With the minute difference that we do not have experimental validation for Angels dancing on a pinhead whereas there is a massive amount of experimental validation for the standard model.
Its still purely theoretical, but a lot of work has already been done to show experimental evidence of angels. I think we're pretty close to confirming their existence.
With the minute difference that we do not have experimental validation for Angels dancing on a pinhead whereas there is a massive amount of experimental validation for the standard model.
I thought he meant "angles on a pinhead".
Now you're talkin' tri-angular!
https://cidu.info/2022/05/06/thats-a-cute-angle/
Right angles are wrong angles! Death to th' T-square!
https://comicskingdom.com/zippy-the-pinhead/2023-07-02
Thank you for your contribution, my fellow Pynchon Enjoyer
So you're saying that all we need to do is experimentally validate the number of angels dancing on a pinhead?
Im getting very strong “ad hominem” vibes from someone who has an irrational view of predictive models.
Measure the area of a pinhead, divide by cross-sectional area of an angel. Easy peasy.
Division by zero error.
Its still purely theoretical, but a lot of work has already been done to show experimental evidence of angels. I think we're pretty close to confirming their existence.