Record quantum entanglement of multiple dimensions

Mar 27, 2014

An international team directed by researchers from the Austrian Academy of Sciences, with participation from the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, has managed to create an entanglement of 103 dimensions with only two photons. The record had been established at 11 dimensions.

The states in which , such as photons, can be found have properties which are beyond common sense. Superpositions are produced, such as the possibility of being in two places at once, which defies intuition. In addition, when two are entangled a connection is generated: measuring the state of one (whether they are in one place or another, or spinning one way or another, for example) affects the state of the other particle instantly, no matter how far away from each other they are.

Scientists have spent years combining both properties to construct networks of in a state of superposition. This in turn allows constructing quantum computers capable of operating at unimaginable speeds, encrypting information with total security and conducting experiments in quantum mechanics which would be impossible to carry out otherwise.

Until now, in order to increase the "computing" capacity of these particle systems, scientists have mainly turned to increasing the number of entangled particles, each of them in a two-dimensional state of superposition: a qubit (the quantum equivalent to an information bit, but with values which can be 1, 0 or an overlap of both values). Using this method, scientists managed to entangle up to 14 particles, an authentic multitude given its experimental difficulty.

The research team was directed by Anton Zeilinger and Mario Krenn from the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. It included the participation of Marcus Huber, researcher from the Group of Quantum Information and Quantum Phenomena from the UAB Department of Physics, as well as visiting researcher at the Institute of Photonic Sciences (ICFO). The team has advanced one more step towards improving entangled quantum systems.

In an article published this week in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), scientists described how they managed to achieve a quantum with a minimum of 103 dimensions with only two particles. "We have two Schrödinger cats which could be alive, dead, or in 101 other states simultaneously", Huber jokes, "plus, they are entangled in such a way that what happens to one immediately affects the other". The results implies a record in quantum entanglements of multiple dimensions with two particles, established until now at 11 dimensions.

Instead of entangling many particles with a qubit of information each, scientists generated one single pair of in which each could be in more than one hundred states, or in any of the superpositions of theses states; something much easier than entangling many particles. These highly complex states correspond to different modes in which photons may find themselves in, with a distribution of their characteristic phase, angular momentum and intensity for each mode.

"This high dimension offers great potential for applications. In cryptography, for example, our method would allow us to maintain the security of the information in realistic situations, with noise and interference. In addition, the discovery could facilitate the experimental development of quantum computers, since this would be an easier way of obtaining high dimensions of entanglement with few particles", explains UAB researcher Marcus Huber.

Now that the results demonstrate that obtaining high dimension entanglements is accessible, scientists conclude in the article that the next step will be to search how they can experimentally control these hundreds of spatial modes of the photons in order to conduct quantum computer operations.

Explore further: Scientists open a new window into quantum physics with superconductivity in LEDs

More information: Paper: arxiv.org/abs/1306.0096

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Physicists correct quantum errors

Feb 03, 2014

Scientists from the FOM Foundation and the Technical University Delft, working together at the Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, have succeeded in detecting and correcting errors during the storage of quantum ...

Quantum physics mimics spooky action into the past

Apr 23, 2012

Physicists of the group of Prof. Anton Zeilinger at the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI), the University of Vienna, and the Vienna Center for Quantum Science and Technology (VCQ) ...

Recommended for you

Controlling light on a chip at the single-photon level

Dec 16, 2014

Integrating optics and electronics into systems such as fiber-optic data links has revolutionized how we transmit information. A second revolution awaits as researchers seek to develop chips in which individual ...

Fraud-proof credit cards possible with quantum physics

Dec 15, 2014

Credit card fraud and identify theft are serious problems for consumers and industries. Though corporations and individuals work to improve safeguards, it has become increasingly difficult to protect financial ...

An Interview with Thomas Vidick on quantum code cracking

Dec 15, 2014

Quantum computers, looked to as the next generation of computing technology, are expected to one day vastly outperform conventional computers. Using the laws of quantum mechanics—the physics that governs ...

User comments : 57

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
4.8 / 5 (5) Mar 27, 2014
This in turn allows constructing quantum computers capable of operating at unimaginable speeds,

Well, the quantum computers don't operate at any significantly fast speed (and no: not faster than light).
You can just use the superpositions in qbits to do some things in one operation that would require massively parallel architecture/algorithms on conventional computers.

But I applaud the author: He did not make the "faster than light information transmission" error so often found in such articles.
AmritSorli
1 / 5 (1) Mar 28, 2014
What an achievement !?.........we publish paper where quantum entanglement is carried by the 3D universal space in which time runs only as duration of change
http://www.degruy...14-5.xml
russell_russell
1 / 5 (1) Mar 28, 2014
You can just use the superpositions in qbits to do some things in one operation that would require massively parallel architecture/algorithms on conventional computers.-AP


Questions I ponder...

The mathematical counterpart?:
N=NP.

Or

Is borrowing a description from the mathematical world
N=NP wrong/misleading?
MrVibrating
5 / 5 (1) Mar 29, 2014
What an achievement !?.........we publish paper where quantum entanglement is carried by the 3D universal space in which time runs only as duration of change
http://www.degruy...14-5.xml

LOL, give us a pithy explanation of how change can arise independently of time and you may garner more interest for your work...

We see this logical error so often; proponents of time as a metric of change always fail to explain why the dimension of change isn't itself time-like...

ETA: as ever, great work by Zeilinger and crew..
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 01, 2014
Hi MrVibrating. :)
..give us a pithy explanation of how change can arise independently of time
Do you realize your 'dare' has inbuilt a-priori assumption that time 'exists' as some physical entity on its own 'independent' of events/process of universal energy-space, don't you? Since the only real things existing independently of any other consideration at all is Energy-Space, then your PREsumption that real independent energy-space features/interactions/evolutions/dynamics PROCESSING OF and EVENTS IN that REAL energy-space somehow 'needs time' abstraction to 'occur' per se, is putting the cart before the horse LOGICALLY and PHYSICALLY.
..proponents of time as a metric of change always fail to explain why the dimension of change isn't itself time-like
Change is what it is in/of REAL energy-space terms/relativities. The analytic 'time' tool/model WE make of it is OUR ABSTRACT 'overlay' as 'time axis' term/device in maths/geom. No 'time travel', just energy-space events. :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Apr 01, 2014
Do you realize your 'dare' has inbuilt a-priori assumption that time 'exists' as some physical entity on its own 'independent' of events/process of universal energy-space, don't you? Since the only real things existing independently of any other consideration at all is Energy-Space, then your PREsumption that real independent energy-space features/interactions/evolutions/dynamics PROCESSING OF and EVENTS IN that REAL energy-space somehow 'needs time' abstraction to 'occur' per se, is putting the cart before the horse LOGICALLY and PHYSICALLY
I see... and is this the kind of compost youll be publishing shortly? With lots of ' ' and /// and CAPS and - - ? And of course ;)

I can see why you didnt want to discuss it. How 'embarrassing'.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (7) Apr 01, 2014
I see... and is this the kind of compost youll be publishing shortly? With lots of ' ' and /// and CAPS and - - ? And of course ;)

I can see why you didnt want to discuss it. How 'embarrassing'.
What are you, an obtuse rock or something? Don't you understand the CONTEXT and CONSTRAINT inherent here in this 'limited text' commenting format at Phys.Org?

The ToE BOOK will have no such constraints/inconveniences necessitating unusual formatting/expressions like here. And I won't have to use CAPS near as much therein, because I won't be writing for dullard trolls. Duh!

Are you ok? You sound a little dull and more angry than usual lately.

Take a breather, get out of your mom's basement and live 'outside' for a few days and calm down and get slimmer. Stop your gratuitous insults and wanting-it-both ways attacks and opinions when you come back all cooled off and slimmed down, ok? No more 'projecting' either, ok? Not healthy, and is too revealing of your own case. Yes?

Cheers! :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (5) Apr 01, 2014
What are you, an obtuse rock or something? Don't you understand the CONTEXT and CONSTRAINT inherent here in this 'limited text' commenting format at Phys.Org?
-And your beeps and clicks do not pass for legitimate 'maths' although I can understand why you think they 'would'.

You know, not too long ago this site was plagued by a sorry individual who was a obviously a series of pathetic hoaxes. Given the persistent and compulsive/neurotic nature of said individual it is unrealistic to assume that they would just disappear. Unless they died or lost their computer privileges in the day room of course.

You seem to be a hoax in a similar vein. Still bored eh pussytard?
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 02, 2014
-And your beeps and clicks do not pass for legitimate 'maths' although I can understand why you think they 'would'.

You know, not too long ago this site was plagued by a sorry individual who was a obviously a series of pathetic hoaxes. Given the persistent and compulsive/neurotic nature of said individual it is unrealistic to assume that they would just disappear. Unless they died or lost their computer privileges in the day room of course.

You seem to be a hoax in a similar vein. Still bored eh pussytard?
What on earth are you on about?

And who do you think I am other than RealityCheck (my original and so far ONLY name HERE at Phys.Org)?

Only emotional people who do no proper due diligence checks about what/whom the rail against make such MISTAKEN IDENTITY based responses to people/things they "dislike" or "like" as if that was the basis for any cogent intercourse on the science or the person.

Mate, if you're in mistaken impression I am someone else, please desist. Ta. :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 02, 2014
Well

1) youre extremely fucked up
2) you seem to get satisfaction from baiting people
3) you are a shameless flooder
4) you seem to use phony repetitive compulsive character-building affectations like 'mate' and :) and idiot punctuation
5) your posts are completely devoid of content

-Ergo the logical conclusion is that you are yet one more iteration of the wetbrain pussytard. Or the precursor she used to go 'on about'.
https://www.youtu...rhY_Le1w

RoT yOu FrEaK
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 03, 2014
Well, same to you, fella. Nice.
Uncle Ira
2.6 / 5 (5) Apr 03, 2014
I see... and is this the kind of compost youll be publishing shortly? With lots of ' ' and /// and CAPS and - - ? And of course ;)

I can see why you didnt want to discuss it. How 'embarrassing'.
What are you, an obtuse rock or something? Don't you understand the CONTEXT and CONSTRAINT inherent here in this 'limited text' commenting format at Phys.Org?

The ToE BOOK will have no such constraints/inconveniences necessitating unusual formatting/expressions like here. And I won't have to use CAPS near as much therein, because I won't be writing for dullard trolls. Duh!


@ Really-Skippy you tell the great BIG LIE again you. Don't you want to know how the Ira knows that you tell that as the great BIG LIE? Because ol Ira spend the last four or three days reading the stuffs you write on the other forums. And the Really-Skippy uses the CAPS and the ///// and all the pretty colors and the heavy hand types what you call bolds.

Oh yeeiio, so you the BIG LIAR not BIG CHIEF.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 04, 2014
Poor poor poor Uncle Ira. He 'reads' and still hasn't a clue who's who and what's what.

Lay off the 'puff 'n stuff', dude. :)
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (2) Apr 04, 2014
RC... Don't you have a big toe to complete? Just make sure it is BALANCED correctly...
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 05, 2014
Unlike the obvious Uncle Ira spam-bot program (yes that's what it is), people like you and me can 'walk and chew gum at the same time'. LOL

anyhow, never fear, I take breaks and do other research to prevent familiarity-bias 'ToE jam' building up when too close to the work. Dispassionate 'aems length' approach to one's own work is crucial when one is strictly INDEPENDENT LONE RESEARCHER.

Cheers. :)

PS: some time back in the old forum, this and other 'spam-bot' automated 'gaming' of the ratings/feedback system prompted the admin to remove that function. This is only the latest of that old mod-troll Forum Mafia gangmember 'relics' using the same bot system to spoil things because they are sad trolls on the internet and nothing more. Sad poor Uncle Ira BOT programmer. :(
Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (4) Apr 05, 2014
Unlike the obvious Uncle Ira spam-bot program (yes that's what it is), :(


Does that mean you got banneded again over on the other place you troll at Cher? What for this time? Maybe they didn't want to talk the science talk the way you thought they should and got tired of you wanting to be the BIG CHIEF telling everyone else how they should be talking.

Do better Really-Skippy-Boug, your momma may be watching.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 05, 2014
Poor poor spamBOT program "uncle Ira". Poor poor BOT programmer behind Uncle Ira and all past incarnations of his BOT program. Sad internet troll 'relic' of the old Mafia Forum gang of mod-troll saboteurs of discourse/ratings. Poor sad cases trapped by their chosen role of zombie internet relic bot programmers. Poor sad Uncle Ira BOT which does its 'masters' bidding in internet forums because its insensible to its 'masters' putrid character and mind (or what's left of them after all these years of 'internet zombie personna and activity they've been engaged in so sadly mindlessly).

What's that smell? Peeewww! The zombie "Uncle Ira" is in the building again, folks! LOL
osnova
Apr 05, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Apr 07, 2014
Does that mean you got banneded again over on the other place you troll at Cher? What for this time? Maybe they didn't want to talk the science talk the way you thought they should and got tired of you wanting to be the BIG CHIEF telling everyone else how they should be talking.
Do better Really-Skippy-Boug, your momma may be watching.
@ Ira:
Ira:
ignorer le fou. vous pouvez toujours voter bas, et quand il sera hors sujet ou ne parvient pas à parler de la science, faire ce que otto et Zeph faire et de rapporter le message que les ordures hors-sujet ou quelque chose.
J'ai été rapporté par zephand d'autres quand je l'ai souligné qu'ils mentaient et que la science n'a pas soutenu leur thèse.

il semble fonctionner pour certaines personnes. J'ai pensé à une ou deux fois moi-même ... mais seulement dans des cas particuliers

PEACE
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 07, 2014
Hi CaptS. :) Seriously?!? You are 'conversing' with the proven BOT now, and in French, no less? Hilariously funny . LOLOLOL!

Mate, you come across as either gullible or totally in league with the sad case internet troll who programs and occasionally intervenes to make his BOT 'sound like a human' (if that is what the sad case troll is).

Captn, have you no sense at all? Read his rating of me in the thread: http://phys.org/n...let.html

Wherein I agreed with a-p! And guess what? The automated BOT ratings troll-machine didn't actually 'read' the content, but just did what it's programmed to do 'from a list of friends/enemies'. In my case 'downrate' to '1' IRRESPECTIVE of content posted.

That you are now 'emracing' and 'advising' this sad case internet troll and his BOT is supremely revealing of your character. Don't be such a SAP as to continue your 'relationship' with this arsehole idiotic troll "Uncle" and his equally idiotic machine. Think! :)
Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (4) Apr 07, 2014
Does that mean you got banneded again over on the other place you troll at Cher? What for this time? Maybe they didn't want to talk the science talk the way you thought they should and got tired of you wanting to be the BIG CHIEF telling everyone else how they should be talking.
Do better Really-Skippy-Boug, your momma may be watching.
@ Ira:
Ira:
ignorer le fou. vous pouvez toujours voter bas, et quand il sera hors sujet ou ne parvient pas à parler de la science, faire ce que otto et Zeph faire et de rapporter le message que les ordures hors-sujet ou quelque


@ Captain-Skippy everybody needs the hobby, I make the really (and the Really-Stupid-Skippy) stupid Skippy-doos mine own me. When I'm not doing the engineer man works I need some thing or other thing to keep me occupied. When not working I do some hunting and fishing me. But on the boat all I have to do is my Leverage videos, the chess and the stupid peoples here like the Really-Skippy.
Uncle Ira
4 / 5 (4) Apr 07, 2014
Hi CaptS. :) Seriously?!? You are 'conversing' with the proven BOT now, and in French, no less? Hilariously funny . LOLOLOL!


@ Really-Skippy why you care who talks to me? Are you mad because they only make the fun when they talk to you? That is your fault not ol Ira's. He is speaking the Paris french but I can understand it because us coonasses are smart like that. The Paris french Skippys can't understand the Cajun french so they aren't smart like us. Or they pretend to not understand us, but seeing their expressioning faces whenever is see one and insult him good, I think they understand the Cajun pretty good, eh?

But why you care Really-Skippy who talks to me? I don't tell peoples not to talk to you. Even though you only say the foolishment and pretend to be the science type man. How you like it if I start telling everyone they had to stop talking to you, eh? You would probably like that considering the things they all the time say to you.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
Captn, have you no sense at all? Read his rating of me in the thread:
@RC
1- I dont control anyone
2-I ENJOY talking to him
3-it was probably a knee-jerk reaction because you tend to produce so MANY TROLL posts, especially lately! whats up with that?
Don't be such a SAP as to continue your 'relationship'
no one, and I mean NO ONE tells me what to do or think. therefore I CHOOSE to ignore your request and continue as I feel fit
everybody needs the hobby
@Ira
Quel type de bateau travaillez-vous? J'ai travaillé pendant une courte période pour ACBL sur des bateaux fluviaux chimiques. Nous avons livré barges chimiques haut et bas de la rivière Ohio, et certaines livraisons de la rivière Mississipi pendant quelques mois. Je ne faisais que travailler pour un court laps de temps.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
Hi CptS. :) You "encourage" and "support" and "enable" etc that internet sad case tragic TROLL BOT operator. Not a good look for you if you claim that 'science' is your agenda and not internet trolling with your bot-operator "Uncle", yes?

Instead of encouraging "Uncle Ira" and his BOT to sabotage/clutter this science news/discourse site with your idiotic BOT chatter, why don't you both 'get a room' in one of those social media sites where you can "friend each other silly" in "private"?

"For evil to flourish it's enough for good men to do nothing." Ever here that?

I have posted where necessary to speak up against the REAL TROLLS, silly. They prejudice reading/discussion against people rather than stick to science issues on merits/logics.

Doesn't fact that "Uncle" of yours downrates "from a list" AUTOMATICALLY, without reading content, give you pause to consider that troll's agenda at all?

Friendly advice: "Choose better the company you keep, bro."

Science isn't TROLL fodder ok? :)
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
Hi CptS. :) You "encourage" and "support" and "enable" etc that internet sad case tragic TROLL BOT operator. Not a good look for you if you claim that 'science' is your agenda and not internet trolling with your bot-operator "Uncle", yes?


@ RC, with all due respect, don't ya think ya might be overreacting just a tad? I was one of his targets when he showed up as "Zephyr_Fan". After he saw that I could laugh just as hard at myself as he could he changed his entire demeanor towards me. There were two or three people who started out of the gate by friendly responses to his, his, well whatever it is, Otto & Stumpy come to mind, and in return he has been very respectful to them. And anyone else who took the time to answer one of his "ponderings".

But it appears he may have gotten to ya by so accurately pegging your self-designated "role" of being some sort of "director" of the conversation. Ya have to admit, his sense of irony is about as good as any on this site? Right?
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
Unlike the obvious Uncle Ira spam-bot program (yes that's what it is), :(


Does that mean you got banneded again over on the other place you troll at Cher? What for this time? Maybe they didn't want to talk the science talk the way you thought they should and got tired of you wanting to be the BIG CHIEF telling everyone else how they should be talking.

Do better Really-Skippy-Boug, your momma may be watching.


Ya Ira, he got "banneded" again. This is the third time in as many months. It's the only time he ever comes here any longer, when he can't do "his thing" there for a week or two. Don't worry, it's only a temporary ban so he'll be going back there when it's up in day or so.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
@ RC, with all due respect, don't ya think ya might be overreacting just a tad? I was one of his targets when he showed up as "Zephyr_Fan". After he saw that I could laugh just as hard at myself as he could he changed his entire demeanor towards me. There were two or three people who started out of the gate by friendly responses to his, his, well whatever it is, Otto & Stumpy come to mind, and in return he has been very respectful to them. And anyone else who took the time to answer one of his "ponderings".
You don't 'get it', do you, mate? That's called MANIPULATION of YOU and anyone else who basically is COWED by that TROLL-BOT sicko. That's how he gets his kicks, making YOU 'toe his line'. Appeasing socioptaths only makes it WORSE for the NEXT VICTIM, idiot. Just because YOU are 'ok' doesn't MAKE it OK for the next victim, idiot. So you'd rather 'get on the right side' of a MURDERER rather than EXPOSE him and save the NEXT potential victim? You're weakminded selfish idiot.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
Ya Ira, he got "banneded" again. This is the third time in as many months.
So you are responding to a BOT-TROLL, idiot? The Uncle Ira downvotes AUTOMATICALLY the PERSON regardless of content? How is that 'good' for science or members to 'cotow' to, idiot? He disrupts and clutters up importgant discussions/commentary, but as long as YOU are now 'not on his hit list', then that's ok? Idiot.

Stop making excuses and rationalizations for why YOU have 'caved' to the troll-bot sociopath who disrupts, intimidates and frames posters BY DOWNRATING regardless of content. Idiot.

No wonder many mainstream 'practitioners' are CORRUPT and FRAUDULENT lately, if you are the measure of the 'calibre' of ethics/character and 'objectivity' they have been 'making do' with. Get a clue and a backbone, willya?!

And I was 'banned' by usual mod-troll pretending to be 'mod' ignoring his TROLL 'protected mates' who start disruptive/baiting tactics to give him 'excuse to ban' when someone defends. Idiot.
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
You don't 'get it', do you, mate? That's called MANIPULATION of YOU and anyone else who basically is COWED by that TROLL-BOT sicko. That's how he gets his kicks, making YOU 'toe his line'. Appeasing socioptaths only makes it WORSE for the NEXT VICTIM, idiot. Just because YOU are 'ok' doesn't MAKE it OK for the next victim, idiot. So you'd rather 'get on the right side' of a MURDERER rather than EXPOSE him and save the NEXT potential victim? You're weakminded selfish idiot.


Good golly RC, this has really got ya going bonkers. It's not that big a deal, relax and ya will live longer and have a better quality of life. Why call me all those names? This is just an anonymous internet forum with inconsequential anonymous posters.

RC says: Murders? Sociopaths? Weakminded? Idiot? Victims? COW? TOE the line?

Rory says: HYPERBOLE? HISTRIONICS? MELT-DOWN? Do ya have the delusions of grandeur to go along with that?
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
So you are responding to a BOT-TROLL, idiot? The Uncle Ira downvotes AUTOMATICALLY the PERSON regardless of content


A bot is a computer program, so I doubt he is a bot. He was able get an accurate read on ya from a single or maybe two of your posts. He probably downrates ya because he finds ya to be a total tool.

Stop making excuses and rationalizations for why YOU have 'caved' to the troll-bot sociopath who disrupts, intimidates and frames posters BY DOWNRATING regardless of content. Idiot.


To paraphrase Stumpy,,, Don't tell me who I correspond with. Ya will not be happy with the reaction.

And I was 'banned' by usual mod-troll pretending to be 'mod' ignoring his TROLL 'protected mates' who start disruptive/baiting tactics to give him 'excuse to ban' when someone defends. Idiot.


Ya were banned because ya were trolling, baiting and making posts that had no content with any meaning. Everybody picks on & conspires against ya? It that about right?

RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
Good golly RC, this has really got ya going bonkers. It's not that big a deal, relax and ya will live longer and have a better quality of life. Why call me all those names? This is just an anonymous internet forum with inconsequential anonymous posters.

RC says: Murders? Sociopaths? Weakminded? Idiot? Victims? COW? TOE the line?

Rory says: HYPERBOLE? HISTRIONICS? MELT-DOWN?
Where have you been? The net has had big problems with bullying that affects more vulnerable//immature types who have taken their own life because of BULLYING. Idiot.

And there is no way of getting through your insensible thick heads the seriousness of the bullying sociopathic MO, and how you are enabling them by your appeasement/cowtowing to their intimidatory tactics. You aren't even aware of being manipulated by these sociopaths whom you so lightly appease so selfishly in order that they leave you alone and pick on someone else. Selfish weakminded fool like you seem to be is not good. :)
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
A bot is a computer program, so I doubt he is a bot. He was able get an accurate read on ya from a single or maybe two of your posts. He probably downrates ya because he finds ya to be a total tool.

To paraphrase Stumpy,,, Don't tell me who I correspond with. Ya will not be happy with the reaction.

Ya were banned because ya were trolling, baiting and making posts that had no content with any meaning. Everybody picks on & conspires against ya? It that about right?
Idiot. He is its programmer who intervenes as necessary to update the 'list' and 'key words' etc. I already pointed that out, so you are an idiot who can't read as well as can't think straight. It's NOT about me, you idiot. I already said I am speaking up for OTHERS affected by the troll "Uncle Ira". Idiot. :)

You 'comply' with the Uncle Ira troll because he intimidated you into appeasing it. What does that say about your character and "I won't be told what to do" claim, idiot.

The 'conspiracy' was PROVEN. Idiot.
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
Where have you been? The net has had big problems with bullying that affects more vulnerable//immature types who have taken their own life because of BULLYING. Idiot.

And there is no way of getting through your insensible thick heads the seriousness of the bullying sociopathic MO, and how you are enabling them by your appeasement/cowtowing to their intimidatory tactics.


Oh my, it sounds like the End of The World As We Know It! I think the fellow is funny. Even when he was poking at me. RC, ya need to take stock of life and assess how important an anonymous internet poster is to ya. Ya are getting hysterical over nothing.

Selfish weakminded fool like you seem to be is not good. :)


So I'm supposed to be crushed or devastated if some anonymous internet poster calls me a fool? That only works on the truly weak-minded, such as ya. It means nothing to me. Ya should try it sometime, it will greatly enhance your quality of life.
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
[Idiot. He is its programmer who intervenes as necessary to update the 'list' and 'key words' etc. I already pointed that out, so you are an idiot who can't read as well as can't think straight. It's NOT about me, you idiot. I already said I am speaking up for OTHERS affected by the troll "Uncle Ira". Idiot. :)

You 'comply' with the Uncle Ira troll because he intimidated you into appeasing it. What does that say about your character and "I won't be told what to do" claim, idiot.

The 'conspiracy' was PROVEN. Idiot.


Ya need to seek professional help. Ya sound like ya might be wearing tin-foil hats instead of Ira's dunce caps.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
Oh my, it sounds like the End of The World As We Know It! I think the fellow is funny. Even when he was poking at me. RC, ya need to take stock of life and assess how important an anonymous internet poster is to ya. Ya are getting hysterical over nothing.

So I'm supposed to be crushed or devastated if some anonymous internet poster calls me a fool? That only works on the truly weak-minded, such as ya. It means nothing to me. Ya should try it sometime, it will greatly enhance your quality of life.
No, idiot, its the bit right under your nose that's been the playground for the "uncle Ira" sociopath who has his bot programme that he has used for YEARS now and ruined the 'feedback' systems and 'ratings' systems of many sites who have had to disable and/or limit those functions to avoid libelous and legally problematic abuses by the same sociopaths that you seem to be 'ok' with just because he 'left you alone' because he obviously saw you as ONE OF HIS ILK. Obviously. Idiot
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
You 'comply' with the Uncle Ira troll because he intimidated you into appeasing it. What does that say about your character and "I won't be told what to do" claim, idiot.
The 'conspiracy' was PROVEN. Idiot
Where is the proof? and... no, it is not intimidation because it is likely that Q doesn't worry about his "star rating" like many others... given that I have seen people down-vote legitimate science here as well as logical explanations from a former JPL physicist Tim Thompson, I would say that the rating system is dead in the water to begin with... only you would take it so seriously as to wrap your ego into it, which is what you are doing

as for the rest:
you are NOT angry about trolling/bullying etc, because you seem to have NO PROBLEMS doing it yourself (see rant above), therefore who gives a sh*t about your opinion on this?

I LIKE Ira, he is a good guy IMHO and he seems to have a nose for TROLLS

p.s. Ira shows few (if any) sociopathic traits
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
the "uncle Ira" sociopath who has his bot programme that he has used for YEARS now and ruined the 'feedback' systems and 'ratings' systems of many sites
one last thing
the ONLY PROOF that you have given of this is your word

your word here not so great, especially lately

IF your word is not good, and you provided no evidence other than your word, how are we to make any informed decisions about what you are saying?

EVEN IF your word was good, I would still request links/proof/supporting data or empirical evidence... now... if Q-Star can provide it for his explanations, I think you should as well... starting with your conspiracy above...

but I don't think you can. so it is your word against his.

RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
Ya need to seek professional help. Ya sound like ya might be wearing tin-foil hats instead of Ira's dunce caps.
And you need a brain to go with that empty skull, idiot. How can you make so light of a serious problem like internet bullying and intimidation when its next victim could be a sensitive KID attempting to interact on the net/forums and getting a face-full of idiocy from you while you enable, aid and abet such longstanding sociopaths and their BOTS on the net exploiting the site weaknesses for personal info while pretending to be 'one of you', idiot.

No wonder the reputation of 'science and scientists' has suffered so badly lately, if your posts/personal idiocy are in any way 'representative' of the 'calibre' of 'science/scientists' of today.

Get a clue about real life dangers to society from sociopaths/psychopaths masquerading in all sorts of guises while doing their worst to undermine everything, including your character (in which Uncle Ira has succeeded). Idiot.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
You "encourage" and "support" and "enable" etc...Get a clue about real life dangers to society from sociopaths/psychopaths
I have more to add... why is it WRONG for someone ELSE to TROLL. but OK for you? you think it is OK to call people idoiot, and tell them who to talk to, and you say
For evil to flourish it's enough for good men to do nothing
but when I speak out about YOUR trolling, or Reg, or Zeph, it is that I am an idiot and I dont know physics?you said to me
PREJUDICED personally/egotistically against Zeph's posts
here http://phys.org/n...rsy.html
what I SEE is someone who is TRYING to gain control of a forum (that would be YOU, RC)
this is what sociopathic traits look like
manipulation, domination, control
all of which are traits you have shown In flagrante delicto since posting here

call everyone else what you wish... your traits reflect sociopathic as well as TROLLING SPAM far better than most anyon
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
one last thing
the ONLY PROOF that you have given of this is your word...
Proof: Before splitting the old Phyorg into phys.org and physforum.com, the feedback/ratings and personal comments system was also plagued by a BOT program by the same troll/sociopath currently named 'Uncle Ira (on of a string). The mod there eventually had to DE-activate that function altogether because of the legal implications for the site if the more insane and libelous and personally objectionable 'feedback' comments went 'undeleted'. It got to be too much work for the mod/owner, and too risky legally, so he just deactivated and removed that function altogether.

Go on, ask around of those who were there in the old days and see I am telling the truth. You are naive and eaily convinced by LIES, and yet so readily unable to spot the truth when you hear it from me. I don't lie. That is one constant you can depend on, mate, when all else and all others fail you as your 'troll sociopathic mates' have. :)
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
I have more to add... why is it WRONG for someone ELSE to TROLL. but OK for you? you think it is OK to call people idoiot, and tell them who to talk to, and you say

but when I speak out about YOUR trolling, or Reg, or Zeph, it is that I am an idiot and I dont know physics?you said to me
here http://phys.org/n...rsy.html
what I SEE is someone who is TRYING to gain control of a forum (that would be YOU, RC)
this is what sociopathic traits look like
manipulation, domination, control...
Get your facts straight, CptS. I only speak up for others trolled by Uncle Ira bot or similar sociopaths. I only speak out against bullies.

Who wants to 'control' the site, not me? I could have been a mod here and elsewhere long ago, but politely declined because I have more pressing work to do.

Mate, if you've convinced yourself that the good guys are the bad guys, and vice-versa, then you are one mixed up kid. Good luck being so naive. :)
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Apr 08, 2014
ask around of those who were there in the old days and see I am telling the truth
@RC
not empirical data, this is called circumstantial and has no merit unless used with supporting evidence
unable to spot the truth when you hear it from me. I don't lie
anyone can say this on the internet, which is why i require empirical data/proof that would stand up in a court system. Q-Star provides links/references, why cant you?
That is one constant you can depend on
no, the only constant that I have seen from you so far is your propensity to TROLL... you coment about others but you are just as bad if not worse
I only speak out against bullies
SEE! I caught you in a lie! You've spoke out about Q-Star as well as myself! when it was YOU doing the trolling! SEE ABOVE for more proof! YOU ARE THE BULLY IN THIS THREAD!

I've been face to face with sociopaths. you show far more traits than Ira

no more TROLLING, "mate"
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 08, 2014
@RC not empirical data, this is called circumstantial and has no merit unless used with supporting evidence
anyone can say this on the internet, which is why i require empirical data/proof that would stand up in a court system.

no, the only constant that I have seen from you so far is your propensity to TROLL... you coment about others but you are just as bad if not worse

SEE! I caught you in a lie!
To this day physforum.com has still not reactivated the feedback system. The posting record of the trolls there will give you all the proof you need. There was even a FORUM MAFIA started by the sociopaths. I don't have time to spoonfeed you.

How did you "catch" me in a "lie" when it was ME that told YOU I spoke up against bullies? And since you/Q-S/a-p haven't condemned Uncle Ira, and effectively enabled/encouraged it (a_p said he would even "buy him a beer"), then you are 'complicit' with its nastiness.

Naivete' is one thing, but active support/cheering/enablement? Nasty. :)
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 09, 2014
ask around of those who were there in the old days and see I am telling the truth

not empirical data, this is called circumstantial and has no merit unless used with supporting evidence
unable to spot the truth when you hear it from me. I don't lie
anyone can say this on the internet, which is why i require empirical data/proof that would stand up in a court system. Q-Star provides links/references, why cant you?
That is one constant you can depend on
no, the only constant that I have seen from you so far is your propensity to TROLL... you coment about others but you are just as bad if not worse
I only speak out against bullies
SEE! I caught you in a lie! You've spoke out about Q-Star as well as myself! when it was YOU doing the trolling! SEE ABOVE for more proof! YOU ARE THE BULLY IN THIS THREAD!


I'm an idiot, among other things, but then there is,,,,,,,,,,

RC is "Undefined",,,,, http://www.scifor...list.php ,,,see for yourself who lies.
Q-Star
5 / 5 (2) Apr 09, 2014
unable to spot the truth when you hear it from me. I don't lie


I'm an idiot, among other things, but then there is,,,,,

RC is "Undefined",,,,, http://www.scifor...list.php ,,,see for yourself who lies. RC's game is old and tired. Yes do as he says, ask any of the old hands at any of the physics forums, and I do mean any, and all. The consensus is 100%,,,, he's a jerk.

(But it may be that it's just that every single person in the world somehow got together to conspire against him and enticed every single moderator on every single site to single him out for bullying. It's a matter for the odds makers or the psychiatrists, even they will would agree on the chances of that.)

@ RC, I told ya that would not like my response to ya telling me how and who to talk to. I've got a very long list of links to "prove" how ya have been abused and picked on over the years. Would ya like to drop this silliness now? Or make it a daily "RC the Troll Link Of The Day"?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Apr 09, 2014
THIS is an example of whiny, TROLLING comments with no empirical data, especially when the person comments about spoonfeeding and ignoring the fact that it is simply word against word... just tell everyone you dont lie, forget proof
To this day physforum.com has still not reactivated the feedback system. The posting record of the trolls there will give you all the proof you need. There was even a FORUM MAFIA started by the sociopaths. I don't have time to spoonfeed you
BUT HERE is a good example of why Q-Star is respected here: PROOF! he makes comments, and provides LINKS to back them up!
RC is "Undefined",,,,, http://www.scifor...list.php ,,,see for yourself who lies.
The verdict is in, folks. making an unsubstantiated comment is the same as saying "fairy farts cause hurricanes" whereas science, and here, you should link proof of claims!

such a perfect example. THANKS Q-Star for showing us the PROOF!
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Apr 09, 2014
Hi Q-S. :) The fact that the mod-troll leader is still at physforum banning everyone who he dislikes is no 'proof' of anything but the fact that the mod-troll 'conspiracy' was in full swing under his 'moderatorship' and 'protection' and 'participation'.

So would you go to Al Qaeda and ask them about America? Idiot. :)

And the fact that "RealityCheck" as "Undefined" was allowed back to sciforums by the admin and EVERYONE was made aware of that, doesn't tell you anything about the troll-mod collusion that was PROVEN when banning RealityCheck? That troll-mod responsible was shamed and is not active there anymore is telling of what the situation was there.

Now that "Undefined" got a few days' holiday over there from one of the GANG mod-trolls who trained AT physforum, and is still trying his mod-troll 'bannings' of members who challenge his abuses of mod powers (and using his troll mates to frame and incite and sabotage until an excuse to ban the victim) is PROVEN by experiment. Idiot.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 09, 2014
HI CptS. :) Mate, I don't have time to spoonfeed you. That's a fact. Sorry.

And what has Q-S 'proved' by his 'link'? Everyone knew who I was/am there. No-one tried to hide it, especially me and the admin of sciforums. They allowed me back after I PROVED by internet experiments that the MOD-TROLLS abusing the site and its rules/moderation were colluding against MANY members they targeted for 'framing, inciting and banning' MO.

Frankly, mate, I couldn't care less what you or your easily manipulated fellow (as proven by the Uncle Ira episode) gaggle of silly, gullible, emotional 'personality cult' chattering social media types on the internet 'thinks' about me. It's NOT about me, but about the bullies YOU have allowed to infest the forums and provided 'cover' for while they do their sociopathic worst against everything/everyone, including site ratings/feedback and discussions.

If you are STILL too silly to realize you were BEING USED as 'cover' and 'complicit' pawn, well... Bye! :)
Uncle Ira
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 09, 2014
@ Really-Skippy, Cher I am sorry to hurt your feelings me. Until the Captain-Skippy and the Q-Skippy pointed it out right there ol Ira didn't realize you was the mental not well. Ol Ira's mother taught me better than to hold up the same standards on the people who are handicapped and she would be ashamed that I was not making allowances for your condition.

So how about we let the bye gone be gone and start off better. I didn't mean nothing from that silly looking pointy cap business no. I didn't realize about your problems me, no.

So how about a sinceremant: Laissez les bons temps rouler Really-Skippy and if you want to write what you think about the science stuff, you go right on ahead you.

Okayeei?

Oh yeah I almost forget this, Really-Skippy, you really skippy shouldn't try tell the grown ups who to talk to and who not to talk to, there is always the trouble that comes up from that and not every coonass you run into will be as kind and forgiving as the Ira-Skippy, eh?
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 10, 2014
Poor poor irrelevant sad Uncle Ira and his BOT program. :)

What's the matter, bot-programmer troll? Lost your 'cover' now I exposed you? What 'con man tactic' will you morph your MO to now that you have been shown to be a sad internet troll without a life outside your Spam/Phishing activities using the commercial BOT network you are operating from to elude permabans. You have been banned and returned as one after another troll socknames.

@CpatS: So how come you approve of trolls socks but you are 'outraged' when genuine members use socks because were banned by mods colluding with the real sock-trolls? Hypocrite much? :)

Anyhow, "uncle Ira" bot sock sad case has been exposed, and anyone even tacitly 'approving/conniving' with it to attack/disrupt other members person/discussions will be branded accordingly by the genuine members here. Good luck, CptS. :)

@Forum: How about ignoring the trolls and personal stuff and get back to the science discourse as presented/argued in posts. :)
Uncle Ira
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 10, 2014
What's the matter, bot-programmer troll? Lost your 'cover' now I exposed you? What 'con man tactic' will you morph your MO to now that you have been shown to be a sad internet troll without a life outside your Spam/Phishing activities using the commercial BOT network you are operating from to elude permabans. You have been banned and returned as one after another troll socknames.


@ Really-Skippy, you is about to test my niceness and goodwill you. Now you have to stop calling me names and get on with your science talking. Otherwise you might have some trouble again with me. It is true that I am more tolerant than your averagemant coonass me. But even ol Ira has his limits. Now please Really-Skippy, stop acting up. Your condition is not the license to disrupt the grown ups.

@Forum: How about ignoring the trolls and personal stuff and get back to the science discourse as presented/argued in posts. :)


Go first Cher you. Make the example you.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Apr 10, 2014
Poor poor Unle Ira roll bot man. You're getting desperate to 'be accepted on new terms', but still keeping the 'tone' you started out with. LOL

It's all there, idiot. You haven't changed a bit. You still insinuate lies and personal disparagement while pretending to 'want to change'. Dumb is as dumb does. And they don't come any dumber than you, idiot. That 'puff 'n stuff' has rotted what's left of your brain just as effectively as that BOT-running life of your has rotted what's left of your character.

You and your gang has ruined many person's reputations/discussions by insinuating lies and frames which became 'urban legends' because no-one questioned them even though they were falsely based 'legends' manufactured and promulgated by you and your mod-troll bot-operating internet gang.

You deserve nothing but contempt and exposure for what you've done and what you STILL attempt to do even now here. Poor CptS had no idea who he was 'conversing' with when he 'spoke' with you. Naive. :)
Uncle Ira
2.3 / 5 (3) Apr 10, 2014
It's all there, idiot. You haven't changed a bit.You still insinuate lies and personal disparagement while pretending to 'want to change'. Dumb is as dumb does. And they don't come any dumber than you, idiot.That 'puff 'n stuff' has rotted what's left of your brain just as effectively as that BOT-running life of your has rotted what's left of your character.


What this BOT mean Cher?

You and your gang has ruined many person's reputations/discussions by insinuating lies and frames which became 'urban legends' because no-one questioned them even though they were falsely based 'legends' manufactured and promulgated by you and your mod-troll bot-operating internet gang.


I not have a gang. Ira is the independent operator.

You deserve nothing but contempt and exposure for what you've done and what you STILL attempt to do even now here.Poor CptS had no idea who he was 'conversing' with when he 'spoke' with you. Naive. :)


You make no sense Cher.What you trying to say?
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Apr 11, 2014
@BOT-man troll. It won't work with me, mate. Give it up "Uncle", your cover's been blown. Take it like a man and stop your silliness. Either behave and listen to the 'smarts peoples' and stop downrating without proper understanding and discussing the content, or remain an irrelevant troll on the internet and so remain a sad case. Good luck on your future path choice, "Uncle".

Read more at: http://phys.org/n...html#jCp
padillacury
2.3 / 5 (3) May 21, 2014
Translated from Spanish, you can help to improve this translation.

The first successful experiment to measure the speed of light was that of Ole Roemer in 1676, since then there have been several experiments yielding results in a finite speed for light in vacuum of 299,792,458 m / s.

Other significant events in the history of physics were the various theories that have tried to explain the nature of light and determine if it has wave or corpuscular nature, and although there are still unresolved theoretical issues. The most accepted theory is that the dual nature of light is synthesizing Maxwell's electromagnetism and particle theory in quantum electrodynamics. Paul Dirac Being is a pioneer in this regard.

In the eighteenth century, contradictions emerged between classical physics and experiments by scientists as light waves being emitted by a moving object had a final speed that differed to the result predicted by the classical vector sum of the velocity of the object emitting and the speed of light.

Similar results obtained British astronomer George Airy to make measurements through a telescope and a flow with a velocity equal to that of the earth and against the expected, the light did not change the relative velocity. From these experiments, the best known is the Michelson-Morley that by using an interferometer showed the speed of light does not vary regardless of the speed of the observers. This experiment did not throw results consistent with the theory of ether (initial motivation of scientists), but it was the precursor of the concept of the Lorentz contraction introduced by Hendrik Antoon Lorentz and what later was the most important formula in Special Theory Of Relativity published by Albert Einstein in 1905. According to current theoretical framework based on the Theory of Relativity, if the velocity of any particle is greater than light, then the denominator of the Lorentz Factor would be an imaginary number (The square root of a negative number), so that under this paradigm hyper light speed is a mathematical impossibility.

In September 2011, however, OPERA experiment result was announced by CERN scientist and many people thought the neutrino speed could exceed the speed of light, regardless that a few months later they announced that the results of this experiment was inaccurate, this would have contradicted the current theoretical framework based on Lorentz transformation used by Einstein to conceptualize the Special Theory of Relativity.

This led me to formulate an alternative paradigm for Lorentz transformation, even if neutrino is not faster than light, the approach I present here is still useful and effective because there is in fact another phenomenon that apparently occurs faster than light: Quantum Entanglement.

Recently a team of European scientists have entangled photons between the Canary Islands of La Palma and Tenerife, Spanish territory located across North Africa, a distance of nearly 150 miles and entanglement occurs many times faster than light, which according to Einstein-Lorentz paradigm would be impossible.

Some dismiss an Einstein-Quantum Interlace paradox, arguing that quantum entanglement does not imply energy or information transmission, but perhaps this argument is wrong because:

1-The nature of the information transmitted by quantum entanglement is unknown, so it still belongs to the field of study of the philosophy of science, even if we know it´s effects experimentally.

2-Quantum non-separability is an algebraic approach to a physic phenomenon. But even with photons in a non separate state, the quantum entanglement between two or more particles occurs thousands of times faster than the speed of light. no matter the distance between.

2-Quantum entanglement changes the quantum state of the particle (Spin, Momentum, position and polarization). And if we consider the definition of energy, which in its simplest form could be expressed as follows: Energy is the ability to produce work or movement (Just what happens in quantum teleportation). Indeed there is energy transportation on quantum entanglement. (If no energy is transmitted in a quantum entanglement process, special relativity still remain with out explain tachyonic speed at it).

Scientist needs an alternative to explain Relativity-Entanglement paradox, and because of the lack of a workable theory I propose an alternative approach to the limitation imposed by the special Relativity: The denominator of the Lorentz factor, will not have the speed of light as a variable, but will have u as an universal speed variable. Of course the observers A and B will detect u particles or waves but won't detect electromagnetic waves as human eye or radars. For this experiment, we will use a hypothetical interferometer to detect tachyons only (no photons) And if in these conditions we make the Michelson-Morley experiment, then tachyon speed will be constant and independent to observers A and B, not light, c would not be constant anymore. In this scenario, as in quantum entanglement, the Lorentz factor denominator shall not be an imaginary number, it shall be root of a positive number, and since the particle velocity would be faster than light but slower or equal to the tachyon speed. In other words, if we consider that the information travel through tachyon particles or waves then the speed of light would not be the maximum speed but the tachyon will, (From the reference frame of tachyonic observer).

When we apply this principle to a particle or wave that moves faster than c, this particle will travel to the future ¨ In relation to our present, determined by photonic information ¨, but never in relation with the moment when the phenomenon occurs. For this reason the practical implementation of the relativistic formulas for satellite signal synchronization is so effective, but ineffective if trying to reconcile with the quantum entanglement.

This new paradigm is important and could re-design the framework of modern physics related to time and space. I hope that the scientific community get curious about Quantum Entanglement paradox and initiate research on this subject in which this theory can be taken into account.
Uncle Ira
5 / 5 (1) May 21, 2014
Translated from Spanish, you can help to improve this translation.


You maybe change change your name Skippy, but you still like to copy-cat-glue the same thing over and over in all the different sections. Do better Skippy-Doo you.
bluehigh
1 / 5 (2) May 22, 2014
Yes, it's a multiple post. So what? The comment is well thought and seems to convey a valid hypothesis. If the comment contains errors lets hear objections. Is it falsifiable? Can it make a testable prediction? To piss on it just because it happens to be posted in alternative relevant threads is petty.
Shamuss
not rated yet May 22, 2014
RealityCheck, Are you seriously getting all bent out of shape about a "bully" in the comment section of a physics site? You do realize that the vast majority of the articles here are supported by science that is well beyond the comprehension of a 12 year old and as such the readers can fairly safetly be inferred as "adults" (well age-wise anyway). As an adult are you still really bothered by people as you put it "Bullying" you?? are your feelings being hurt by an anonymous internet poster?? My apologies if you are indeed 12 years old.

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.