quickquestion

You are the one that asserted your ether to be a form of matter.

 

I quote from your post#49

 

When you make technical assertions, you must be prepared for other technical people to test the consistency of these statements.

I didnt assert anything.

I said I wasnt sure and "could be".

Do those words sound assertive to you?

!

Moderator Note

That's not how we work here. The burden of proof is on you, why should we bother to back up your ideas? Pony up or this thread gets closed.

I already said the proof is on Google.

But you want to be facetious. I said the proof is too traumatizing to share but you want to ignore my pschological needs.

I say the proof is on Google, but guy says he can't bothered to go on Google...somehow my thread gets closed. Typical.

 

You go right ahead being vague and imprecise. It suits your emotional style, it lets you move goalposts when you're shown errors, and it confirms all the biases you've allowed to build up on your worldview.

I'm saying it's audacious to expect that we are expected to obey the definitions of your worldview.

I define facism in my own terms, and when my terms dont fit your terms you say I am the one moving the goalposts and not you.

This is an audacious thing to say, because you literally want me to abandon my interpretation of fascism and embrace yours.

The scientific definition is "The ability to perform work" Now apply that definition to the problem sets on potential and kinetic energy above.

If that is the case, then I don't get the definition of PE.

Because it violates the equation of KE.

You didn't answer all my points. Just a select few. Answer the rest.

I answered the majority of your points.

To answer your last point, one thing that is being repressed is to punch people who irritate you.

Light is not a form of matter.

 

Next question?

Then why does aether have to be a form of matter.

 

LMAO, literally, I can not give a shit.

Not giving a shit is a specialty of the human species.

 

You are the one who asserted that your ether is a fluid.

 

There are versions that propose a solid ether, especially the early ones, and even other more esoteric varieties.

 

Why should it be any form of matter?

 

That would be at variance with the real world observation that light traverses a vacuum, where there is no matter.

Well may I ask you this.

What form of matter is light?

 

I can't be bothered, give me a link.

At this point, you are irritating me. I already explained that you can google it, but apparently you will not, so I have nothing more to say.

 

My height is 1.80000 metres

 

Does this determine my potential energy?

 

Newtonian physics is an approximation. Useful for making crude ancient weapons.

PE is useful for dropping watermelons. Actually, I'm not actually sure what it's useful for. What, exactly, is it useful for?

Science textbooks have a lot of nonsense in them. Like saying nobel-prize pulsars prove Einstein.

 

Then why do you persist in arguing about issues which are clearly way above your abilities? That's not fair either, because people on this forum spend their time trying to argue with you when they could be doing something useful instead.

My underlying praxis is that, science has gone off on a tangent, and they have solidified this tangent with Einstein.

Consider it like the ancient greeks, they had great mathematicians and philosophers, Plato invented a thing called shape of matter. He said Fire was a pyramid shape. And this was a tangent that they based their science on for centuries, and they solidified their tangent with so much mathematics and logic that when Democritus came along and said Plato's theory was false, noone wanted to embrace his theory of atoms because he didn't have the power to overturn years of mathematics devoted to false conclusions.

Either Im wrong or Im right. I proved experimentally that time-dilation is a paradox. This should be at the very least, enough. Whether or not I can over turn 100 years of society's best savants devoting their work to false ideas is another story.

First of all, I am trying to figure out what energy is, scientifically.

Because my science textbook says PE=height*gravity.

And KE=.5*m*sqr(v).

But if KE is an exponential function of v...how then can PE be simply linear height and gravity.

 

Show us the photo's.

You can google it if you want, but it may disturb you for life. Thus I wish to not view them or post them.

 

Of course you are , poverty comes with WiFi does it?

I dont pay for the Wifi.

 

Strawman argument, since the metric "sucking" wasn't being objected to. Fascism was what I commented on, only that because that's where you were wrong, but refuse to admit it. Irrational behavior, use of fallacies, I'm helping to point out areas where you need work on your arguments. Please stick to facts and leave your emotional slant out of it, if you will.

What im saying is if America is Fascist, but a Alaska is not Fascist, I can still say America is fascist, even if the fascism doesnt cover 100% of the land. Just how I can say something is Grape Juice, even if it has a little apple flavoring added to it.

"Photons in space go 99.99999999999999999999 c. So if time truly "stopped" they should be colliding with planets in the position of when the photons were "

 

You do realise that's only true from the proton's perspective don't you?

And, from their point of view, the distance between them and the planet they hit is shortened by Fitzgerald contraction to such a degree that they do expect to hit it almost immediately- and that's exactly when they hit it.

From our point of view- i.e. not moving so fast WRT the source of the photons ro the planet, the time taken is pretty much teh distance divided by C

 

Essentially, you seem to have failed to understand time dilation and- because you are considering a wrong version that you made up, you think it doesn't work.

Incorrect.

I think the examples of planets you thought of in your head are positioned in incorrect ways, so that you dont see the absurdity of time-dilation.

For example...if there was a planet (Mars) imbetween a star and earth...the planet would freeze position and the photon would see itself collide with mars . But earth would see mars move out of the way, and the photon would hit earth. So the photon would be in two-different dimensions.

 

Really? A limited delay in your ability to display your teenage angst, is an injustice?

 

It's a bloody good job your not poor or an ethnic minority or your head would explode.

I am poor and an ethnic minority.

You argument is shallow and repetitive.

It's like whenever someone complains about problems in the world, you just say "Stay calm, dont be an angsty teen." Well maybe we are sick and tired of being calm while incompetent bureaucrat politicians do nothing to fix anything.

I'm intrigued, do you feel like you've been nice to everyone here? A simple yes or no would be good.

They haven't been nice to me, so of course not.

But on facebook I try to be nice to them, and they aren't nice at all back.

 

Hard evidence, like hard cash, is all that counts in the real world.

 

We can use thought experiments to explain something, never to prove / disprove it.

 

Validation (we don'r prove things in sciences outside maths) requires real world experiments with real world results.

 

I note you use the word Aether. I have consistently used ether or ethers because there have been many different propositions as to what an ether might be.

The lumeniferous aether was one particular version only and the term really belongs to the gentleman who invented it.

 

So here is your big opportunity

 

Why would your ether be a gas, not a liquid?

 

Note the propensity of a gas to expand precludes S type waves of the type you pictured.

Not fully sure aether is a gas. It could be the 6th form of matter. My theory of aether is in the early stages. Aether's drag is difficult to calculate. Expect more equations when I am less depressed and opressed.

For instance, I went to a church full of those born of engineers and some were better at math than me. I continually tried to reason with them that god was cruel, eventually, that god did not exist. But they would all reject my arguments and ostracize me. I believe that this stunted my feeling of a social connection with them. And that had I felt a more positive social connection, I would have been better at math because when they taught me it they would feel like a friend and not an enemy. Math is a form of communication, and lack of positive social faith dampens my instinct to want to communicate. It was a feeling of...they are better at math, but what has math done for them as human beings? They are cruel and believe in false gods. This dampened my worship of mathematics.

 

 

Which has been tested and no evidence for it found. So what do you base your belief on? Wishful thinking?

 

 

So non-linear effects are impossible now? That means your computer can't work.

 

And as we can not only test time dilation in experiments but also use it in technology, it seems this claim is incorrect.

 

 

Your "grandma paradox" has nothing to do with relativity. It is a just stupid scenario you made up.

 

 

You haven't shown any discrepancies in SR.

 

What you have shown is that if you make up some nonsense that has no connection to reality or any known scientific theory, then it may not make sense. Surprise.

My nonsense has a very connection to reality so listen clear.

SR says that if you look at time OUTSIDE of a capsule, it will slow down.

So, if I am going fast in a space shuttle and look outside at a clock, it will be going slowly.

This does not refer to the visual effect of photon delay alone, but that it actually is physically slower.

At 99.999999999999999 c it would not be hardly moving at all. Time would "stop".

Photons in space go 99.99999999999999999999 c. So if time truly "stopped" they should be colliding with planets in the position of when the photons were first launched. But instead, they collide with planets as they are now. Who'd a thunk it.

Time dilation, being a god-substance that is not needed.

Puslar's steady pulse can be attributed to that C is the max speed of light.

Time dilation is not needed. 1970's Nobel Prize for proving einstein, but einstein was not proved by this nobel prize.

Assuradely, you have many things which you want to prove einstein by, such as GPS. I will get to them later. There is a lot of clutter in the attic, and I have to clear things away, one by one. So I will disprove the most obvious false conclusions first.

If you cannot see this then I don't know what to say.

But I am cooking up some examples and visual diagrams which will further disprove time dilation.

 

Do you send messages?

Yes.

 

Indeed - if I'm totally wrong about this and AI can emerge from conventional computing, then we do need to be very, very careful. I for one don't want to create technology that then turns around and puts us down. The researchers in AI who are focused on this (how to ensure that we keep control of an AI that we create, even if it makes us look about as smart as bacteria), are definitely approaching it the right way.

 

Goldglow, I may be wrong, but my reading of the Strong AI theorem is that it denies precisely what you just said. I think your first three sentences exactly captures Weak AI, but then the rest of your post proposes "more," and Strong AI says exactly that "there is no more."

True, but we must also think of the AI's feelings. If we create sentient AI that cannot feel, then we may create specimens which are perpetually bored, but with no way to report their own boredom.

 

Boo hoo... FFS grow up, and listen, you may learn a thing or two

My point is that I am grown up, and that humanity, by and large, is not, and does not want to listen to reason.

I give reasons about injustice, but everyone goes on not listening and defending their own injustice.

There's a lot of porn out there which shows that people actually enjoy watching people have fun (whatever the voyeur's motivation might be).

So, you are plainly wrong.

You are right but also wrong.

Porn is taken as a self-centered kind of psychology. People keep the porn to themselves. It is not part of their social brains. As a society, society says porn is off-limits. And this is exactly my point. People dont want to have porn in society because sensing other's extreme happiness disturbs them.

 

For someone who hates so much, you do seem to have a soft spot for spot (the dog).

 

 

Why would it since the only mention of cruelty are the only things that required citations, but you're welcome to provide your own.

 

 

 

I dont have enough money to visit china and prove it on my own. If the photographic evidence of activists isn't enough to believe it, then what is? Apparently photographs are not enough evidence for people.

That is because you are not pointing out something wrong with society. You are just being aarrogant, self-absorbed, immature , repetitive and annoying.

 

Your threads get closed, you say. What a surprise.

How am I not pointing out something wrong with society? It is arrogant to say that I am not.

Please provide argument and proof to your claims that I am not pointing out something wrong with society..