/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14371924

17KiB, 474x355, THAT one pepe pic that stares right into your soul.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Thu 07 Apr 13:26:23 2022 No.14371924 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By:

But why would an expert on GPS oppose relativity so vehemently?

https://www.gps.gov/governance/advisory/members/hatch/

/sci/ told me GPS was incontrovertible experimental evidence for special relativity. That GPS works because of special relativity and that it was settled science. I wanted to mogg the antiscience chuds gps style so I started doing some research for myself but now I'm not so sure anymore...

I'm lost. Should I trust the experts on this one? Tell me what to think.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 13 Apr 2022 15:53:56 No.14391957 Report

Quoted By: >>14392007 >>14393273

>>14391886
>>14391889
All of this is whining over nothing. If you think the consensus is wrong then all you have to do is prove it. Posting about crackpot engineers who know nothing, and a few outdated fringe opinions that never amounted to anything, does nothing. Scientists don't whine, they work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 13 Apr 2022 16:12:52 No.14392007 Report

Quoted By: >>14392179

>>14391957
I've thoroughly enjoyed your incessant seething ITT and I hope I'll see you again in my next thread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 13 Apr 2022 17:31:19 No.14392179 Report

Quoted By:

>>14392007
I'll BTFO your schizo whining in the next thread too, can't wait.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 13 Apr 2022 23:57:20 No.14393273 Report

Quoted By: >>14394326 >>14394330

>>14391488
>concedes to pointless points

Oh no, what will I do now? By the way this is the actual poster you were replying to earlier and not the other one who are clearly picking up what a pedantic moron you are and poking fun at your incessant need to be right and to argue.

>>14391798
Nono, "accurately described relativity". Without the magical non existence place they refer to as "spacetime"...which logically could not possible exist let alone be explained logically...well they have no foundation at that point let alone one that shakes more than cafeteria jello. That's not a lie. That's literally what they have to believe.

That alone is enough to disregard it entirely. Or are you referring to how you think GPS literally relies on this belief system? Again, you'll have to go ask someone at the Department of Defense for how the fine tuned stuff works, but other GPS systems also do not use what you claim it does. Go ahead, go look at any manufactures webpage/footnotes what have you. Go call up one of the engineers yourself and ask if they actually reference Einsteins Velocity Composition Laws. They don't, but again my "opinion" is shit to you so I encourage you to look it up for yourself.

Or you can go "nahanah I win, you conceeeeded" again like a child because I refused to accept your "source" that literally negates itself by implying that it actually can't reveal the entire truth. I will let your sources do the talking for you I guess...you want me to anyway right?

>>14391957
>If you think the consensus is wrong
>Appeal to popularity is wrong
Yes.

>then all you have to do is prove it.
Nah.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 08:06:54 No.14394082 Report

Quoted By: >>14394349

>>14381247
>No quantum mechanics is not used in practice, not any more than people used combustion when science believed in phlogiston.
This is very true and I can comment on the state of the field in terms of multiscale simulation especially with respect to surface science. We never use DFT/HFT results, they are not accurate. They have errors in the range of 30% to 100%, this goes up another order in more complex molecules.

What we do in reality is to reoptimise the parameters in the basis density function used in the MD simulation to the AFM results. Then in the end we get accurate MD simulations and this tends to actually work well to compute atomic density profiles which in turn works well for meso- and microscale simulations. The thing I have a problem with is that we then claim in papers "we derived the models from QM computations", which is false, we did not even use it as boundaries in the end. Generally only atomistic MD simulations (classical models) have relatively reliable predictive properties, but even these are really used without reparameterising the higher scale models.

This is not an anti-Semetic post, you can read textbooks by Isrealachveli etc. which will tell you the same thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 08:09:15 No.14394087 Report

Quoted By: >>14394339

>>14391678
>fringe bullshit
Sorry, but the words of those titans carries far more weight than some retards from the internet.

>obsolete theories
Most of what he posted is critique on modern theories, not an alternative theory.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 11:35:25 No.14394326 Report

Quoted By: >>14394804

>>14393273
>"accurately described relativity"
You lied several times and failed to defend your lies. Respond to >>14389976

>Without the magical non existence place they refer to as "spacetime"
Spacetime is not a "place," places are points in space. You claim to accurately describe relativity and then you immediately fail. Schizo.

>which logically could not possible exist
Proof?

>Again, you'll have to go ask someone at the Department of Defense
No need, already shown by the paper I gave you, which you repeatedly ignored. Schizo.

>but other GPS systems also do not use what you claim it does.
The paper I posted says you're wrong. Are your going to respond?

>Go call up one of the engineers yourself and ask if they actually reference Einsteins Velocity Composition Laws
Why would they? The derivations were already posted, why are you trying to shift the goalpost to velocity composition laws?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5253894/

You have no response, you just repeat already disproven talking points. Schizo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 11:39:23 No.14394330 Report

Quoted By: >>14394804

>>14393273
>>If you think the consensus is wrong
>>Appeal to popularity is wrong
That doesn't even make sense as a response. The scientific consensus is a position, not an appeal. Is the theory of evolution " an appeal to popularity?"

>Nah.
So you're just whining over nothing. Thanks for admitting that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 11:45:07 No.14394339 Report

Quoted By:

>>14394087
>Sorry, but the words of those titans carries far more weight than some retards from the internet.
False dichotomy. What makes it fringe bullshit is that it's contradicted by what every other titan has determined. It's just obsolete bullshit you cling to to make yourself feel special. Also, he can't even tell the difference between a scientist and an engineer whose crackpot physics was already falsified.

>Most of what he posted is critique on modern theories, not an alternative theory.
Fringe bullshit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 11:49:15 No.14394349 Report

Quoted By:

>>14394082
Could you post some resources on the matter? Thanks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 13:45:32 No.14394593 Report

Quoted By:

Frog posters and tripfags need to have their abdomens cut open and hanged by their entrails in public

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 15:36:42 No.14394804 Report

Quoted By: >>14395126 >>14395187

>>14394326
>Spacetime is not a "place,"
So relativity is bullshit, exactly.
>places are points in space
...and what IS space, relativist? I hear it's curved, but not what it actually is to be curved.

>You claim to accurately describe relativity and then you immediately fail
You literally just confirmed everything I just said. Without spacetime you have nothing, and spacetime is defined using a goddamn privation referred to as "space".

>Proof?
"It makes no sense", the proof is in the pudding, the theory itself and how it doesn't hold up.

>No need, already shown by the paper I gave you,
Which, again told me that only the Department of Defense knows what it's talking about and not the actual schmuck writing the paper.
>which you repeatedly ignored.
"The GPS is a navigation and timing system that is operated by the United States Department of Defense (DoD), and therefore has a number of aspects to it that are classified."

I will quote your stupid papers own words all day buddy. Especially if you're going to keep coming up with sad coping mechanisms.

>The paper I posted says you're wrong.
And right too. Literally.

>You have no response,
Except the papers own words that you keep posting.

>>14394330
That doesn't even make sense as a response
Well I don't see actual proof. All I see are book learned retards agreeing with each other over a disproved theory that's ultimately based on a null result of other experiments.

>Is the theory of evolution " an appeal to popularity?"
Given that they stalk endlessly about it as if it were fact, yes. Especially since it's not actually a fact yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 17:24:02 No.14395126 Report

Quoted By: >>14395874

>>14394804
>So relativity is bullshit
Your idiotic attempt to strawman it is bullshit.

>...and what IS space
3 of the dimensions of the 4 dimensional manifold in which events lie.

>I hear it's curved, but not what it actually is to be curved.
What would something have to be to be curved?

>You literally just confirmed everything I just said.
No, I literally contradicted what you said from the very beginning. You're lying again, schizo.

>spacetime is defined using a goddamn privation referred to as "space".
How is space a "privation?"

>"It makes no sense"
You don't even know what the definition is, so of course it makes no sense to you. Unfortunately, that's not proof it doesn't exist, just proof of your own incompetence.

>the theory itself and how it doesn't hold up.
Holds up to what? Your misrepresentations? LOL

>Which, again told me that only the Department of Defense knows what it's talking about and not the actual schmuck writing the paper.
It didn't. You're lying again. It said certain aspects are classified, not the aspect relevant to this thread, which the paper describes in detail. Do you actually believe your own bullshit?

>And right too.
So you admit you're wrong. Thanks.

>Except the papers own words that you keep posting.
Not a response, as I already explained abs you had no counter to. You're a proven liar.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 17:47:02 No.14395187 Report

Quoted By: >>14395874

>>14394804
>Well I don't see actual proof
Because you're delusional and deny what's right in front of your face.

>All I see are book learned retards agreeing with each other over a disproved theory that's ultimately based on a null result of other experiments.
The tests of relativity are not "null results." You're lying again.

>Given that they stalk endlessly about it as if it were fact, yes.
It is. Schizo.

>Especially since it's not actually a fact yet.
What would it take for it to be a fact, oh wise one?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 19:41:54 No.14395477 Report

Quoted By:

>>14389125
>It's dust
Doesn't matter mercury rotates off sync of it's orbit. So there can be an effect. Further it's an swinging systems because that repeats billion of times. But I don't now either, just an idea. Similar to the tides on earth, gravitational tide hub is only 30cm, but you can observe up to 14m because of endless repetition which swings it up. If you ignore that you can state some other forces too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 14 Apr 2022 21:58:49 No.14395874 Report

Quoted By: >>14396320 >>14396330

>>14395126
>what IS space
>3 of the dimensions of the 4 dimensional manifold in which events lie.
>So... half of spacetime
You're literally describing half of the"Spacetime" imagined bullshit. You have to believe in it because you have nothing. All you can do is call it a measure...Things are indeed measured you retard. So please tell me what this "space" actually is that you're measuring/mistaking as a standard of measure if you woudn't mind?

>How is space a "privation?"
Well for starters it has no properties. You yourself used nothing other then measurements (of what?) to define it...but you measure things in this alleged "Space" to define it. Defined by everything else...because it has no definition or sustainability whatsoever in itself.

>Holds up to what?
Anything. It's useless as shit because it was never experimentally verified. Also because it's simply a fancy description.

>It didn't.
"The GPS is a navigation and timing system that is operated by the United States Department of Defense (DoD), and therefore has a number of aspects to it that are classified."
I can do this all day.

>You don't even know what the definition is,
Defined it makes no sense. Combining "Space" and "Time"...two concepts that are reified and don't actually fucking exist. It couldn't make sense if you tried because they have no ontology, no actual substance to speak of other than imagined bullshit.

>Not a response,
"The GPS is a navigation and timing system that is operated by the United States Department of Defense (DoD), and therefore has a number of aspects to it that are classified."
Sorry you keep insulting the papers you post.

>>14395187
>The tests of relativity are not "null results.
Relativity is ultimately a descriptions based on the nulls results of other experiments. In reality it has no actual test that has confirmed what's said.

>It is
>It's not falsifiable!
So it's not science then. It's a belief system. Go preach it at your church, bike rider.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 01:17:59 No.14396320 Report

Quoted By: >>14396382

>>14395874
>You're literally describing half of the"Spacetime" imagined bullshit.
What is bullshit about it?

>You have to believe in it
I don't have to believe in anything, it's proven! You're the only one who has to believe, that all the evidence doesn't exist, that anything you're too stupid to understand is fake, because you need that to preserve the delusion that makes up your entire worldview.

>All you can do is call it a measure
Where have I called it a measure? You're delusional.

>So please tell me what this "space" actually is
I already told you. What don't you get?

>Well for starters it has no properties.
How is curvature not a property? Dumb schizo.

>You yourself used nothing other then measurements (of what?) to define it
Where? Delusional schizo.

>Defined by everything else
That's how definitions work, otherwise they would be circular. Dumb schizo.

>It's useless as shit because it was never experimentally verified.
It's experimentally verified by every experiment in physics, delusional schizo. Here's an experiment you can do to verify it: stand in one place. Now stand in another place. Wow, how did you do that? It's almost like there are locations separate from each other. Fucking hell, you're literally mentally ill.

>"The GPS is a navigation and timing system that is operated by the United States Department of Defense (DoD), and therefore has a number of aspects to it that are classified."
Exactly as I said. Certain aspects are classified, not the aspect relevant to this thread, which the paper describes in detail. Thanks for admitting you lied.

>Defined it makes no sense.
How so? First you'll have to actually describe the definition accurately, then you'll have to show what in that definition doesn't make sense. I doubt you'll get past the first part.

>Combining "Space" and "Time"...two concepts that are reified and don't actually fucking exist.
Why do you think they don't exist?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 01:22:37 No.14396330 Report

Quoted By: >>14396382

>>14395874
>Relativity is ultimately a descriptions based on the nulls results of other experiments.
You mean relativity is based on the failures of prior theories? So what? That doesn't mean the tests of relativity are null results. You're just putting phrases that sound similar together, like a schizo.

>In reality it has no actual test that has confirmed what's said.
In reality, which you continually ignore like a schizo, it does:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity

>It's not falsifiable!
Who are you quoting schizo? You're having hallucinations of words I never wrote. Time to take your meds again. Fact =/= unfalsifiable.

And of course you avoided the question: What would it take for it to be a fact, oh wise one? You just spew nonsense with no reasoning behind it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 01:47:22 No.14396382 Report

Quoted By: >>14397569 >>14397575

>>14396320
>What is bullshit about it?
Spacetime is a load of fucking rubbish, I agree.

>You're the only one who has to believe,
Shove it.

>that all the evidence doesn't exist,
It literally does not exist. Space has no properties for you to test. Time literally is a made up measure. "Spacetime" is the fancy accurate description of fake and gay shit.

>I already told you
You surmised it as half of the "spacetime" model. The other half I'm assuming is the "Time", in anycase both are reified bullshit. They don't exist and there is no experiment in reality that you could perform on either. Fucking deal with it numbskull.

>How is curvature not a property?
How does space curve?

>Where?
>3 of the dimensions of the 4 dimensional manifold
You use measures to describe it. This doesn't explain what it actually is, buffoon.

>That's how definitions work
No that's how a privation is defined you retard. It lacks the basic necessities to define it (such as properties) in the first place to substantiate an "existence". Like a shadow, only defined when the light is there to cause the phantasm you refer to as the "shadow". It doesn't actually exist, it's an illusion. It is neither cause or effect, it is only attributed to an effect due to another cause from something else.

>Exactly as I said. Certain aspects are classified,
So shut the fuck up and stop posting this useless source. Kthx.

>not the aspect relevant to this thread
Oh because they're cherry picked to your liking right?

>which the paper describes in detail
I've had enough useless descriptions for a lifetime, thanks.

>>14396330
>You mean relativity is based on the failures of prior theories? So what?
So it's flawed. It's useless.

>That doesn't mean the tests of relativity are null results
LOL

>Fact =/= unfalsifiable.
A psychosis.

>What would it take for it to be a fact, oh wise one?
Space and time would have to be experimented and tested. I hear vacuum chambers are good at isolating test subjects.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 14:40:14 No.14397550 Report

Quoted By:

>>14382944
>Spacetime is a load of fucking rubbish, I agree.
Another hallucination of something I never said. What's bullshit about it? You can't even explain your claim.

>Shove it.
Looks like I hit on the truth.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 14:50:40 No.14397569 Report

Quoted By: >>14397835

>>14396382
>Spacetime is a load of fucking rubbish, I agree.
Another hallucination of something I never said. What's bullshit about it? You can't even explain your claim.

>Shove it.
Looks like I hit on the truth.

>Space has no properties for you to test.
It has curvature, which has been tested. Thanks for proving that you're in denial of the evidence that goes against your beliefs.

>Time literally is a made up measure.
Measure of what? It's a dimension.

>They don't exist and there is no experiment in reality that you could perform on either.
I already gave you one. Did you try it? No,
you're just going to ignore reality like a schizo.

>How does space curve?
If you want to know how space curves in response to mass and energy then I suggest you learn GR, specifically the math involving metric tensors. If you are asking why space curves, this is a meaningless question. Fundamental reality is the way it is, regardless of whether it's easy for you to digest.

>You use measures to describe it.
No, I didn't say anything about measures,
I said dimensions. Thanks for admitting you lied.

>This doesn't explain what it actually is
How is that not what it actually is? You thought the thing containing all locations is a location. You have no clue what you're talking about.

>No that's how a privation is defined you retard.
So according to you everything is a "privation." You're demanding a circular definition.

>It lacks the basic necessities to define it (such as properties)
I already gave you a property. Why are you lying?

>It doesn't actually exist, it's an illusion.
How?

>It is neither cause or effect
It's curvature is an effect of the mass and energy occupying it, and it causes objects in it to move according to its curvature. By your own argument it exists.

>it is only attributed to an effect due to another cause from something else.
From what?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 14:56:12 No.14397575 Report

Quoted By: >>14397595 >>14397835

>>14396382
>So shut the fuck up and stop posting this useless source.
Why? Certain aspects are classified, not the aspect relevant to this thread, which the paper describes in detail. Even you realize you're not making a valid argument.

>Oh because they're cherry picked to your liking right?
What cherrypicking? Are we not talking about the relativistic corrections to GPS??? I don't think you believe your own bullshit at this point.

>I've had enough useless descriptions for a lifetime
Not a response, thanks for admitting GPS uses relativistic corrections.

>So it's flawed. It's useless.
Doesn't follow.

>LOL
>A psychosis
Not a response. Thanks for admitting the tests of relativity are not null results.

>Space and time would have to be experimented and tested.
They are. Here's an experiment you can do to verify it: stand in one place. Now stand in another place. Wow, how did you do that? It's almost like there are locations separate from each other. Fucking hell, you're literally mentally ill.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 15:12:59 No.14397595 Report

Quoted By: >>14397840 >>14397906 >>14400348

>>14397575
>They are. Here's an experiment you can do to verify it: stand in one place. Now stand in another place. Wow, how did you do that? It's almost like there are locations separate from each other. Fucking hell, you're literally mentally ill.
Here's an experiment that proves that angels are responsible for sound:

>speak.
>the angels carry the voice particles through the vacuum to my ears.
>I hear you speak!!

The angels make things such as "air particles" wholly redundant so we discard them, but for some reason I'll postulate that the mathematics stays exactly the same. The experimental evidence agrees with me.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Mathemeticians Hate Him!.png, 25KiB, 1200x1200

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 17:00:24 No.14397835 Report

Quoted By: >>14398282 >>14398309

>>14397569
>Time literally is a made up measure.
>Measure of what? It's a dimension.
A belief system. Irredeemable. It has no ontology, yet you have to believe in it for the belief system to work.

>learn GR
It doesn't explain how. Not an answer.

>No, I didn't say anything about measures,
Because you think time is a "dimension"...which is a fucking measurement by the way.

>It's curvature is an effect of the mass and energy occupying it,
>occupying it
What is "it" to occupy? It is these things with the properties, not space you dipshit.

>From what?
Tell me what causes space and you'll have your answer

>>14397575
Why? Certain aspects are classified.
And I'm taking this one to the bank

>which the paper describes in detail
I'm glad it can fail at describing classified shit. Who cares?

>Not a response

If it's a fact then it's not false, therefore unfalsifiable. Stop with the dualisms, I get that you have to believe in them for relativity to makes sense but it still makes you look like a moron.

>They are. Here's an experiment you can do to verify it: stand in one place. Now stand in another place. Wow, how did you do that? It's almost like there are locations separate from each other.
You're mentally ill you know that? You actually think this makes sense. Like there are actually countless of million discrete locations seperate from one another in ONE universe. As if that caused my location to change...the location itself. And math determined that right? Even though it can't even do that for a fucking simple triangle. Idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 17:02:15 No.14397840 Report

Quoted By: >>14397894 >>14397906 >>14400356

>>14397595
>>speak.
>>the angels carry the voice particles through the vacuum to my ears.
There is no vacuum, so no need for angels. What separates different locations from each other?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 17:20:23 No.14397894 Report

Quoted By: >>14398314

>>14397840
You deny angels? Meds. Now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 17:25:44 No.14397906 Report

Quoted By: >>14398327

>>14397595
>The experimental evidence agrees with me.
>vacuum
>The experiment involving nothing
>Nothing agrees with me

I can agree to that.

>>14397840
>There is no vacuum
Yet they still will talk endlessly about space.

>What separates different locations from each other?
It's the same fucking shit. Farts of fields. Ultimately there is no such thing as "location" because "it's the universe". Where would it go?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 20:34:03 No.14398282 Report

Quoted By: >>14398675

>>14397835
>A belief system. Irredeemable.
Doesn't answer the question. Try again, you claim time is a "measure." Measure of what?

>It has no ontology
The ontology is physics.

>It doesn't explain how.
Yes it does. What doesn't it explain? You don't even know what it says.

>Because you think time is a "dimension"
It is by definition.

>which is a fucking measurement by the way.
No, measurements are measured along a dimension. Dumb schizo.

>What is "it" to occupy?
Space.

>It is these things with the properties
Space has curvature, not the things moving along that curvature.

>Tell me what causes space
Causes space to what?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 20:45:28 No.14398309 Report

Quoted By: >>14398675

>>14397835
>And I'm taking this one to the bank
Not a response. The relativistic corrections to GPS are not classified.

>I'm glad it can fail at describing classified shit.
It didn't try to describe anything classified. You don't even believe your own bullshit.

>If it's a fact then it's not false
How would you prove that? If it's a fact then we are reasonably certain that it's true. But there is nothing stopping any fact about reality from being proven wrong.

>Stop with the dualisms
I espoused no dualism, delusional schizo.

>Like there are actually countless of million discrete locations seperate from one another in ONE universe.
Finally, thanks for admitting space exists.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 20:46:39 No.14398314 Report

Quoted By: >>14398379

>>14397894
Angels are unnecessary. What scientific theory requires angels?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 20:51:08 No.14398327 Report

Quoted By: >>14398675

>>14397906
>Yet they still will talk endlessly about space.
Who? The voices in your head?

>It's the same fucking shit. Farts of fields. Ultimately there is no such thing as "location" because "it's the universe". Where would it go?
None of this schizo babble answered my question. Try again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 21:16:19 No.14398379 Report

Quoted By: >>14398467

>>14398314
They're experimentally verified. Take your meds.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 21:47:30 No.14398467 Report

Quoted By: >>14398517

>>14398379
By what?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 22:07:13 No.14398517 Report

Quoted By: >>14398567

>>14398467
Fluid dynamics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 22:32:07 No.14398567 Report

Quoted By: >>14398570

>>14398517
What experiment?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 22:33:46 No.14398570 Report

Quoted By: >>14398667 >>14400361

>>14398567
Any.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 23:18:28 No.14398667 Report

Quoted By: >>14398685

>>14398570
Nope, none show angels. Why did you lie?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 23:24:41 No.14398675 Report

Quoted By: >>14399912 >>14399931

>>14398282
Doesn't answer the question. Try again, you claim time is a "measure." Measure of what?
It's made up. It's point is that it's made up, that's why it's a good standard compare, not something to be compared.

>The ontology is physics.
There is nothing physical about time

>Yes it does
With made up belief system such as time reified as a cause/dimension, yeah. It's not, but I won't stop you from believing it is.

>It is by definition.
So it's a measurement. It doesn't exist. That's the point of measurements you buffoon.

>No, measurements are measured
Lol
>along a dimension
Which is what if not measurement?

>Space.
>space is space
really clears it up for us.

>Space has curvature
Lol okay but how?

>Causes space to what?
So space is uncaused? So how does it exist?

>>14398309
I espoused no dualism, delusional schizo.
>Fact =/= unfalsifiable.
My bad. Just a blatant contradiction I mean.

>Finally, thanks for admitting space exists.
Okay but which one of those spaces? See now we have the dilemma of billions of discrete locations, each being totally distinct and not consubstantial to everything else that caused them in the first place right? So which "space" shall we speak of now?

>>14398327
>Who?
Probably you. You probably believe it exists too.

>None of this schizo babble answered my question
You question assumes that they're separate in the first place. They're not. How could they be? It's "the universe". If it were separate from the universe...where would it be then?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 15 Apr 2022 23:30:16 No.14398685 Report

Quoted By: >>14399934

>>14398667
Why do you lie about the angels?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 11:54:26 No.14399912 Report

Quoted By:

>>14398675
>It's made up.
That doesn't answer the question. Is time a measure or not? If yes, what is it a measure of? If not, why did you claim it is?

>There is nothing physical about time
Except for all of physics depending on its existence. LOL. There is nothing unphysical about it.

>With made up belief system such as time reified as a cause/dimension, yeah.
Not made up, proven. Cope more.

>So it's a measurement.
Doesn't follow. Measurements are measured along a dimension.

>Which is what if not measurement?
A property of the manifold in which events lie. How do you measure the amount of space between something if space doesn't exist? Your misrepresentation isn't even internally consistent.

>really clears it up for us.
All a clearer question if you want a clearer answer.

>Lol okay but how?
If you want to know how space curves in response to mass and energy then I suggest you learn GR, specifically the math involving metric tensors. If you are asking why space curves, this is a meaningless question. Fundamental reality is the way it is, regardless of whether it's easy for you to digest.

>So space is uncaused?
Space is caused to curve by mass and energy. You need to specify what event you're talking about in order for "cause" to have any meaning.

>So how does it exist?
What do you mean? You're saying causality applies to the existence of spacetime as a whole? Causality is a relationship between events that lie in spacetime, so that's simply a categorical error.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 12:08:33 No.14399931 Report

Quoted By:

>>14398675
>Just a blatant contradiction
Not a contradiction. If something is a fact then we are reasonably certain that it's true. But there is nothing stopping any fact about reality from being proven wrong.

>Okay but which one of those spaces?
All of them exist.

>See now we have the dilemma of billions of discrete locations
How is this a dilemma?

>not consubstantial to everything else that caused them in the first place
What do you mean?

>So which "space" shall we speak of now?
The entirety of it is we were talking about from the beginning.

>Probably you
Not me. Anywhere there is sound, there is no vacuum. So no need for angels.

>You question assumes that they're separate in the first place
It doesn't assume it, it's proven. All you have to do is do the experiment I gave you. If locations were not separate, then you would in the same location as everything else. But you're not. You're in your place, your bed is in another, etc. Is your bed intersecting with your body? Check now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 12:10:07 No.14399934 Report

Quoted By: >>14400083

>>14398685
Where did I lie? You haven't shown a single experiment that shows angels. So you lied.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 13:34:40 No.14400083 Report

Quoted By: >>14400336

>>14399934
No you lied. I told you what the experiments are.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:32:59 No.14400336 Report

Quoted By: >>14400338 >>14400344

>>14400083
You haven't given a single experiment that shows angels. Why did you lie?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:33:53 No.14400338 Report

Quoted By: >>14400344

>>14400336
Why do you lie about what I said?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:37:19 No.14400344 Report

Quoted By: >>14400348

>>14400338
I didn't. Show me a single experiment that has shown angels. >>14400336

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:40:41 No.14400348 Report

Quoted By: >>14400356

>>14400344
All experiments show angels. What are you talking about? >>14397595

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:44:43 No.14400356 Report

Quoted By: >>14400361

>>14400348
>All experiments show angels
Then why can't you show any of them do?>>14397840

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:48:32 No.14400361 Report

Quoted By: >>14400371

>>14400356
>Then why can't you show any of them do?
Any experiment will do.>>14398570

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 16 Apr 2022 15:51:37 No.14400371 Report

Quoted By:

>>14400361
The only one you described didn't, so it's clearly not "any." Why did you lie?

I had no problem giving you multiple experiments that confirm relativity. Why are you not able to give me any?

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches