Michael Eichele
Well-Known Member
ME,
Other than affirmation, I am not certain how "Bingo" should be interpreted.
Your order of emphasis appears to favor a "magical" preference. I do agree with FD's final point in a significant way... there are surprises all the time in my work. I will be the first to embrace the proposition that a problem is interesting, by virtue, of a level of unpredictability.
That said, this thread is akin to the "cold fusion" discovery of a few years ago. Many, otherwise thoughtful, people bought into it. Physical laws are not violated in the course of discovery.
there is nothing to interpret. He hit the nail on the head. Physics are physics. The problem is the human element. WE DONT KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT PHYSICS! I know we like to think we do but we dont. Without a proper understanding of the physics behind any topic, the results of that said topic are unpredictable.
Remember we are dealing with bullets of a totally difefrent design than anything previous. It can be hard to predict any reponses this bullet will offer simply due to the fact that there are unkown and unproven variables at work here. A magical preference? No. An unproven and undocumented one.
And your point is......?
I am not sure what your purpose here is.
Last edited: