Привет, просто хочу поделиться некоторыми взглядами на физику UAP от человека, имеющего формальное образование в области теоретической физики элементарных частиц и работавшего с некоторыми из лучших физиков в этой области. Некоторым из вас это может показаться полезным (у меня есть докторская степень и в прошлом я три года работал над докторской диссертацией). Во-первых, реальны ли UAP? Я сохраняю агностическую позицию до тех пор, пока не появятся научные данные, которые я смогу изучить. Как физик, я, вероятно, так же взволнован, если не больше, чем большинство из вас на форуме. Даже если есть вероятность 0,001%, что мы имеем какое-то реальное, но необъяснимое явление, это легко стало бы самым захватывающим научным открытием на долгое время (если не на все времена). Тем не менее, наука требует от нас изучения научных данных. Поэтому я с нетерпением жду публикаций, скажем, НАСА, чтобы сделать окончательные выводы. Для контекста: физики ждали открытий, скажем, бозона Хиггса и черных дыр более 50 лет, думаю, я могу подождать. Во-вторых, как насчет всех разговоров о UAP, нарушающих законы физики? Есть разница между нарушением ожиданий и фактическим нарушением законов физики. Я согласен с тем, что некоторые предполагаемые поведения UAP кажутся странными: нереальная скорость, ускорение, отсутствие звукового удара… и т.д. Но я не думаю, что они обязательно действительно нарушают настоящие законы физики. Например, у нас нет доказательств того, что они превышают скорость света, звуковой удар технически можно свести к минимуму путем придания формы, а ускорения, которые кажутся нереальными, не являются технически невозможными. Поэтому я говорю, что мы должны попытаться использовать физику настолько, насколько это возможно, для анализа этих явлений. Это означает, что нам нужны калиброванные научные данные и многоканальные измерения. Например, скажем, мы не наблюдаем звукового удара, возможно, они недостаточно громкие, а наше оборудование недостаточно чувствительно. Если действительно звуковой удар можно свести к минимуму, и мы выясняем, как это может быть серьезным улучшением в технологии движения. В-третьих, как насчет таких вещей, как межпространственное пространство, путешествия во времени… и т.д.? В физике это не настоящие объяснения, это скорее утешительные слова, создающие иллюзию объяснений. Настоящие объяснения требуют своего рода физического моделирования, последовательной математики и проверяемых предсказаний. Итак, скажем, если вы хотите увидеть намеки на дополнительные измерения, вам нужно построить модель и проверить их. Например, у LHC есть некоторые ограничения на эти модели. [https://cerncourier.com/a/the-lhcs-extra-dimension/](https://cerncourier.com/a/the-lhcs-extra-dimension/). Мы не можем просто иметь дополнительные измерения, которые работают для UAP, но не для остального мира, должна быть какая-то математическая причина, почему это так. В общем, я не пытаюсь быть организатором вечеринок. Наука сложна, но наука — наш лучший друг в продвижении вперед гуманитарных наук. Важно, чтобы мы придерживались его стандартов, потому что, если мы непредвзято относимся к возможностям, мы можем быть приятно удивлены. Есть намного больше фантастических возможностей, которыми мы могли бы себя ограничить, если бы всегда опирались на слова, которые звучат осмысленно, но не имеют за собой строгого построения научной модели и математических уравнений. Например, если мы ослабим эти убеждения, мы могли бы исследовать такие вещи, как что, если UAP взаимодействуют с темной материей, и могут ли они быть их источниками энергии? Могут ли UAP быть искусственным миражом/проекцией или чем-то еще? Могут ли быть новые частицы с аномальными гравитационными взаимодействиями, которые используют UAP? Могут ли существовать новые силы, которые БАК не обнаружил и которые UAP используют для движения? Любое из них может быть абсолютно новаторским открытием и открытием, которое изменит мир. Будучи настроены скептически, мы оставляем открытыми эти фантастические возможности для исследований. Действительно, если кому-то нужно напоминание о том, как некоторые из этих физических открытий могут изменить мир, примеров множество: удобрения (единственный способ накормить наш мир), ядерные силы (они положили конец войне), транзисторы (основы электроники). .. Я мог бы продолжать и продолжать. Во всяком случае, только мои 2 цента напыщенная речь. Редактировать: я не думал, что это может вызвать столько дискуссий. С тех пор, как я ушел из академии, я взял на себя обязательство поделиться своим удивлением и научными знаниями со всеми вами. Мне жаль, что некоторые из вас могут счесть это скучным/неинтересным, но это всего лишь мое скромное мнение после того, как я провел более десяти лет, изучая физику элементарных частиц (это передний край науки и предмет, которым я очень увлечен) , серьезно размышлял о науке и писал о ней статьи. Я изо всех сил старался предоставить некоторую научную обратную связь к комментариям и представить то, что могут сказать другие физики, но это довольно трудоемкая задача. Так что я воздержусь от дальнейших комментариев, если не будет серьезной подсказки.
Похожие записи:
Спорные смерти исследователей НЛО, журналистов и авторов. (лекция Питера Роббинса)
В свете недавних заявлений Дэвида Груша, возможно, пришло время еще раз взглянуть на звонящего из Зоны 51 от побережья до побережья. (Начало с 1:33) Также обратите внимание, что в последние годы становится все труднее найти это видео на YouTube.
Fin365 — Black Diamond НЛО преследует озеро Онтарио — 2001 — компьютерная реконструкция
Тайны и споры об НЛО: специальный репортаж на NewsNation
Кто-нибудь может поговорить с Хаимом Эшедом?
Так считаются ли иглу и гамбургеры одной и той же формой? Нам нужно начать копаться в старых книгах об НЛО
50к за мусорное ведро
Само влияние заявления Груша о том, что правительство сдерживает технологию чистой энергии, ошеломляет.
Я попытался выяснить, говорит ли Дэвид Груш правду, перевернув звук из его интервью NewsNation.
Превосходная критика парадокса Ферми
All in all, good perspective to offer. I’ll just tweak one thing: there doesn’t need to be mathematics explaining inter-dimensionality for it to exist as a phenomenon. As I understand it, calculus did not exist until Newton invented it to describe gravity. That didn’t preclude gravity from existing. The cart follows the horse.
You’re right that people don’t have any specific mathematical model to explain what they mean when they say “inter-dimensionality”. But I think that the claim originates in what has allegedly been observed. And, in the event that data proves that some objects could physically manifest or disappear (as is claimed), physics and the associated mathematics would have to be invented to explain reality.
Thanks for the interesting read.
One thing I notice about the scientific community is that they don’t talk enough about what they DON’T know. In high school I can remember being actually shocked that a particle had to be made up so the standard model could explain atomic mass. Of course this was later found to be true, but there are LOT more unexplained mysteries in our standard model than people realise, like:
Dark Matter/Dark Energy
Measurements collapsing quantum wave functions (or all understanding of whaybis reality is tied up in this! And we really don’t have a clue)
String Theory — we aren’t good enough to measure it
Matter–antimatter asymmetry
Parallel Universes/is the universe flat?
Strong CP problem
Nuetrino Mass
Whilst I agree that science is our friend, like the period before quantum physics when we thought we had it all figured out, I fear that would narrow our scope to much as there is too much we don’t know, or can’t explain already. I believe that the technology in UAP, and the physics behind the technology, being presented to our scientists now would be the same as on one of our scientists trying to show quantum physics to Galileo.
Nothing can break the laws of physics. If anything does anything at all it does so because of the laws of physics, it’s just shorthand for «breaking the laws of physics *as we know them*». It’s even often phrased «*seemingly* breaking the laws of physics».
Lol. This sub, man…
“Listen here, literal scientist, you might be educated in that “science” garbage, but clearly you’re very uneducated in UFOs. Unlike me, Steve, who has seen a ton of YouTube videos.”
And people wonder why nobody takes the UFO community seriously.
We can sit back and type any conclusion: UAPs are aliens, inter-dimensional beings, Greys… Scientists (the ones who make planes, phones, space probes, cure diseases, etc.) don’t have that luxury, they require empirical evidence. If any of this turns out to be true, it’s the scientists that will see it first. Scientists will be the ones that study, experiment, validate the data. Not us (layman, myself included).
Give Gbyte a break. Hearing from more scientists on this thread is refreshing.
OP is too legit a scientist to cover the topic at the moment.
If you lived your entire academic life in which all of the data is presented neatly and uniform, tackling a subject that has been shrouded in secrecy and legend is too impractical.
I agree we need the data too truly understand the phenomenon in a scientific sense. Hopefully the government will give it to us. I’m not holding my breathe.
Until then this forum is like a group of detectives trying to solve a murder of a person we aren’t even sure exists.
Particle physics isn’t something you can just stop doing.
Agree 100% with you.
You just said something that’s been in the back of my mind for a long time.
We can’t have a scientific discussion about UAP without scientific data to back it up.
In my opinion too many people mistake scientific data from calibrated and dedicated instruments with any data from any sources.
The Nimitz data, tic-tac, video or orbs etc.. these are great to say » ok there is something that should be investigated here» but this is not something that we can use to say «we have made a scientific discovery».
How often do you see mick west (or any other) debunking a measurement made by one of the large detectors at CERN ? Ligo? Icecube?
The scientific process is meant to leave as little room for error as possible. Data is recorded by multiple instruments, with different designs at different locations and time, analyzed by multiple teams with different methods and if after all of this all points toward the same thing, then you can start to say «we’ve discovered something new!»
There is a need for a public systematic approach to measure the UAP phenomena. We poured 1B€ in the LHC to be able to detect the Higgs, a monumental discovery as it was the final particle of the standard model.
If UAP are real and if they are from NHI, this could be the biggest scientific discovery of all time, why not put some cash in there too?
Right now we are talking about building FCC or ILC but for what prospects? Most theoreticians I know are adamant that there is very little evidence that we could discover anything with these machines and their cost is going to be much larger than LHC…
Sorry for the rant but I have been frustrated with this issue for a long time..
(No bad intentions toward the particle physics community, I have many friends there :), just saying that there are other things worth looking into..)
One core issue this entire comment section highlights, and the cause for a large amount of misunderstandings as to what OP means regarding data, is that way too many people here (and on reddit in general) have this image of the genius scientist taking a look at the data, going «oh my God…» and then weaving a complete theory of how the phenomenon at hand works within a few minutes. But actual science doesn’t work like this and has never worked like this, for good reason.
As someone who is a science nerd and enjoys reading about the leading theories in physics let me say I loved this post and the take from someone who has formal training in this.
Something I was thinking about today actually was how a possible confirmation of alien life would change our science, especially if it were “interdimensional”. But then I started wondering if it would change as much as be supercharged? My understanding is that our modern technological world is predicated on our understanding of physics being correct. So that would mean we are on the right track in terms of our science — because our technology works. So would the discovery really change (or re-write) our science as much as it would give us a confirmation of what is possible to work backward from? I guess that would be an extreme version of reverse engineering science? I dont know, not entirely sure if that question makes sense but would love to hear your thoughts if you get it and have the time.
Very logical and reasonable statements. But I also think part of being logical is looking at probabilities. Just examine the Tic Tac Nimitz incidents. Instead of saying there’s no definitive evidence so I cannot comment, consider the combination of witness statements and the footage that are all extremely compelling. There is a probability they are telling the truth and that has implications. The pilots have reported what the saw. Instantaneous acceleration. No visible means of propulsion. Then another pilot captures an object on video that matches the description of the first group of pilots. In addition, there is radar data and other witnesses that have not been revealed. There is more evidence and we just don’t have access to it. So, instead of disregarding certain variables and not reaching 100% conclusive results, calculate the equation with the variables as true. What is the result of that equation?
Very much appreciate this kinda post. People who don’t know about the laws of physics don’t realize exactly HOW difficult it is to break them, whenever I see people talk about it hurts my soul.
What if SOME UAPs are balls of plasma? Most likely they would have to be naturally occurring to explain historical accounts, but not ruling out human made/manipulated in more recent times. As a particle physicist, I’m curious about if you think that the unusual characteristics of these objects might be more explainable if they had considerably less mass (plasma vs a phyisical ship). This is under the assumption that this plasma would be visible by the naked eye, as well as detectable by radar, radio, thermal sensors etc. Any thoughts on the plausibility of this?
I’m just here to say that the atomic bomb did not end WWII as you claim. The Japanese were already preparing to give up. All their major cities were destroyed or heavily damaged and when they heard the Soviets were preparing to join the war against them, they decided to call it quits (this is in the public record now). THEN came the atomic bombing (on medium sized almost randomly picked cities because the rest of Japan was already bombed to hell). This was mostly done to impress and scare the Soviets, and simply because they spent all that time and money making them, so they felt they had to put them to ‘good’ use.
Not to say nuclear power hasn’t changed the world forever: both nuclear weapons and nuclear power reactors have both had huge impacts on the world.
You don’t think that an object going from 20,000ft altitude to hovering over the ocean in 0.7 seconds breaks the laws of physics as we currently understand them?
You’re not trying to be a party buster, But I believe you’re extremely uneducated in the ufo phenomena, and you use your expertise in particle physics, to give you a false sense of authority regarding the phenomena.
That’s like using my expertise in mechanical automotive, or renewable energy and local buy back laws to explain, medical science. It just doesn’t apply.
It’s not just lack of sonic booms, it’s the lack of frictional forces present. or the fact that there is no deformation in the insane G forces such acceleration would have on the object.
Also let’s look at the big elephant on the room.
There are allegations taken very seriously to the point where the most senior senator himself introduced the 2023 UAP disclosure act, that factions of the US government have in their possession this craft in their possession.
Maybe you should have spend a few more days maybe a couple of weeks familiarizing yourself with this subject before giving us your “expert” take on the phenomena. Also remember that humility is a virtue.
People and their down votes. Skepticism is healthy, if someone not believing in your extra dimensional ufo driving bigfoot makes you angry go to r/highstrangeness. Nothing in op’s post negates your beliefs or is unreasonable. It leaves plenty of room for unknown unknowns.
> But I don’t think they are necessarily really breaking the real laws of physics. For instance, we have no evidence that they break the speed-of-light, sonic boom could technically be minimized by shaping, and accelerations that seem unreal are not technically impossible.
I think [this article](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7514271/) is worth a read
The flight characteristics observed should result in significant thermal, accoustic or kinetic energy being imparted on the surrounding air yet none of that is observed. One could make the argument that it works in a way that is different from what we *understand* as the laws of physics without actually breaking them, but I think that is an arbitrary distinction. When we say it breaks the laws of physics, we obviously mean that it breaks our current theories/understanding
When we discovered quantum physics it did break the rules of physics as we knew them. Same thing is going on here.
>For instance the LHC has some constraints on these models https://cerncourier.com/a/the-lhcs-extra-dimension/. We can’t just have extra-dimensions that work for UAPs but for not for the rest of the world, there needs to be some mathematical reason why that is the case.
I think the LHC is great and will teach us a lot more stuff in the coming years. However, I don’t think it is the be all end all of physics. By definition, LHC works for stuff that interacts with one another (like normal matter). It will never give us the solution to something that doesn’t behave the way normal matter does. For instance, it can’t inform us about weakly interacting particles/stuff like alleged dark matter. It will only ever produce stuff that comes out of matter/composed of matter or virtual particles. It can’t talk to us about forces we may be missing or axioms that are escaping us.
>We can’t just have extra-dimensions that work for UAPs but for not for the rest of the world, there needs to be some mathematical reason why that is the case.
String theory has that covered and then some. It operates on our 3 physical dimensions, time plus 7 other physical dimensions that are folded down on themselves so small that they are completely unobservable at our macroscopic scale. A good example of a folded dimension is like a straw. From afar it looks like a 1 dimensional line but it’s actually a 2d surface twisted in on itself.
Maybe the UAPs have technology that’s able to tickle the strings and release the energy in gluons or whatever.
We are seeing the craft move fast, but inside the bubble time is normal, and nobody is under heavy g forces. The act of modifying the semi conductance of energy through space (which under normal conditions is an insulator to energy transfer) causes gravity, it causes time dilation.
When you modify this, we see zippy, gravity defying spacecraft, but inside, there’s little to no friction as it changes the way matrer interacts entirely.
What modifies the semi-conductance? Not totally sure, but i suspect fields. In electricity, for example, when a current is changing in a wire, an emf field is produced. I think the same thing happens when kinetic energy is changing in matter, but the field is beyond what we can measure. The fields interact with each other and facilitate conductance.
Okay. Do you have an explanation as to the physics of accelerating to 25,000 mph within the atmosphere without burning up (or even generating heat)? How about doing so without causing a sonic boom? How about transitioning from air to water?
Is it even remotely possible that human beings, with our current understanding of physics, could accomplish these feats?
If the craft behave in these ways, is it safe to assume that no human created them? Because as far as I know, we don’t even have a conjecture that would explain these behaviors, let alone a solid theory. And without a theory, engineering seems impossible, beyond the pale.
To believe that humans created these craft, you’d have to believe that a secret cabal came up with a slew of new physics, verified it experimentally, and then engineered those breakthroughs into craft, totally on their own and in complete secrecy. (Aliens seem much more plausible.)
What about alien craft even being here? How could they have traversed the distance from another star system while having enough food and whatever necessary liquids for the journey?
Doesn’t their being here imply that they somehow travel at least near light speed (if not greater, via some sort of wormhole technology)? Wouldn’t it make the mass of the craft immense traveling at even 50% light speed? Without some sort of shortcut, t’s difficult to imagine how they could arrive from even relatively close star systems that contain planets in the habitable zone.
I think people like you are going to struggle the most with the revelation of these craft. They exist, they operate seemingly with no regard for our atmosphere or fluid dynamics. We’ve had them for at least 80 years and so far haven’t been able to replicate their technology. Their technology could be billions of years advanced from ours.
Our science/mathematics/physics models are OK at explaining some things we can see/test. But it breaks down at certain points, there is no grand unified theory.
I can’t even stress just how infantile our science and technology is compared to NHI. The universe could be infinite, and so these beings may even be infinite, not just millions or billions of years advanced. Our idea of physics, or rather our idea of the universe, is like cave paintings.
Dark matter is just regular matter from another dimension but mass/gravity transcend all. You read it here first
If you were forced to speculate: which of the commonly held theories would you put your money on?
No offense, but the common, «Look, I really want it to be aliens, but …», kind of line is indicative of being a naive ideologue. There is a hidden implication that people who think it is aliens are believing what they want to believe. And there is also a naive implication that being confronted with an intelligence far greater than us would be merely an exciting scientific discovery. This isn’t a fantasy, or the hook in the introduction in a physics paper. This is probably a much bigger deal than you’ve allowed yourself to comprehend, and deserves real, serious thinking.
Thank you for posting this.
Great post! It’s fun to think about how if there is an advanced civilization which is thousands of years ahead of us what could their mathematics look like. Imagine trying to tell Euclid about modern algebraic geometry a la Grothendieck!
Man, this read like a full Mick West segement… Next!
Great post! We are truly on the cusp of something incredible and weird
These unreal accelerations are very unlikely to be real. It’s far more likely to be camera effects.
We need more people like you. Open to the idea but waiting on the sidelines until there is something to measure.
Have you considered trying to make what we know fit what has been claimed? Say instant acceleration, not top speed. How could such a thing be possible? If you were to develop a propulsion engine to do that, where would you start?
Women and men with your knowledge are our best bet at theorizing what could be until what is, is proven or shown.
Those physics laws you got there? Yeah………you’re gonna have to rewrite those mmmkay?
For the particle physicists consideration:
ChatGPT:Certainly! Particle physics can indeed be understood and explained through the lens of information theory. Information theory is a branch of mathematics and computer science that deals with the quantification, storage, and transmission of information. It provides a framework to study the fundamental properties of information and how it is processed.
In the context of particle physics, information theory can be applied to understand the fundamental particles and their interactions. Let’s break it down into a few key concepts:
1. Bits and Quantum Information: In classical information theory, the basic unit of information is a bit, which can represent a 0 or 1. However, in quantum information theory, the basic unit is a qubit, which can exist in a superposition of states, representing a combination of 0 and 1 simultaneously. Quantum particles, such as electrons or photons, can carry and process quantum information.
2. Entanglement: Entanglement is a peculiar phenomenon in quantum mechanics where two or more particles become correlated in such a way that the state of one particle cannot be described independently of the others. This entanglement can be seen as a form of shared information between particles. It plays a crucial role in various aspects of particle physics, such as quantum teleportation, quantum computing, and quantum cryptography.
3. Conservation Laws: Conservation laws in particle physics can also be understood from an information theory perspective. Conservation of energy, momentum, and angular momentum can be seen as a consequence of the information content of a physical system remaining constant over time. Information is neither created nor destroyed but is conserved in different forms as particles interact and transform.
4. Particle Interactions: Particle interactions can be seen as a transfer of information. Fundamental particles exchange other particles, such as photons or gluons, which carry information about the interaction. The exchange particles mediate the transfer of forces and information between the interacting particles.
5. Symmetries and Information: Symmetries play a significant role in particle physics. In information theory, symmetries can be seen as constraints on the information content of a system. In particle physics, symmetries such as charge, parity, and time symmetry provide fundamental principles that govern the behavior of particles and their interactions.
Overall, information theory provides a useful framework to understand the behavior of particles, their interactions, and the conservation laws that govern them. By applying concepts from information theory, researchers gain insights into the fundamental nature of the universe at the most fundamental levels.
Thank you. Excellent post.
From my convos with physicists (including a high profile one) there is a lot of cautious curiosity and guarded optimism.
After all, they’ll stop being afraid of Ed Witten because ET is scarier 😉
Edit:
I will never understand this stupid fucking site
Would you please do a deep dive on information theory and information physics in general? What is you take on the black hole information paradox for instance? Also, your take on the CIA’s interest in the ties between quantum weirdness and parapsychology, link below?
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp96-00787r000200090021-0
If we go off what Bob Lazar has said. If you’re generating gravity and bending space time in front and behind you within a bubble. This would give you no effects of acceleration within the craft and would zip you at speeds well over Mach 10 and beyond. This would also allow zigzag motions. No air is being displaced since space (air) is being bent around and put right back wear it was hence no sonic boom. Thoughts?
this guy’s larping from say, his mother’s basement. what «scientist» goes «i can’t wait for that nasa publication» instead of Nature, the biggest, most widely accepted scientific journal?
all the physics stuff sounds like poorly regurgitated, 1am youtube videos. I bet he can’t even explain what Dark Matter is
and the sonic boom stuff is as dumb as john wick using silencers. guns are still loud as fuck with silencers, the nasa sonic boom experiments were still loud as fuck and abandoned because the results weren’t worth the effort. everything is a solid, even when you wave your hand, you’re cutting through a solid wall of air. when supersonic planes break the sound barrier, they break through the wall of air like a karate chop through butt cheeks, and then the butt cheek wall of air slaps itself behind the vehicle, causing the sonic boom. particle displacement, as fantastical as it is for us, is a better explanation than dampening
Oh, the hubris of scientists, especially physicists!
Albert Michelson said at the inauguration of the Ryerson Physics Laboratory at the University of Chicago that the great principles had already been discovered, and that physics would henceforth be limited to finding truths in the sixth decimal place. That was about 125 years ago. How much new have we learned in the 125 years since this statement?
Are you expecting that we now understand physics well enough to explain what aliens can or cannot do — aliens who were at our level 125 years ago, or make that 125 centuries ago, or 125 millennia ago?
It MUST be difficult when you find your «laws» are little more that mere suggestions, and not very good ones at that.
Neil degrasse tyson seem to be having a hard time with that.
Most sane person in r/ufos
I wish more would openly discuss this issue.
How do you feel when you see Physicists brush these ideas off as nothing more than fiction and something to be laughed away? Neil deGrasse Tyson comes to mind.
As far as I know, the only thing sometimes reported about these craft that is absolutely contrary to our understanding of physics is their reactionless acceleration. They don’t have wings or jets, or throw out any reaction mass of any sort, and yet they’re reported to be able to zip around with very high acceleration, even underwater.
If they are physical objects and not some kind of projection (like, a laser pointer creates a dot that moves around in seemingly impossible ways as well) then this seems like momentum is not being conserved.
While I appreciate this perspective, if something is traveling interdimensionally chances are that they know a little bit more about dimensions than we do at our current state and time. Doesn’t necessarily mean it goes against physics.
Former always makes me sus. Why did he lose his job?
Suppose superstring theory is real and a NHI has been able to tap into the calabi-yau manifold compact matter state, use quantum tunneling or some other as yet little known and unproven means. That would not be breaking the laws of physics (as we know them). I like to imagine the ‘uap’ that have been seen are 3-dimensional cross sections of higher dimensional objects. But you as a particle physicist must have some hypothesis. You original post was extremely vague and simplistic. You haven’t demonstrated proof of credibility so let’s hear your thoughts.
I concur, they aren’t breaking the laws of physics; they just know more laws than we do lolol.