Debunking the Left's Narratives: American Debunk

'Total Vacuum': Dems Admit Sede Vacante in Oval Office

Endoliths are a good reminder that life, uh, finds a way.

"Upon leaving the hospital she had an uncontrollable urge to go to a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant."

The universe is constantly expanding, but how do scientists think about what it's expanding into?

Humans and other animals must have really wanted to make it to the Americas.

A recent experiment has confirmed an interesting aspect of quantum physics: the dual nature of light particles, known as photons, cannot be fully observed as both a wave and a particle at the same time. This limitation arises from a principle called entropic uncertainty. In the early 20th century, physicist Niels Bohr introduced the idea of wave-particle duality, which suggests that photons can behave as waves (like ripples on a pond) or particles (like tiny billiard balls), depending on how they are observed. However, Bohr also proposed the complementarity principle: it’s impossible to observe both behaviors simultaneously. It’s like trying to focus on both the forest and a single tree at the same time—you’ll always lose some detail. Physicists later connected this idea to entropic uncertainty. This principle states that certain aspects of a quantum system—like whether a photon behaves more like a wave or a particle—will always remain partly unknown. Think of it as a magician who reveals only part of their trick while keeping the rest a mystery. To test this, physicists designed an experiment using photons and an interferometer, a device that splits a beam of light into two paths and then recombines them. Here’s a simple analogy: imagine you’re splitting a stream of water into two hoses and then directing both streams to a single point. Depending on how the hoses are adjusted, you can observe different effects when the water meets. In the experiment: Photons were sent through a crystal, acting as the first splitter. The split beams were reflected and crossed paths at a second splitter. Depending on the settings of this second splitter, the photons could be measured as waves (showing interference patterns like overlapping ripples) or particles (behaving like individual droplets). The twist? The researchers adjusted the second splitter to measure both the wave and particle nature simultaneously. However, they found that the clearer the wave behavior became, the blurrier the particle behavior appeared—and vice versa. This experiment confirmed that it is impossible to fully observe both aspects of a photon’s nature at the same time. The limitations arise because of entropic uncertainty: no matter how sophisticated the measurement tools, some information about a quantum system will always remain hidden. The findings go beyond just photons. They reveal a deep connection between quantum physics and information theory, a branch of science that deals with how information is stored, processed, and transmitted. By showing that quantum systems inherently keep some secrets, the research may help physicists develop better methods for quantum computing—a technology that uses the unique properties of quantum systems to revolutionize data processing and storage. The study is published in the journal Science Advances. The post Photons Can’t Be Fully Seen as Both Waves and Particles appeared first on Anomalien.com.

Secretary of Defense nominee Pete Hegseth correctly called the media out on Monday for lying about his past comments about women not serving in combat in order to suggest he looks down upon women serving, belittles their service, or that he even opposes their inclusion in the military. However, CNN Newsroom host Jim Acosta welcomed Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed to his Tuesday show, where they both falsely suggested Hegseth was merely flip-flopping to get confirmed. To make his point, Acosta introduced two clips of Hegseth, “Pete Hegseth is trying to walk back some of these comments he has previously made about women in the military, saying they have been, quote, ‘misconstrued.’ But let's listen to what he said in November and compare it to what he said last night on Fox.”     In the first clip, Acosta took a nearly two-and-a-half-hour interview and boiled it down to one sentence, “I'm straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn't made us more effective, hasn't made us more lethal, has made fighting more complicated.” That was a clip of Hegseth’s November 7 appearance on The Shawn Ryan Show, but here’s a highly relevant portion Acosta omitted: And so you had women truck drivers or fuel or mechanics on these convoys in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then they'd be ambushed or hit by IEDs and suddenly now you have women in combat. That's maybe a modern reality in a 360 battlefield. That's different than intentionally saying we're going to put women into combat roles so they will do the combat jobs of men knowing that we've changed the standards in putting them there, which means you've changed the capability of that unit. And if you say you haven't, you're a liar. Because everybody knows between bone density and lung capacity and muscle strength, men and women are just different. And so if you want to, I'm okay with the idea that you maintain the standards where they are for everybody. And if there's some, you know, hard-charging female that meets that standard, great, cool, join the infantry battalion. But that is not what's happened.  Hegseth later added, “I'm not even talking about pilots. I'm not talking about pilots. I'm not talking about the ability to do. I'm talking about physical labor-type, labor-intensive-type jobs.”       Viewers didn’t get that context, and it is fair to ask why, because it certainly would’ve put Hegseth’s Monday statement in context where he said: I also want an opportunity here to clarify comments that have been misconstrued that I somehow don't support women in the military. Some of our greatest warriors, our best warriors out there are women who served, raised their right hand to defend this country and love our nation, want to defend that flag. And they do it every single day around the globe. So, I'm not presuming anything, but after President Trump asked me to be his Secretary of Defense, should I get the opportunity to do that, I look forward to being a secretary for all our warriors, men and women, for the amazing contributions they make in our military. Acosta followed by asking, “Mr. Chairman, what do you make of that?” Partly because he is a Democrat partisan and partly because Acosta didn’t put Hegseth’s November 7 clip in its proper context, Reid replied, “It sounds like a pre-confirmation conversion. He was pretty blatant. He's not only been blatant in his comments, he's blatant in his writings that women should not be in combat. And then now, suddenly to disown those comments, it seems more calculated to get votes for a confirmation than it is his real policy, which he'll carry out.” Hegseth did not disown his comments, Acosta just committed an act of journalistic malpractice. Will Daniel Dale fact-check his own colleagues? Probably not, but he should.

In reply to Arwen. Hello Arwen, thank you for your comment. We agree that owning critically endangered animals isn’t the best idea and we don’t encourage buying axolotls as pets. This article is meant strictly for informative purposes.

In reply to Carol Willette. Hello Carol, thank you very much for your feedback and your question. As far as the feeding goes it is important to specifically consider your cat’s calorie requirements. Those can be very different depending on your cat’s size, age, breed, weight, health and so on. These two following posts could help answer your questions: – How Much Wet Food to Feed a Cat (With Feeding Calculator) – How Much to Feed a Kitten? Vet-Verified Feeding Chart & FAQ Hope this helps!