one? It's true, that the introduction of special relativity makes the quantum mechanics more close to real world in the same way, like the introduction of Maxwell's theory into general relativity. But these two theories remain deeply inconsistent - they represent two four-dimensional perspectives, which are separated with many extradimensions each other in similar way, like the description of water waves from perspective of water surface or from underwater perspective. From one perspective the water is massless deterministic environment, from another one it's very dense chaotic one. The vacuum catastrophe illustrates the same paradox for vacuum.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Aug 25, 2012
A millisecond difference in the photons arrival time is also a 300 km difference in space at light speed.


A difference of 1ms in 7 billion years is 5x10^-21 so a speed difference of ~1.5x10^-12m/s.
ValeriaT
1.7 / 5 (11) Aug 25, 2012
Space-time is a continuum, or at least that's where most of the evidence is pointing to..
Space-time may be actually quite inhomogeneous, but is allows the propagation of energy quanta in dispersion-less manner like the metamaterial. The trick is in the foamy structure of space-time: the foam gets more dense at the places where it's shaken, so it refocuses the light wave like lens. Such a soliton propagates with substantially lower speed, but it doesn't scatter into outside. Of course, you may still interpret it like perfect agreement with general relativity too, if you don't care about details. The contemporary physics is for smart people, not for these who just seek for conformance with one hundred years old textbooks.
daywalk3r
3.1 / 5 (19) Aug 25, 2012
The trick is in the foamy structure of space-time: the foam gets more dense at the places where it's shaken
Not the milkshake® analogy again, please..
What next? Should we start looking for signs of the McDonalds logo imprinted in the CMBR? ;-D

Such a soliton propagates with substantially lower speed
Now you got me really baffled..

Mr. ValeriaT,
are you really as dense as your theory suggests? :-D

Because, you know.. The whole time you question the reasoning of the PRL paper authors, yet at the same time you propose somewhat of an analogy, which inevitably leads to almost identical conclusions..

That's the whole frikin' point, you coconut! :-D

That if your "foam bubbles" were of certain non-zero size, then gamma ray photons of different wavelengths should each take slightly different paths, therefor resulting in ever so slightly different travel times!

Unless your "foam bubbles" were of a much smaller size than the wavelength of those photons, of course..

Duh! :)
ValeriaT
1.9 / 5 (9) Aug 25, 2012
gamma ray photons of different wavelengths should each take slightly different paths
And I believe, they should really do it. But how to organize such an experiment/observation? At the case of distant gamma ray bursts all gamma ray photons of different wavelengths are originated from single source - so that nothing prohibits them to get entangled with their gravity field and to propagate through space as a single body. We should prohibit them in it with simultaneous firing of these photons from different sources - or to analyze closely the clusters of arriving photons.
ValeriaT
2.1 / 5 (7) Aug 25, 2012
For example, we could organize an experiment with two distant satellites equipped with source of gamma ray and microwaves. These sources could be fired at distance with radiowave or laser signal so we could check here at Earth their simultaneous arrival. It's very simple experiment, but we still haven't made it.
ValeriaT
1.8 / 5 (10) Aug 25, 2012
So far we have only indirect evidence of different character of light propagation at different wavelengths. For example, the distant radiowave sources appear 6x brighter, than it corresponds their distance, as measured in visible light spectrum. It means, that the Universe appears smaller, when being observed in radiowaves, which would indicate, that these radiowaves do propagate faster. The long-wavelength sources should even exhibit a blue shift instead of usual red shift - but without reference spectrum of their radiation it's difficult to determine it. So far the only reference remains maser at the Pioneer spacecraft satellite. This source exhibits the blue shift too.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (36) Aug 25, 2012
While three phortons is not really a statistically significant sample this is indeed intersting
?? As in Phorton Phears a Phoo?
http://www.youtub...Vr_Mp8T8

-Notice the intense particle physics at the beginning-
baudrunner
2.6 / 5 (10) Aug 25, 2012
I get it. That's one observation. It might not tell us that the universe isn't foamy but might be foamy in a non-chaotic way, guaranteeing non-chaotic randomness in a constant source, a scenario in which we continually see the same pattern of non-chaotic randomness. It would have to have a pattern in any event, and not necessarily "foamy" - that's just a plausibility - in order for us to be able to eventually teleport ourselves within this constant matrix. We *will* definitely get there one day.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (6) Aug 26, 2012
At the case of distant gamma ray bursts all gamma ray photons of different wavelengths are originated from single source - so that nothing prohibits them to get entangled with their gravity field


Photons interact with matter gravitationally but not with each other.

We should prohibit them in it with simultaneous firing of these photons from different sources - or to analyze closely the clusters of arriving photons.


Ah right, so your proposal is to trigger multiple GRBs several billion years ago hundreds of light years apart, but to within a fraction of a millisecond. Neat trick if you can do it, I can't wait to see that one.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2012
I get it. That's one observation. It might not tell us that the universe isn't foamy but might be foamy in a non-chaotic way, guaranteeing non-chaotic randomness in a constant source, a scenario in which we continually see the same pattern of non-chaotic randomness. It would have to have a pattern in any event, and not necessarily "foamy" - that's just a plausibility - in order for us to be able to eventually teleport ourselves within this constant matrix. We *will* definitely get there one day.


The observation tells us that any nonhomogeneity is at much less than the Planck scale. The same conclusion was reached some time ago using the Integral craft and this confirms it:

http://www.esa.in...x_0.html
ValeriaT
2 / 5 (8) Aug 26, 2012
so your proposal is to trigger multiple GRBs several billion years ago hundreds of light years apart, but to within a fraction of a millisecond. Neat trick if you can do it, I can't wait to see that one.
IMO the simultaneous firing of nuclear bomb and a laser or maser at the Jupiter orbit would do the job reliably.
Photons interact with matter gravitationally but not with each other.
Which makes no sense if you try to think about it. In addition, this interaction depends on the wavelength of photons - the microwave photons can defy the gravity like so-called Hawking radiation. And if we realize, that CMBR noise is formed with the same space-time curvatures, like the massive objects or their gravity field (just very sparse one), we can make reliable estimations of photon behavior from it.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (4) Aug 26, 2012
so your proposal is to trigger multiple GRBs several billion years ago hundreds of light years apart, but to within a fraction of a millisecond. Neat trick if you can do it, I can't wait to see that one.
IMO the simultaneous firing of nuclear bomb and a laser or maser at the Jupiter orbit would do the job reliably.


Way too close, the reason why astronomical tests are used is to extend the baseline, but also the solar wind is much denser than inter-galactic space and its refractive index would be unpredictable, you need very long distances through high vacuum.
ValeriaT
2 / 5 (8) Aug 26, 2012
you need very long distances through high vacuum.
I don't think so, the blue shift of maser at Pioneer spaceprobe was observable before ten years already. The distance of this spaceprobe from Earth is not astronomical.
daywalk3r
3.1 / 5 (17) Aug 26, 2012
I don't think so, the blue shift of maser at Pioneer spaceprobe was observable before ten years already.
A.) What does that have to do with this topic?

B.) Author: Paul A. LaViolette

C.) No, even if photons did interact "gravitationaly" as you propose, the photons in question arrived each a few milliseconds apart, so unless you are suggesting that some of them moved back in time, there is no way they could have interacted with each other during their journey.

And as I allready wrote in my first post in this thread (which was first downvoted by an "at that time" allready banned account, then deleted for being reported, probably also by the same already banned troll), these findings only compliment a multitude of previous ones (by INTEGRAL, etc.), which reach similar conclusions.

For example:
http://phys.org/news/2011-06-physics-einstein.html
http://phys.org/news/2012-01-physics-team-constraints-lumpy-space-time.html
daywalk3r
3.1 / 5 (17) Aug 26, 2012
And another few suckpuppets of the same voting troll:
===> URaTard, racistblackguy <===

How funneh ;-) Feel free to report.
Fleetfoot
5 / 5 (3) Aug 27, 2012
you need very long distances through high vacuum.
I don't think so, the blue shift of maser at Pioneer spaceprobe was observable before ten years already. The distance of this spaceprobe from Earth is not astronomical.


That was working in transponder mode, the masers in question are located in the DSN ground stations on Earth. The signals had to be integrated over years and required intensive analysis to extract the shift from all the other contaminating effects even though they were phase-locked microwave signals. I know that system very thoroughly!

Spacetime quantisation requires very high energy signals in the gamma ray region to have any hope of seeing an effect.
BenFRayfield
not rated yet Aug 27, 2012
Another explanation for why the photons travel together: My Physicsmata 0.6.1 (get that exact version number at Sourceforge) open source software shows one way a grid of pixels, which you can think of as planck length apart, can flow smooth patterns even at angles, while all calculations are done in terms of which pixels are adjacent to which other pixels in that version. In 0.6.0 the pixels are each connected to 16 other randomly selected pixels and looks more random but still has some flowing properties in common. Therefore it is not implied that when 3 photons travel an undistorted path (or many paths at once converging to the appearance of a single path) for a long distance that the planck length is not part of the calculations. It just needs some normalization.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (34) Aug 27, 2012
And another few suckpuppets of the same voting troll:
===> URaTard, racistblackguy <===

How funneh ;-) Feel free to report.
These are iterations of the drooling mouthbreather pirouette/ritchieguy/russkiye/pussycat/obama_socks/estevan57/jewzrule... and many others.
Estevan57
2.3 / 5 (37) Aug 27, 2012
So sorry, Otto not me. I think you suck independently of the others mentioned. And I don't vote with them.
ValeriaT
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 27, 2012
My Physicsmata 0.6.1.. shows one way a grid of pixels
After dblclicking to the jar file a following error appears: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: \Physicsmata_0/6/1_doubleClickToRun_or_unzipToGetS
ource_java1/5OrHigher/jar
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: \Physicsmata_0.6.1_doubleClickToRun_or_unzipToGetSource_java1.5O
rHigher.jar
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClassInternal(Unknown Source)
Could not find the main class: \Physicsmata_0.6.1_doubleClickToRun_or_unzipToGetSource_java1.5OrHigher.jar.
Program will exit.
What I'm doing wrong?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (30) Aug 27, 2012
So sorry, Otto not me. I think you suck independently of the others mentioned. And I don't vote with them.
So sorry esai but as we discussed evidence indicates otherwise, that you are as much a liar as the megasicko p/r/r/p/o. Guilt by ass-ociation. THEY seem to have all disappeared, except for you and the gangrater sickpuppets. And all you do anymore is bitch. And whine. Poo poo.
Estevan57
2.4 / 5 (38) Aug 28, 2012
Otto, are you trying to say ese, which is spanish for hommie, or homeboy?
Or something else? Japanese?

So sorry dumbass, people come and go on this website all the time. Just because you have been at "war" with so many of them doesn't mean all of them are one entity, group or person. Get a grip.

If I honestly think you're an egotistical troll with delusions of adequacy, how could it be a lie? It is my opinion after all.
I'm glad to have annoyed you, Nazi.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.4 / 5 (32) Aug 28, 2012
Otto, are you trying to say ese, which is spanish for hommie, or homeboy?
You pretended not to know how to spell sorghum, nor how to look it up as well didn't you piro/Ritchie/russkiye/pussy/Obie/esai? Your persistant pathology degrades this site.
Estevan57
2.3 / 5 (38) Aug 28, 2012
Otto, Otto, Otto, you stoner. Have you forgotten that we have been in conversations with the very people you say I am? - Doh -.
When someone angers or disagrees with you your first reaction is to group them together with past "enemies".
Can you show me a post where I have pretended to not spell sorghum? And why would I?
Oops that was NotParker.
Your persistant pathology degrades this site.
Spiro Agnew. Spiro Agnew. Spiro Agnew.
Deathclock
2.3 / 5 (9) Aug 28, 2012
What I'm doing wrong?


Using java...

I kid, I kid!

(but seriously, fuck java, it's the most annoying language I've ever worked with)
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (29) Aug 28, 2012
Otto, Otto, Otto, you stoner. Have you forgotten that we have been in conversations with the very people you say I am? - Doh -
Jigga/zephyr/terriva/valeria talks to himself and hes way smarter than you -doh-
Can you show me a post where I have pretended to not spell sorghum? And why would I? Oops that was NotParker.
No that was you as pussycat_lies.

Keep talking dumbass. Sooner or later you or your bf will post gay porn links again and youll be outta here.
When someone angers or disagrees with you your first reaction is to group them together with past "enemies".
Naw only when they prove themselves to be one and the same.

"Why why why do you persist?"
http://www.youtub...D5kSqzUw

"Because Im a stupidass. Obviously."
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (31) Aug 28, 2012
Here is otto against the multitude:
http://www.youtub...eSq_R38Q

"E inevitavel."
daywalk3r
3.9 / 5 (21) Aug 28, 2012
Another sockpuppet, same owner:

>>> Ghost_Busters <<<

All that the sockpuppets have in common is a ZERO post record, stupendous (in some cases offensive) names, and inter-topic group voting behaviour.

It is pretty easy to spot and assign all the accounts to a single owner, just based on post times and the specifics of their voting activity.

On a side note: According to available data, Estevan57 doesn't seam to fit in. So it's either him but playing it VERY smart (unlikely), or most probably someone else behind it.

Plus, Estevan57 displayed skills in stringing together words to create meaningful sentences - a feat hardly expected from someone as mentaly challenged/deficient as the sockpuppeteer voting troll x-D

Anyways..

Phys.org (0) | (1) Trolls

Viva la trolls, and offtopic..
Estevan57
2.3 / 5 (37) Aug 28, 2012
Otto vs the multitude is you , inside your own skull.
Estevan57
2.3 / 5 (37) Aug 28, 2012
If you are interested, daywalker, pm me and i'll tell you why I stalk Otto.
daywalk3r
3.7 / 5 (19) Aug 28, 2012
Well, not that I care much about that..  
I just get an urge to care when I see some e-psycho using 3-5 accounts to randomly downvote sometimes even very on-topic and constructive valuable posts, systematically, throughout the whole site.

Can't really blame him though, as he/she probably hardly has any other options..

What would you do if you were just rock-stupid, and wanted to somehow participate? Yea, right..

God gave the reply button to the wise.. And the vote button to the stupid :-)
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (30) Aug 28, 2012
Estevan has been dropping poop:
"To survey 5,000 of 1,200,000,000 and project the results for an entire nation? Cowpucky"

-and when corrected, sucks up...
"Shotman you are correct, the minimum sample size for that population is 4971... Oopers."(pirouette epithet)

-Claims to own a windmill (sorghum-powered?):
"Mine works just fine, thank you. 2 years and counting."

-Empty chit-chat comments:
"I think the Israeli webmasters have been successful."
"I wish that Physorg would't even go near politics, even if the source is a "fanciful poll"."
"Dying America? Get real, even in recession we are the envy of the world."
"Welcome to the chinese tarbaby. Sweets for the sweet."

-Typical pussycat suckups:
"I like your attitude djr. Nice post."
"Well written article. Lots of relevant info in a small space."
"Could any statement be more Trollish? Possibly? Your arguments and science are thin. Please just go away."
"i'll tell you why I stalk Otto"

-THIS IS PUSSYCAT. The ethnic nick threw us-
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Aug 28, 2012
Careful daywalk3r if you PM it you may get a scummy reply like I did:

"So what is the REAL reason why you keep coming after me? Is it that you would like to make love to me. If I gave you my picture, you would probably cum all over yourself."
Estevan57
2.3 / 5 (37) Aug 28, 2012
Ha Ha Otto, go dig more "poop". I stand by all of these statements because they are all mine. But one.
To admit a mistake on the sample size of 1,200,000,000 because I am off on the minimum by 29 is a big deal only to you.

"So what is the REAL reason why you keep coming after me? Is it that you would like to make love to me. If I gave you my picture, you would probably cum all over yourself."

You know this is someone elses comment, why atribute it to me? Lies, Otto, Lies. Shame on you.

"I just get an urge to care when I see some e-psycho using 3-5 accounts to randomly downvote sometimes even very on-topic and constructive valuable posts, systematically, throughout the whole site." - daywalker

This is why I annoy Otto. He was the 4-6 accounts that followed my posts. I got in the middle of his spat with PussyCatEyes and he resented it. He followed my posts (the same way he gathered quotes 8 months old just now) and downvoted them.
I assure you I am one person.

TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (29) Aug 29, 2012
Ha Ha Otto, go dig more "poop".
Ok...

I found more pussycat sucking sounds:
"alfie null, I think your'e right on target with your comments."
"You sure whine a lot."
"Otto has the right to do these things if he wants."
(Defending otto against pussycat?? This takes phony persona-building to new heights. This bizarre dialogue between E and P is obviously contrived)
http://phys.org/n...rbs.html

-Interesting side-topic between E and P re- vendicars real identity. One reason the alternate sockpuppets may have been created:
"Yes, he is....and he's also Scott Douglas and other names. He'll be arrested if he tries to enter the U.S."

"Bwaaahaaahaaaha and pussy has a cat named Diarrhea hehee." -No wait - thats one of my quotes- to which pussy/estevan replies:
"MY CAT'S NAME IS DALRIADA, WHICH IS AN IRISH PLACE NAME." -Oh sorry - my mistake...
cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.6 / 5 (30) Aug 29, 2012
I got in the middle of his spat with PussyCatEyes and he resented it.
I resent you making up multiple sickpuppets in order to flood this site with inane garbage. Sickpuppets who lie about being farmers and nurses and NASA scientists and windmill owners. I and others will CONTINUE to take exception to this behavior.
He followed my posts
-But just who is stalking who??
If you are interested, daywalker, pm me and i'll tell you why I stalk Otto.
...
(the same way he gathered quotes 8 months old just now) and downvoted them.
-As you have been crawling through my past posts for months now, looking for sockpuppets, you know this is very easy to do.
I assure you I am one person
-who posts ignorance and abuse and gay porn links under multiple sockpuppets for cheap thrills. This is obvious.
Estevan57
2.4 / 5 (35) Aug 29, 2012
Actually Otto, it is obvious that you are a paranoid twit.
To take a three way conversation with three totally distinct styles and attitudes of writing and conclude that it is a clever plot by me to fool you into thinking I am not one but two persons is insane. New ad campaign - Got Paranoia?

If I were one person previously and you were fooled, then you are stupid.
I am 1 person (still) now and I shout "YOU ARE STUPID"!
You might notice the differences between Pussycat and I:
Politics are totally polar opposites.
I enjoy colloqialisms, but am not chatty.
I rarely use all caps.
I usually use a persons username. Have I used Blotto? Oddotard? Just rarely.
I tell only a little about my personal life.
We have been in arguments with each other!
We have disagreed on subjects and pursued conversations when others are gone from the comments section!
We appeared 6 month or so apart. etc.

Believe what you want. I believe the name/identity confusion is not a bad defense mechanism. Spiro Agnew
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (31) Aug 29, 2012
So uh esai is vendicar really scott nudds or what? Boy I hate that guy. Dont you? Esai?
Estevan57
2.4 / 5 (35) Aug 29, 2012
No, I don't hate him at all. I disaprove of his name calling in normal conversation, but that is his personality.
Esai is not a word or name.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.