Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - mikeman7918

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Flat Earth General / Jeranism is ignoring our video war
« on: February 01, 2016, 09:23:08 AM »
A while ago I challenged Jeranism to a video war and he accepted.  He said he would be done with the first video in a few days, and a week later he said he was just getting started because of internet problems.  Now it's been nearly a month and Jeranism has posted an additional 10 videos in that time, none of which relate to our video war.  I tried contacting Jeranism again multiple times in multiple ways but he seems to be ignoring everything from me.  I told him that he could opt out if he wanted, but just say so and don't leave me hanging.  Still nothing.

It seems that Jeranism is ignoring our video war.

2
The Lounge / Flat earthers are technically right
« on: January 08, 2016, 11:23:29 AM »
According to relativity, every frame of reference is just as accurate as any other.  This includes the Earth, and it can even be said that Earth is not spinning and space is just rotating around it.  Any point can also be declared as the center of the universe too.  This means that the Earth being static and at the center of everything is a possible frame of reference that's just as accurate as any other.

From the reference of an object traveling at very near the speed of light relativistic effects make the Earth flatten.

Relative to a distant galaxy, dark energy is accelerating the Earth at 9.8 m/s2.

From the perspective of something orbiting very close to the event horizon of a black hole the universe is only 6,000 years old because of time dilation, and to an even closer object all of creation happened in only 7 days.

In a very technical way, we are all right.

3
Flat Earth General / Video war: Jeranism vs mikeman7918
« on: January 06, 2016, 09:43:58 PM »
This is a thread dedicated to the up and coming video war that Jeranism and I are doing.  All the videos we make as part of the war will be posted here to the people on the forum can follow along and make comments.

Lately, Jeranism has been working on his video and I have made a YouTube channel that I will use for debunking conspiracy stuff.  At the moment I have just created the profile picture:



I also have a great idea for the logo animation that will really test my animation skills and if all goes well it will be awesome.  I don't expect that do be done for a while though.  Fortionately it is possible to add an intro to an existing YouTube video, so I will just do that when the animation is ready.

If you havn't been keeping up with this, you can find the rules of the war here.  The games will begin once Jeranism makes the first video, may the best model win!

4
Flat Earth General / I challenge Jeranism to a video war!
« on: January 01, 2016, 12:24:18 AM »
I see that Jeranism is here and it seems that he is a rather prestigious flat Earth YouTuber.  I have already challenged Heiwa to a video war but I think I can handle two at once.  The idea is that we will take turns making and posting videos addressing points raised in the last video posted by the other person, and we will post links to our videos on this thread.


The rules and guidelines are the same as in the video war with Heiwa.  Here they are:

Videos can be any length and they can be as simple or as professional as you want.  You could just talk in front of a camera or make a well polished animated video with voice overs, whatever works for you is fine.

You must address all points raised in the video you are responding to.  If you do not address something then it will be assumed that you agree with it.

Do not derail the conversation.

Only 5 points may be present in each video, reguardless of weather they are new ones or points being addressed.  This is to make sure that the videos are not too long, because if they are then they will be hard to make and boring to watch.

And lastly, please use common sense.


Both Jeranism and I will be bound by these rules, and aditional ones may be proposed.

So what do you say Jeranism, is this going to be a thing?

5
Flat Earth General / I challenge Heiwa to a video war!
« on: December 31, 2015, 07:49:13 PM »
I have been continuing my discussion with Heiwa over email during my ban and as you all might have guessed it isn't going anywhere.  That is why I am changing things up by challenging Heiwa to a video war.  The idea is that we make videos challenging points brought up in the previous video made by the other party.  I am going to start a second YouTube channel (Yes, I do have a first one) that will be all about debunking conspiracy stuff.  That is the channel I will use to upload my videos, and all of them that are in response to Heiwa will be posted here.


Here are the rules and guidelines:

Videos can be any length and they can be as simple or as professional as you want.  You could just talk in front of a camera or make a well polished animated video with voice overs, whatever works for you is fine.

You must address all points raised in the video you are responding to.  If you do not address something then it will be assumed that you agree with it.

Do not derail the conversation with off topic nonsense.

And lastly, please use common sense.


I will let Heiwa choose who makes the first video.  The topic of the debate will be Heiwa's challenge of course.

So Heiwa, do you accept my challenge?

6
Suggestions & Concerns / My phone is IP banned
« on: December 31, 2015, 07:07:57 PM »
Just over a month ago I got banned for 30 days for creating an alternate account and my alt (namekim25) was perminantly banned.  The probelem is that whoever did the banning thought that IP banning my alt was a good idea and now I can't use the forum on my phone.  Whenever I go to this site on my phone it says that namekim25 has been banned for being an alternate account of mikeman7918 and I can't even log off.  I even replaced my phone (for unrelated reasons) and the probelem followed me to the new phone which is rather odd.  Could a moderator please fix that?  Thanks ahead of time.

7
Flat Earth Debate / Binary Stars
« on: November 24, 2015, 09:27:06 AM »
I have personally observed a binary star system with my telescope.  When I focus on what looks like one star with the naken eye I can clearly see 2 stars very close to each other and if I observe it for a few nights I can see that the stars slowly orbit one another.  Do flat earthers have any explenation for this?

8
Flat Earth General / The France attacks
« on: November 15, 2015, 10:53:02 AM »
For those of you who haven't heard, France recently got attacked by terrorists who took hostages and started shooting them.  Here on the United States there has been a large movement to support France because they are an ally of the US.  Knowing what I do about die-hard conspiracy theorists you probobaly already think that they are fake without even seeing any evidence.

9
Flat Earth Debate / Is flat Earth falsifiable?
« on: November 12, 2015, 09:03:08 AM »
Isaac Newton came up with a philosophical razor that's known as Newton's flaming laser sword because it is so effective and has become the basis of science.  The razor states that any theory that cannot be disproven is not worth speculating about or believing in.  Some examples of unfalsifyable arguments is the universe being created 5 seconds ago along with all of your memories and an invisible unicorn being in the same room as you.

I am hoping to demonstrate that flat Earth falls under that same catagory, and therefore believing in it is no more then religious dogma that deserves no scientific merit.  Flat earthers: I have a question for you.  Are there any experimental results that would cause you to stop believing in flat Earth, and if so what are they?

10
Flat Earth General / Science encourages free thinking
« on: October 24, 2015, 03:55:27 PM »
There was a flat earther (I can't remember who) who said that scientists have a tendency to find what they are looking for.  I actually agree with that, because what science is looking for is not evidence to confirm a specific idea, but an answer as to weather that idea applies to the real world.  You are not forced to accept anything as given, and if you think that you can disprove a widely accepted idea then as long as you have an experiment that could do it your

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / My philosophy about religion and science
« on: October 05, 2015, 11:55:12 AM »
As many of you know, I am a Mormon.  Many people wonder how I can be a Christian and yet not be a science denier, and when I am in religious debates with Atheists they often act like they have won when they get me to say that a God is not nesesary for the Earth and life to form, so I am making this thread to clarify my beliefs about how Christianity and science fit together in harmony.

An analogy I like to use is that the universe is like a car: it was designed and build by an intelligent creator but that creator does not need to intervene every 2 seconds for the car to run.  Imagine there is a car and two people have a disagreement about it.  Person 1 argues that the car works because an engineer designed it to work and person 2 argues that it works because it uses gas explosions to push Pistons which turns the drive shaft which causes the wheels to move the car, and no engineer is required for that to happen.  To someone who has never seen a car these explanations might seem contradictory, but since we are all familiar with cars we know that they are both right.  The universe can do what it does without a higher power, but that doesn't mean the whole thing wasn't planned and set in motion by a higher power.

12
Flat Earth General / Thing explaining
« on: September 30, 2015, 10:06:54 AM »
In this place I will explain hard to explain things using only the ten hundred most used words, like how it's done in the up goer five picture.  You can ask me things about our round home world or about hard to understand things and I will explain them as good as I can like this, which should make it easier to understand..

Just so you know, this part also uses only the ten hundred most used words.

Ask away.

13
The Lounge / Aspergers
« on: September 23, 2015, 02:40:10 PM »
As many of you know, I have aspergers.  Many people seem to think that it makes me retarded or something.  In this thread I will explain what aspergers actually is, because it's clearly not common knowlage.

Aspergers is basically a high functioning form of autism.  It's cause is believed to be genetic and it is being called into question weather it should even be considered a chronic mental illness.

What does this mean for me?  Things like social skills and communication don't come naturally to me.  Things like making it obvious that I am not ignoring what someone is saying are things that I had to actually learn about and practice.  The way I think isn't very compatible with English so I have to sort of translate things in my head before I speak, which sometimes takes a few seconds and it can be really annoying.

This doesn't mean that I am retarded though.  I may find it a bit harder then everyone else to communicate to others, but that does not hinder my ability to reason.  People with Aspergers have an almost obsessive interest in something, which in my case is science and space travel.  That's how I know as much as I do about those subjects.  Although never formally tested, it is believed that Albert Einstein had Aspergers or at least some of autism because he exibited many signs of it.  The same is true for many great scientists, composers, and inventors including Sir Isac Newton, Henry Cavendish, Charls Darwin, Thomas Jefferson, Michelangelo, Mozart, Beethoven, and Thomas Edison.  People with Aspergers are often incredibly persistannt with a probelem.  In the words of Einstein himself: "it isn't that Iam so smart, it's just that I stick with problems longer".  I am not saying that people with Aspergers are superior or anything, my point is that we are not retarded.

Jroa: think about that the next time you feel inclined to call me a retard.  Aspergers is believed to be genetic so insulting someone for it is as bad as being racist or sexist.  Now you know what Aspergers actually is.

14
Flat Earth General / My challenge to flat earthers
« on: September 21, 2015, 10:48:55 AM »
I am prepared to give $250 to any flat earthers who can successfully complete this challenge.

To complete this challenge you must tell me one thing we expect to see on a round Earth that we don't see in reality.  If Earth were really flat then this would be easy.

To put it simply, there is no reason to doubt round Earth if you have no reason to doubt round Earth, so if nobody can think of a reason to doubt round Earth then I am not going to doubt round Earth.

15
Flat Earth General / Your first impression doesn't always reflect reality
« on: September 14, 2015, 11:43:42 AM »
The point of this thread is to prove that your first impression of a probelem does not always reflect reality.

Imagine you have a car that has a separate odometer on it's front and back wheels.  If you drive it around for a while which set of wheels will travel further?

I am sure that all of you have had the first impression that they travel an equal distance, but in reality the front wheels go a bit further.  I am not going to tell you why that is for now, and I want to see if anyone can figure it out.

16
The Lounge / I am who I say I am
« on: September 10, 2015, 04:17:54 PM »
Many people (especially Sceptimatic) have doubted that I am who I say I am.  Scepti requested that I make a video of myself mentioning his name, so here it is:

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

17
Flat Earth General / Does the round Earth model work?
« on: September 10, 2015, 10:24:11 AM »
If you vote no you must explain why you think that on this thread.  Be prepared for users either telling you that what you expect to see actually happens or how it's not actually expected.  If you cannot defend you argument and you are out of arguments that the round Earth model does not work then change your vote to yes.  Note that this is not admitting that Earth is round, only that the round Earth model works.

18
Flat Earth General / How do flat earthers explain this photo I took?
« on: September 06, 2015, 07:14:46 PM »


The top of the cloud is illuminated by the Sun and the bottom part is not.  This means that the sunlight must be coming up at an angle, so either the Sun fell to Earth or Earth is round.

19
Flat Earth General / 9/11
« on: August 30, 2015, 09:05:10 AM »
What do you think happened that day?  Was it a terrorist attack?  Did the government use explosives to collapse the towers?  Was the whole thing faked?  Discuss.

I believe that the towers were brought down by terrorist planes as we are told, and I am willing and ready to defend that.

20
Flat Earth General / Computers don't work how we are told
« on: August 28, 2015, 12:28:28 PM »
I don't believe any of what I am about to say, but I will defend it in this thread using flat earther tactics to prove that they are flawed and can defend any stupid flawed idea.

Computers seem like magical devices, nobody can really explain how they work and we are kept from looking into it because they are conveniently allegedly the most complicated devices ever made by humans.  Even people who "build" computers just put together a bunch of pre made parts.  Computer companies like Apple are rather secretive about their products, which should raise some red flags.  Common experience says that inanimate objects cannot do logic and reason, yet computers seem to be the grand exception to that rule.

If you look closely at a "circuit board" you will find that they often have everything labeled with words printed on it, and some of the words and numbers seem like they have no relevance to the user.  Why would an electrical circuit need everything labeled?  On top of that the "wires" on the board are always in very unusual patterns that resemble road systems or even ancient symbols.  We only think computers are machines because that's what we are told in government run schools and tech forums full of shills.

So how do computers actually work?  It's actually incredibly simple, and the government doesn't want you to know because you would stop giving your money to computer companies which are secretly government controlled.  Computers work by enslaving deamons and forcing them to do calculations and remember things.  Have you ever wondered why computers need power when they don't do any physical work?  It's because they use the power to zap deamons and force them to work.  Computers communicate by messenger deamons sent out to other computers.  Computer chips are ancient symbols that summon deamons and trap them and computer programs are spells in their language that order them around.  Have you ever wondered why computer programs are written in some obscure "programming" language instead of plain English?  It's because deamons natively speak in languages cleverly disguised under names like C# and JavaScript.

Wake up and see the light, we are being lied to about computers and everyone must know the truth.

21
Flat Earth General / How to persuade any round earther
« on: August 16, 2015, 10:42:03 PM »
Here are some step by step instructions of how to persuade most if not all round earthers that Earth is flat.  Here's the catch: it only works if Earth is flat.

Basically you have to prove flat Earth theory using the scientific method, and in case you don't know how to do that here are the instructions:

1): Make a prediction with the flat Earth model and make sure that the prediction differs from the one made by the round Earth model.  For example: the horizon is always at eye level.

2): Come up with an experiment to test your prediction.  It has to be repeatable and discribed well so it erases all doubt that the results are valid.  also make sure that you have the proper controls in place to eliminate variables.

3): Make a hypothesis and document it.  Predict exact ally what results your experiment will have if Earth is flat.  Also have a null hypothesis ready, which is what results you would expect on a round Earth.  I recommend you have some round earthers formulate the null hypothesis.

4): Do the experiment.  Be as precise as possible and share your raw data as well as your conclusion.

5): Be prepared for scrutiny.  Don't take it personally, peer review is part of the scientific method.  If you did the first 4 steps right then this wouldn't be a probelem.

6): Be prepared to believe whatever conclusion you are brought to.  I for one am prepared and I am sure that most round earthers are if you do this right, but are you?  There are two possibilities: either you confirm your beliefs or you realize you were wrong and become smarter then you were yesterday.  They are both good outcomes for everyone involved so don't be afraid to be open minded.

Remember that this is not a war.  It's not round earthers verses flat earthers, we are just a bunch of people looking for the truth.  If you are wrong then admitting it is a win, not a loss.  This is why I am prepared to accept flat Earth theory if that's what the experiment proved and why flat earthers should be prepared to accept round Earth if the experiment proves that.

So without further ado, let the science begin!

22
The Lounge / You can now buy a hoverboard!
« on: August 16, 2015, 09:43:17 PM »
I just figured out that the car company Lexus has just released a hoverboard!  Granted it does cost $10,000.

Here is a quick promo video they made:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">
(Sorry, I can't embed newer videos)

It works by using liquid nitrogen (which is why there is smoke coming out of it) to cool superconductors and then if it's placed on a magnetized "hover park" where it hovers a set distance above the ground even if there is a person on it because superconductors are wierd.

Hollogram projectors, space tourism, and now this.  We are living in the future!

23
Flat Earth General / Horizon level experiment
« on: August 16, 2015, 10:50:39 AM »
This is an experiment that can be done by anyone near an ocean or living in a flat place like Kansas.  I can't do it because I live in Utah which is in and around the Rocky Mountain range, so I can rarely get a clear view of the horizon.  I could do this experiment if I am on a particularly high mountain (which there are plenty of), but I don't find myself in that situation often.

Now onto the actual experiment.  Most flat earthers will tell you that the horizon is always at eye level, but all round earthers will tell you that it's slightly below eye level.  In most scenarios the difference is too small to notice, but according to the math if you are on a tall mountain the horizon would be below eye level enough that you could easily measure it and experimental error will be too small to mess with the conclusion about the shape of the Earth.

To do this experiment you will need to find a mountain or building that's taller then anything obstructing the horizon.  Take a level and position it so it's perfectly level, then position a camera so your line of sight goes along the level's length and take a picture.  If Earth is flat then the horizon will be at the same height in frame as the horizon and if the Earth is round the horizon will be a fair bit below the level.  I will draw some diagrams later in case anyone is having trouble visualizing any of this.

This experiment doesn't technically require multiple people, but science has to be repeatable and I don't want the "you faked it" excuse to explain away the results.  I want both flat earthers and round earthers alike to do this, and unlike my other experiments no coordination is needed.  I will do this experiment myself if I can find a suitable location and go there with the nesesary equipment.

24
There have been many times where people have posted images of buildings sinking below the horizon and flat earthers start making up laws of perspective that somehow make it work on a flat Earth.  Here I will demonstrate how that doesn't work.

Look at this image:


There are many like it which show buildings sinking below the horizon, and I am using this particular one for demonstration purposes.

Look what happens when I add lines to represent the horizon and the estimated ground level for the buildings:



On a round Earth this makes perfect sense:



On a flat Earth it does make sense that the ground the buildings are on are below the horizon line, but the horizon clearly is in front of the buildings.  In a flat Earth I don't see any way that this would be possible.



The horizon is clearly quite close, and in this case is closer then those buildings.  Let's assume that light travels a finite distance through air and that causes the horizon:



Slight problem: this means you can't see the buildings at all and the horizon is below the base of the buildings in your perspective.

Many flat earthers believe that nearby waves can block buildings in the distance even if the observer is above them:



But that too doesn't work.

There is only one potential scenario I can think of where we can see on a flat Earth involving waves taller then the observer is high:



It requires that there are waves higher then the observer.  This effect of buildings sinking below the horizon happens even when you are quite high up and at the tops of buildings.  This means that there would have to be some pretty huge waves out there.  This should give you an idea of how big they would have to be:



And on top of that, the size of the mega wave between you and the city would have to change based on the distance to the object you are observing.  I don't think I have to explain why this idea is complete nonsense.

There is a way that it's possible though, and it requires the oceans to have a steady curve to them and for gravity to change directions to compensate.  This would require that eventually the Earth would go around and reconnect with it's self forming a huge sphere.  Wait a minute, that sounds familiar:



This model also has the added benefit of explaining many things like sunsets, the motion of the stars,  the Antarctic midnight sun, how everyone always sees the same side of the Moon, and best of all it doesn't require an impossibly large conspiracy.  The theory is already well developed, capable of making incredibly acurite predictions, and we even have photographic evidence that it's true.

25
Technology, Science & Alt Science / General and special relativity
« on: August 14, 2015, 11:28:34 AM »
Relativity is a complex yet mathematically elegant thing, and I wouldn't be surprised if that earthers didn't know the first thing about it.  Here is where I will explain relativity and take questions about it.

26
Technology, Science & Alt Science / How time proves quantom mechnics
« on: August 12, 2015, 12:51:27 PM »
For all you flat earthers who think that quantum mechanics is a lie, here is proof that you are wrong.

You can all agree that time exists, correct?  I mean, not even flat earthers can deny the existence of time.  You can remember the past but you are clueless about the future, it's pretty basic.

All laws of physics do not depend on time going a certain direction.  Let's say you drop a glass of water and it breaks, and then you pause time.  If you were to reverse the velocities of all particles of glass, particles of water, and particles of air then when you resume time the glass will reassemble and fly back up into your hand.  The only law of physics that is irreversible is entropy, which states that everything always goes from order to disorder in a closed system.  In essence, disorder is information because it takes more information to specify the state of a messy room then it does for a clean room, and information can never be destroyed.

If entropy is increasing then where is all this information coming from?  The answer is quantum uncertainty and randomness.  It is why the future is uncertain.  If entropy AKA quantum uncertainty were to suddenly stop then the future would be just as evident as the past and time would cease to exist.

27
Explaining something as counteractive as quantum mechanics is difficult, and explaining anything to a flat earther is difficult.  Combining the two makes for one formidable challenge, so here goes:

The first thing you must realize is that you have to learn to think outside of classical Newtonian mechanics.  Your brain is wired to survive on this world we find ourselves in and that does not require understanding the behavior of things as a quantum scale, so expect that this idea will challenge your way of thinking.  Everything seems to have a definite position and velocity, behave in a single easy to predict way, and the act of observing something doesn't seem to effect it.  When you get down to a quantum scale all these things you think you know are wrong, which seems insane but bear with me and remember that your brain is not wired to understand this.

Quantum objects move in a way that you cannot predict with certainty, you can only say the probability of it being in a certain place at a certain time.  Basically the particle "sniffs out" every single potability and then settles on one once it is observed.  It should be noted that when I say "observed" I mean that it is interacted with in such a way that it's possible to determine it's position.  The different possible locations of the particle form a wave pattern that can interfere with it's self as seen in the double slit experiment, which produces an interference paturn even if the photons, electrons, or any other fundamental particle are fired one at a time.  A way of thinking of this that I find helpful is a speck of dirt in a rain drop: at first it's all in one place and then it spreads out like a wave when it hits the ground, the dirt is more likely to be in the crests of the wave because there is more water there.

Another drastic revision that needs to be made to your classical way of thinking is about the certainty in an object's position and velocity.  In a nutshell Heisenberg's uncertainty principal states that the more you know about an object's position the less you can know about it's velocity and visa versa.  If you wanted to know the position and velocity of, say, an electron you would do that by firing a photon at it and seeing how it's altered.  The accuracy in which you can measure the position of the electron with this method is based on the wavelength you fire at it because your accuracy is always within one wavelength of that light.  The problem however is that wavelength is inversely proportional to the energy of the photon and the higher the energy is the more it disturbs the velocity of the electron.  All other experiments you could possibly preform on the electron are like this, it's not just a technological limitation but a fundamental law of the universe.  We know this because shooting light through a slit and making the slit thinner will make the light smear out when it gets thin enough because the small slit means that the low uncertainty in position (because we know that the photon is in that small slit) will make the uncertainty in velocity rise, causing the light to change directions and smear out.

Something that is commonly associated with quantum mechanics is the fact that things can have multiple states and collapses into one when observed, I will explain that in more detail.  The double slit experiment is the perfect example of this, because a particle goes through both slits, one slit, the other slit, and none of the slits at the same time as the probability wave passes.  The path that the particle finally settles upon is undefined.  If you try to measure a particle to see which slit it goes through then that will disturb it enough to collapse the quantum wave form and then the particles behave like particles and hit the screen in a way that you would expect if you put particles through the double slits, but removing the measurement devices causes the interference pattern to return.

Quantum entanglement is another interesting topic.  There is a property of all particles called "spin", the particle is not technically rotating but the analogy is still a good one.  Every particle has a set spin "speed" that's intrinsic and impossible to change, however the direction of the spin can change.  Photons have a spin of one and if you create two photons together in a process you know will produce photons with a combined spin of zero then those photons are now entangled.  Being quantum objects their spin is uncertain until measured, and so they are a superposition of both spin up and spin down at the same time.  If you measure one of the photons and it's spin up then you immediately know that the other one is spin down without measuring it which means that it's superposition has been collapsed, and if it's measured it will indeed have spin down.  Basically one photon collapsed the superposition of another without communicating with it, and this doesn't violate spacial relativity because classical information such as a message cannot be transmitted instantaneously this way.  You could argue that the spin of the photons was decided at the moment of their creation, but there are statistical experiments that have disproved this.

Anyway, if you have any questions feel free to post them, although I probably didn't have to tell you that.  I tried to be as concise as possible and explain this in simple terms, so this does not represent all that people know about quantum mechanics.

28
Flat Earth General / Quantum mechanics and relativity
« on: August 09, 2015, 10:40:58 AM »
Does the universe really work in a counterintuitive and strange yet mathematical precise way or are conspirators testing our gullability?  It seems pretty stupid to tell a lie that nobody will believe until they carefully analyze it, isn't a good lie supposed to be believable?  Discuss.

29
What if a government agent approached you claiming that Earth us flat and that there is a conspiracy to hide it, and that you will be paid $1,000,000 a year to keep it under your hat.  Would you do it?  I certainly wouldn't.

30
Flat Earth Debate / What we expect to see on a round Earth
« on: August 06, 2015, 12:33:25 AM »
I have a question for the flat earthers: what would you expect to observe on a round Earth that we do not observe in the real world?  Is there anything at all?  Please do tell.

Pages: [1] 2 3