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.


Messages - John Davis

Pages: 1 ... 431 432 [433] 434 435 ... 441
12961
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravitons... a discussion.
« on: September 04, 2007, 03:23:10 PM »
For one, what of the Pioneer anomaly?

To see other reasons why general relativity isn't "proven" look up Quintessence, dark matter, and "magical faeries that move stuff around simply to justify GR".

Also, there seems to be alot of study in alternatives to GR ( rel. MOND, etc) due to its "issues".

Course I guess we can ignore that, and call it "proven."
For one, what about it?

For two, you may need a refresher in how science works. GR has proven its worth. It's one of the most successfully tested theories ever. Yes, science still faces challenges, but I hope that you realize that we'll always have more to explain. I also hope that you'll realize that just because we can't explain sometime now, doesn't mean that GR is wrong. I suspect that you're confusing incomplete with wrong.
I think you are confusing "incomplete" with "proven".

Edit: speaking of refreshers on how science works, things can be proven wrong - not right.

12962
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Yet another gaping hole in the Flat Earth theory
« on: September 04, 2007, 03:16:16 PM »


You're mistaken. You don't seem to be able to follow a simple conversation, so let me walk you through it.

TomB, the fool, said:
* The basic movements of the cosmos cannot be adequately explained by gravity without massive amounts of hypothetical forms of dark-whatever which inherits the universe.

There is all the evidence we need right there to see that gravity does not line up linearly with mass and scale. That gravity acts differently under different situations.

I replied:
We know that the Earth is not accelerating upwards creating the sense of gravity on its surface. You can detect the Earth's rotation by observing the sky, examining Foucault's pendulums, and weather patterns. You can detect tidal forces with Eotvos's device. You can measure differences in 'g' by latitude and altitude. We know by the Cavendish experiment, recently added to the RE Primer by the way, that mass attracts according to a tried and tested formula.

Non sequitur. The Universe need never collapse and gravity work exactly as Newton said.

So TomB is attacking Newton's laws (FE removes all evidence for GR and disagrees with its most basic tenet.). He claims that without Dark Matter all sorts of horrible events will occur.
The universe's expansion is accelerating.  Without dark matter, quintessence, or whatever this is unexplanable by Newtonian Physics.

Quote
I state that the basic movements, (in example, the collapse of the Universe) can be explained as Newton described gravity. Do you have an example where you can describe the basic movements of the Universe better than Newton, without relying of proofs that FE rejects?
The examples where newtonian physics fails to predict basic movements are well documented. 

Quote
Regardless, with GR out of the picture, Newton is the best, common ground that we have between the theories.
Not that I say GR is out of the picture, but there are several non-GR theories out there that are better than Newton.  I suggest you educate yourself. 

12963
Flat Earth Debate / Re: NASA - Explain this one?
« on: September 04, 2007, 03:03:11 PM »
Orbital. Mind. Control. Lasers.

12964
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravitons... a discussion.
« on: September 04, 2007, 03:01:35 PM »
For one, what of the Pioneer anomaly?

To see other reasons why general relativity isn't "proven" look up Quintessence, dark matter, and "magical faeries that move stuff around simply to justify GR".

Also, there seems to be alot of study in alternatives to GR ( rel. MOND, etc) due to its "issues".

Course I guess we can ignore that, and call it "proven."

12965
Flat Earth Debate / Re: 150 Foot Ice Walls
« on: September 04, 2007, 02:44:50 PM »
There is no icewall.

12966
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravitons... a discussion.
« on: September 04, 2007, 02:44:02 PM »
Strange, there are problems in it yet Relativity has been proven
Show me.

12967
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Yet another gaping hole in the Flat Earth theory
« on: September 04, 2007, 02:22:16 PM »
gravity work exactly as Newton said.
o rly?

1) Newton was wrong
2) He didn't give a mechanism either
3) You fail

12968
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Yet another gaping hole in the Flat Earth theory
« on: September 04, 2007, 02:21:11 PM »
We have a good idea, try searching "string theory."
String theory rocks.  If you want a theory that can't predict anything and isn't falsifiable.  Might as well believe in flat earth.
Quote
It is now, however, an unsolved problem in physics. Just because we don't know the answer now, doesn't mean we can't find out later.
It also goes by Unified Theory, and you missed the point.

12969
Flat Earth Debate / Re: The World Government Conspiracy
« on: September 04, 2007, 09:49:45 AM »
They don't want us to believe it - there is no conspiracy.  There are simply misviewing the data.

Satellites are caught up in aether eddies that form predictable patterns.  Aether also has properties that cause light to act strangely when introduced to barriers in reference earthes.  There is no ice wall - the earth is fractally recursive. 

There need be no conspiracy.

12970
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Who was your favourite Beatle?
« on: September 04, 2007, 08:17:42 AM »
George, John second

12971
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof of FE
« on: September 03, 2007, 05:35:22 AM »
Prove the basis and inductive hypothesis rather than just stating them please.

You have much to learn. That's all MacKenzie does, and when you ask if anyone has done the experiment themselves, she insults you. Of course, she isn't being serious, but it's always fun to entertain yourself with the possibility of her believing the shit she spews from herpies infested mouth.
narc = MacKenzie = a she?  Whaaaa?

12972
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat Earth Geography
« on: September 03, 2007, 03:30:41 AM »


Thats what it *looks* like.   If you were to compute any force (etc) on any referencial earth, you need to take into account what is happenig in all of them, and compute the experienced result.


So do I exist in every plane simultaneously?
Yes

12973
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat Earth Geography
« on: September 03, 2007, 02:46:53 AM »


Thats what it *looks* like.   If you were to compute any force (etc) on any referencial earth, you need to take into account what is happenig in all of them, and compute the experienced result.

12974
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat Earth Geography
« on: September 03, 2007, 02:42:39 AM »
Conceptually, to compute the sum based on the zero earth its as simple as saying "half the earths you travel 50 miles, the other half you travel 0, so the end observable result is 25" hwoever, its oversimplifying it and ignoring the statistics involved.

12975
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat Earth Geography
« on: September 03, 2007, 02:36:37 AM »
The flat earth is an infinitely regressive large plane accelerating upwards.

Geological regression/transgression describe the falling and rising of bodies of water on earth, respectively. I fail to see how your regressive plane theory helps create the never-ending earth surface of which you describe.
I'm not talking about geological regression
Quote
There is no "ice wall" or barrier that we cannot cross.

So we *can* cross the ice wall?
No, there is no wall.  How can you cross something that doesnt exist?
Quote
The center of this plane is both in the North and South Poles.

A plane as described in mathematics is linear and infinite so it cannot have a center. But let us assume for the sake of your example that there is a center point. If the center of the plane were the north and south poles then everything between the plane would not exist as the earth would be a single dot.
Its fractal.
Quote
As one crosses perimeter south pole, one enters into the world that the south pole is the center of the earth.

Did you mean to say 'north' in place of the word I accentuated in the above quote? If not, I'm really confused.
No I didn't - .  Really though, one crosses into both at hte same time, when you get down to it.
Quote
When one then cross the perimeter of North pole whent he south pole is center one enters the earth where the north pole is center.  In this way the earth is fractal.

By definition, a fractal is a self-similar fragmented geometric shape with seemingly infinite repetitions on any magnification scale. This doesn't apply to your example because you defined the earth as a single plane, which is not a fractal but rather a euclidean real-line.
Yes plane was not the best word.  My apologies.
Quote
What we end up "experiencing" since we obviously don't experience either of these is the sum of all iterations of the earth based on the 0-earth.

Define the 0-earth and how we experience the sum of the iterations of the 0-earth for me, please. I don't follow.
I think You need to understandt he basics before we get into that.
Quote
Obviously, this is correct.  If anyone has any of their own experimental proof otherwise, please let me know.

I'm having trouble conceptualizing your example without thinking of the earth as a sphere. Can you explain how the earth can be a flat circle that allows people to walk to the edge of the south pole and suddenly end up at the north pole and vice versa? If the north pole is the center of the circle while the south pole is the circumference, then walking to any of the infinite south pole points will put you at the north pole, but what happens when you walk right back to the north pole? Is your body's mass instantly redistributed infinitely to the south pole circumference and if so, how can you stay alive through this experience or reverse the experience?

They don't end up at hte north pole when they pass across the south pole.

Lets say the south pole is the center of the earth we are referencing, and the north pole is the perimeter.  If one were to "zoom in" on the south pole, one would see that in fact, its actually just the edge of a reference of the earth with the south pole at the perimeter.  However, we cannot "zoom in" to detect this, because as we observe it, we pass to a different reference of earth.  REALLY though, we *really* couldnt observe this because we observe the sum based on the zero earth, but thats too complicated to discuss right now.  Its simpler conceptually to put it as stated above.

12976
Flat Earth Debate / Flat Earth Geography
« on: September 03, 2007, 01:59:17 AM »
It is obvious there are some disagreements about geography in the FE vs RE.

The flat earth is an infinitely regressive large plane accelerating upwards.  There is no "ice wall" or barrier that we cannot cross.    The center of this plane is both in the North and South Poles.

Let me explain -

As one crosses perimeter south pole, one enters into the world that the south pole is the center of the earth.  When one then cross the perimeter of North pole whent he south pole is center one enters the earth where the north pole is center.  In this way the earth is fractal.

What we end up "experiencing" since we obviously don't experience either of these is the sum of all iterations of the earth based on the 0-earth. 

Obviously, this is correct.  If anyone has any of their own experimental proof otherwise, please let me know.

12977
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof of FE
« on: September 03, 2007, 01:20:08 AM »
Prove the basis and inductive hypothesis rather than just stating them please.

12978
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravitons... a discussion.
« on: September 03, 2007, 12:10:16 AM »
perhaps, but he's not in this skit.
Alright.  Rewrite the skit when you have taken a physics class that teaches General Relativity. 

Einstein himself admits that this is a glaring problem in Relativity in his writings to Lorenz.

12979
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Atmosphere and the Solar System, for Starters
« on: September 02, 2007, 02:14:39 PM »
How can an object KNOW anything? What the fuck is this mindless shit?

Ignoring the question hints at ignorance.
I'm tempted to add this to TheEngineer's claim list: Objects know things.
people are a subset of objects, people can know things, some objects can know things.

12980
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: South Pole
« on: September 01, 2007, 02:42:19 PM »
im in antartica right now on a laptop
trace his ip imo

12981
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Horizon
« on: August 31, 2007, 07:05:36 PM »
Horizon is in the background.

I don't see it.
I agree, I see what seems to be a river or a large street approaching to top right corner and it touches to top of the picture.  But no horizon

12982
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: My Computer Has A Soul
« on: August 31, 2007, 05:25:31 AM »
You can't just say "something has a soul if its intelligent or sentient." 

I can say anything I wish. I didn't say that however. I was talking about sentience and not a soul. We already established earlier on that this thread has no purpose regarding that discussion. No living person on this planet can DEFINE WHAT A SOUL IS, and none of you have certainly done that lofty milestone.

Thus, nothing said in this thread has any possible way to be defeated, or won, because none of you CAN DEFINE WHAT A SOUL IS, AND THUS CANNOT ASSIGN ONE TO ANYTHING!
I can define anything I wish.

Edit:

And from what I've read of your posts, you should neither be one to criticize prententiousness or to claim you know more about AI than anyone else here.

12983
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: My Computer Has A Soul
« on: August 31, 2007, 03:44:55 AM »
B.  A computer overun with strong code...???  That code came from where?  Thin Air?  I think not.  A HUMAN wrote the code.
It could be random data.

Many artificial life experiments start with random or semi-random data.

12984
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: My Computer Has A Soul
« on: August 31, 2007, 03:31:39 AM »
However, I'm not even talking about intelligence or sentience.   You can't just say "something has a soul if its intelligent or sentient." 

And so I ask again,
Quote
Do you have anything to backup your outlandish claims?


Anyways, as far as AI goes, I think people would  much rather have a proof for  P = NP than something that passes the turing test or a robot that can learn to walk.

12985
I wonder how many people have actually observed this phenomena. I'm certain every noob to the boards knows about it though. It is interesting to me that the majority of RE questions come from unobserved "knowledge" of something, as if the only reason they don't believe is because of something their public school taught them, and they blindly accepted.

For once, Narc makes a good point.

You honestly never think people are not capable of being on a ship? I've been forced to use B.C. Ferries many a time, I can watch islands sink or rise depending on which direction I'm going. I have seen this happen in real life.

I think he means more generally.  Although I do think a great deal of people that post about ships haven't actually seen it happen. 

12986
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: My Computer Has A Soul
« on: August 30, 2007, 06:39:17 PM »
No one has claimed the prize for the Turing test.  So if your computer has a soul then go take the test and collect the prize.   
So you say something must be "intelligent" to have a soul? 

Do you have anything to backup your outlandish claims?

12987
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Gravity changes.
« on: August 30, 2007, 04:45:01 PM »

12988
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Gravity changes.
« on: August 30, 2007, 04:28:44 PM »
It shows the nigh impossibility of a layperson performing such an experiment thus making it non-falsifiable to the general public.

12989
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Please explain
« on: August 30, 2007, 04:24:35 PM »
I will not use the search function. You should have posted a link to the thread. But I will not go any further because this forum is beginning to seem more and more like a joke; and is filled with people that babble about complete NONSENSE. (Even people that are on the same side of my points.) Furthermore, I can't believe people this day in age don't understand that the earth is Round...There are so many reasons why its not flat it's mind-boggling.

I say anybody here that is a "round-earther" should find something else to do with their free time and let the "FE'ers" die, to put it bluntly. I found this website through a public computer and was curious at the time. I don't imagine I'll be back. Thank You.
If you want to pay me for my time to use the search function for you, you'll find my rates are very competitive.  Let me know and I'll set up a paylink.

12990
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: My Computer Has A Soul
« on: August 30, 2007, 04:19:32 PM »
Of course it has a soul - but the real question:

Does it dream of electric sheep?

Pages: 1 ... 431 432 [433] 434 435 ... 441