kronodeus

Practical challenges aside, I'll gladly file this under "things my physicist dad said would never happen" and call it a win.

Based on my understanding of the situation, the 2LDs are getting sold, so yes, you should try to acquire the 2LD if you want to retain control of your subdomain(s).

I've lost track of the point you're trying to make. Are you still trying to convince everyone that quantum mechanics and thermodynamics are part of the field of classical mechanics?

Sorry, with all due respect, I'm not "throwing out" thermodynamics. It's just not relevant to the discovery referenced in the article, which is only concerned with classical mechanics. Thermodynamics is not part of the theory of classical mechanics. I think perhaps you are confusing classical mechanics with classical physics.

The title itself is not the problem, although even that is sensationalized. I was referring to the contents of the article, which have statements like this:

"Is there a way for you to spin the top again so it ends up in the exact position it started, as if you had never spun it at all? Surprisingly, yes..."

Which, as an introduction, just misses the mark completely by highlighting the least surprising possible interpretation of the research.

Not talking about thermodynamics here. The discovery referenced in this article also does not solve for thermodynamics or entropy.

And yes, you're right, the article does mention this later. I'm still bothered by the sensationalized introduction and title.

This article is written in a very annoying and misleading way. The discovery is not that rotation can be "reset". That is obvious and not surprising at all. Physical systems governed by classical mechanics are reversible just by perfectly inverting all forces, velocities, and rotations. The actual discovery is the shortcut to the original position without the need to perfectly inverse the full sequence of rotations.

I usually just call these red herrings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring