Is Science the new Religion ?

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

How is saying that the earth is meant to be an oblate spheroid but non of NASA's CGI or so called pictures confirm this incoherent ?

To what degree is the earth said to be oblate? Would you expect this degree to be noticeable in photos of the earth from space?

How is saying that the earth is meant to be an oblate spheroid but non of NASA's CGI or so called pictures confirm this incoherent ?

Because the oblateness is to subtle to be visible from space.  However, the French Geodesic Mission set out to measure the oblateness in the 18th century.

More like you have no coherent response.

No, it's more like you don't understand what you're arguing against.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 If this is what the people of your scientific religion call evidence or proof it is little wonder that millions of people don't believe in your religion.

I have never seen anything that would suggest time it self does exist it is just how we measure the passing of minutes hours  days ect.

Nobody has ever travelled through time and nobody ever will.

Nobody has ever slowed time down or  speeded time up and no one ever will.

I have no need to waste my "time"and  learn about your nonsensical religion

True Science= Fantastic, helpful, gets fairly accurate "facts" etc..

Hypothetical "science"= Fun, but not facts or science in the correct form. Though unfortunately this is the issue, it is spouted as absolute fact and nincompoops parrot the same sentiment. See above quote...

The latter is a religion, belief, or whatever you want to call it...Anything but science or fact.

Sorry kids

No wonder that this comes from a ME 

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:56:59 AM

How is saying that the earth is meant to be an oblate spheroid but non of NASA's CGI or so called pictures confirm this incoherent ?

Because the oblateness is to subtle to be visible from space.  However, the French Geodesic Mission set out to measure the oblateness in the 18th century.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:56:59 AM

More like you have no coherent response.

No, it's more like you don't understand what you're arguing against.

The pictures and images of earth Nasa have given us show a round planet not an oblate spheroid.

So you are saying the Earth is an oblate spheroid but you can't tell from the pictures and CGI or sorry not CGI the hundreds of pictures Nasa stitched together using a computer to produce the Blue Marble ?

Ok 

Do Santa and the Tooth Fairy have anything to do with it?

I think they must have only Santa and the Tooth Fairys magic combined could make an oblate spheroid look like a circle.

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:49:07 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 

Yes, this is what "time dilation" stands for. That things happen slower. I do not know what "time itself goes slower" even means.

Quote from: markjo on May 21, 2017, 07:51:50 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:56:59 AM

How is saying that the earth is meant to be an oblate spheroid but non of NASA's CGI or so called pictures confirm this incoherent ?

Because the oblateness is to subtle to be visible from space.  However, the French Geodesic Mission set out to measure the oblateness in the 18th century.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:56:59 AM

More like you have no coherent response.

No, it's more like you don't understand what you're arguing against.

The pictures and images of earth Nasa have given us show a perfectly round planet not an oblate spheroid.

How can you tell from the images available whether it's perfectly round or slightly oblate? Have you tried to measure any of them? If the polar diameter of earth in an image is 2000 pixels, how many pixels would the equatorial diameter be using the shape of, say, the WGS84 ellipsoid?

So you are saying the Earth is an oblate spheroid but you can't tell from the pictures ...?

Yes. Have you calculated how obvious (or not) it should be yet? Do you know how to do that?

Do Santa and the Tooth Fairy have anything to do with it?

No. You're just being silly.

I think they must have only Santa and the Tooth Fairys magic combined could make an oblate spheroid look like a perfect circle.

You might think that. You'd be wrong. You're merely explaining why treating the earth as a perfect sphere works well enough for many purposes, but only very precise situations require the slightly more accurate, but much more complex, ellipsoidal model.

Quote from: Babyhighspeed on May 21, 2017, 06:23:46 AM

True Science= Fantastic, helpful, gets fairly accurate "facts" etc..

Hypothetical "science"= Fun, but not facts or science in the correct form. Though unfortunately this is the issue, it is spouted as absolute fact and nincompoops parrot the same sentiment. See above quote...

The latter is a religion, belief, or whatever you want to call it...Anything but science or fact.

Sorry kids

No wonder that this comes from a ME 

What because nonsense masquerading under the guise of "science" isn't welcome in my field?

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 08:57:24 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:49:07 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 

Yes, this is what "time dilation" stands for. That things happen slower. I do not know what "time itself goes slower" even means.

You hit the nail on the head that many people of your religion do not understand basic logic.

I will give some examples to help:

Using your religions logic.

I smashed my clock yesterday and it stopped working.

Because my clock stopped working I stopped time it self.

I placed a magnet near my clock and it slowed it down.

Because the magnet slowed the clock down magnets can slow time it self down.

A clock stopping or slowing down does not prove that time has been effected at all it just means the medium we use to measure time has been effected.

Hope that helps

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 09:35:21 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 08:57:24 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:49:07 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 

Yes, this is what "time dilation" stands for. That things happen slower. I do not know what "time itself goes slower" even means.

You hit the nail on the head that many people of your religion do not understand basic logic.

I will give some examples to help:

Using your religions logic.

I smashed my clock yesterday and it stopped working.

Because my clock stopped working I stopped time it self.

I placed a magnet near my clock and it slowed it down.

Because the magnet slowed the clock down magnets can slow time it self down.

A clock stopping or slowing down does not prove that time has been effected at all it just means the medium we use to measure time has been effected.

So why do clocks go slower in airplanes? And why do they go exactly as much slower as the Lorentz equation predicts?

So why do clocks go slower in airplanes?

Flight phobia! 

Quote from: User324 on May 21, 2017, 08:58:38 AM

Quote from: Babyhighspeed on May 21, 2017, 06:23:46 AM

True Science= Fantastic, helpful, gets fairly accurate "facts" etc..

Hypothetical "science"= Fun, but not facts or science in the correct form. Though unfortunately this is the issue, it is spouted as absolute fact and nincompoops parrot the same sentiment. See above quote...

The latter is a religion, belief, or whatever you want to call it...Anything but science or fact.

Sorry kids

No wonder that this comes from a ME 

What because nonsense masquerading under the guise of "science" isn't welcome in my field?

Where do you draw the line between true science and hypothetical science?

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 09:50:20 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 09:35:21 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 08:57:24 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:49:07 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 

Yes, this is what "time dilation" stands for. That things happen slower. I do not know what "time itself goes slower" even means.

You hit the nail on the head that many people of your religion do not understand basic logic.

I will give some examples to help:

Using your religions logic.

I smashed my clock yesterday and it stopped working.

Because my clock stopped working I stopped time it self.

I placed a magnet near my clock and it slowed it down.

Because the magnet slowed the clock down magnets can slow time it self down.

A clock stopping or slowing down does not prove that time has been effected at all it just means the medium we use to measure time has been effected.

So why do clocks go slower in airplanes? And why do they go exactly as much slower as the Lorentz equation predicts?

You scientific fundamentalists are hard work.
Why do people of your religion believe anything ?
And why do they argue about things they have not verified for themselves ?

It is irrelevant whether clocks slow down or not on a plane.

It is irrelevant if someone has retro fitted a formula to support their nonsensical hypothesis.

Clocks only measure seconds and hours.

Time is a word we use to describe the passing of seconds hours minutes days ect.

Nobody has travelled through time.

Nobody has slowed time down.

Nobody has speeded time up.
 
And nobody ever will.

This is because time doesn't physically exist.

Nobody has travelled at the speed of light and nobody ever will.

It is all nonsense only scientific fundamentalists and stupid and gullable people believe.

Right I'm off to my nearest church to argue with Christians about Jesus will probobly get more sense out of them.

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 09:56:26 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 09:50:20 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 09:35:21 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 08:57:24 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:49:07 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 

Yes, this is what "time dilation" stands for. That things happen slower. I do not know what "time itself goes slower" even means.

You hit the nail on the head that many people of your religion do not understand basic logic.

I will give some examples to help:

Using your religions logic.

I smashed my clock yesterday and it stopped working.

Because my clock stopped working I stopped time it self.

I placed a magnet near my clock and it slowed it down.

Because the magnet slowed the clock down magnets can slow time it self down.

A clock stopping or slowing down does not prove that time has been effected at all it just means the medium we use to measure time has been effected.

So why do clocks go slower in airplanes? And why do they go exactly as much slower as the Lorentz equation predicts?

It is irrelevant whether clocks slow down or not on a plane.

Ok.

You hit the nail on the head that many people of your religion do not understand basic logic.

I will give some examples to help:

Using your religions logic.

I smashed my clock yesterday and it stopped working.

Because my clock stopped working I stopped time it self.

I placed a magnet near my clock and it slowed it down.

Because the magnet slowed the clock down magnets can slow time it self down.

A clock stopping or slowing down does not prove that time has been effected at all it just means the medium we use to measure time has been effected.

Hope that helps

I don't accept the argument that RiF is making here, but I do think this is a rather clever post. I would like it if someone expounded a little more on why this line of reasoning is incorrect. (I know in my head, but I don't think I can articulate it well.)

Stop quoting eachother without deleting the old quotes. It's really annoying...

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 09:50:20 AM

You hit the nail on the head that many people of your religion do not understand basic logic.

I will give some examples to help:

Using your religions logic.

I smashed my clock yesterday and it stopped working.

Because my clock stopped working I stopped time it self.

I placed a magnet near my clock and it slowed it down.

Because the magnet slowed the clock down magnets can slow time it self down.

A clock stopping or slowing down does not prove that time has been effected at all it just means the medium we use to measure time has been effected.

Hope that helps

I don't accept the argument that RiF is making here, but I do think this is a rather clever post. I would like it if someone expounded a little more on why this line of reasoning is incorrect. (I know in my head, but I don't think I can articulate it well.)

His line of reasoning is not really incorrect. there are many reasons why a clock may slow down. So if you want to test Special Relativity, do not put the clock beside a magnet.

When the clock in your bedroom stops at all, it is either broken or your bedroom dashes with light speed through the universe. Hard to tell, before you have your morning coffee and remember that you smashed it yesterday.






EDIT: For the purists: I know, it does not work that way, because reference frame and stuff...

agreed that the "new science" denies a Creator.   ("God" is reportedly code for doG-ma or religion which denies spirituality).

This thread got me to add science to the two known (to me at least) control structures: religion and government.  fake science is indeed another.  consider the hiding of proven breakthroughs at the NIH and CDC and the complete nonsense of global warming and the scare of running out of oil.  on and on.  the better, private oil companies never call it "fossil fuel"!

sorry for the tangent.  my point is that Creator deniers tend to be leftists/liberals/socialists/communists and put their faith in the government.
Creator embracers or the far right want their religious doGma forced on the voters.
now i consider those who blindly believe "studies" as promoted by the AMA, etc.  doctors never consider fake science from the AMA that was initially a pay-to-promote organization.  some say it still is.

To answer the OP's question, it seems that science was always linked with or hiding from religion.  chemists claimed to be alchemists so that the religions would leave them alone because they were convinced they were nuts.  perhaps, the vatican had to co-op many scientists to further their control structure.  so i guess as i ramble on, sorry, my answer is YES!   

Science was religion in all past of the world. But it was accepting the God. But updated fake/Darwinist science made [it a co-op] to real science. This is a religion too but denying to the real science. It should be destroyed is an Emergency coded task.

Quote from: rabinoz on May 19, 2017, 03:38:19 PM

If we take the diameter of the earth as 7,918 miles, this makes the earth to moon distance of 241,728 miles. Looks about right to me.

You did not show the math.
I guess you are using pythagoras equation.

0.94185 ° (this is half your 1.88 °).
3975 miles is the radius of the Earth.

3975 miles / tan(0.94185 °) = 241,790 miles (Earth to the moon distance)

Or in metric:
6400 km is the radius of the Earth.
6400 km / tan(0.94185 °) = 389,297 km (Earth to the moon distance)

Yes, funny how these things work out when you really look into it.

Where do you draw the line between true science and hypothetical science?

Easy.. The scientific world I live in (and true science) is a simple method.

Example...I have an idea about a compact pressure fed turbo pump. I say it will flow 15k cfm at 8k psi... So I build this design and test it, either it works or it doesn't. If it works, I will continue testing it, if it does not, then I will see the failure, make changes, and test again.

I then will record all the stats of it, how much power it consumes, efficiency, heat soak etc etc etc.

This is science...Hard facts... It's binary, a simple yes or no.

Hypothetical science, origins, macro evolution, general relativity, string theory etc etc etc. Although I enjoy string theory, and I find it quite plausible, I am not touting it as fact. Nor do I call people ignorant for not thinking it is fact. I even find alot of plausibility in GE.

Simply this...I believe the higher power I have faith in is a fact. Hence the bolded word.. I can cite much circumstantial evidence for both a higher power, and the exact higher power I believe in...Though in the end, I am fully aware, despite whatever circumstantial evidence, it is a faith and a belief.

The issue I have with "hypothetical science" is all the yuppies cite "fact fact fact" "science science science" when it is neither. Then call all who don't agree cavemen, simplitons, and morons.

When in reality it is "faith faith faith" "belief belief belief"..

Although I enjoy string theory, and I find it quite plausible..

Yes, Babybrain. Tell us all about it.

Quote from: Babyhighspeed on May 21, 2017, 02:19:15 PM

Although I enjoy string theory, and I find it quite plausible..

Yes, Babybrain. Tell us all about it.

I know I am picking on your religion and hitting a nerve, but you don't have to get snippy cup cake.

You are still sexy though...However, better start walking west, the Google balloon is moving further and further.

It is irrelevant whether clocks slow down or not on a plane.

It is irrelevant if someone has retro fitted a formula to support their nonsensical hypothesis.

Clocks only measure seconds and hours.

1. It is not irrelevant. That's the whole point of this argument. You have yet to provide an explanation.

2. Citation needed for your retrofit claim.

3. Get a better clock?

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:49:07 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 06:36:11 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 06:00:11 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 05:42:59 AM

Quote from: FalseProphet on May 21, 2017, 04:50:45 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on May 21, 2017, 03:58:45 AM

You can accept calculations that support a hypothesis and be sure that's what will happen when no one as travelled at the speed of light  and no one ever will.

We can observe particles that travel with almost light speed. They follow the Lorentz Transformation. Even things like airplanes measurably follow the Lorentz transformation. So time dilation exists, it is a proven fact. Which part of it is a "religion"?

You say we as if we can all witness particles that travel at "almost light speed"

What you should said is someone has said that these people say they have witnessed particles almost travelling at the speed of light.

Well, many people, not some. It is routine.

So either every experimental physician without exception is a fraud or time dilation is real. Decide by yourself, what is more likely.

It does not require faith in the sense you mean it. It requires the same amount of trust that you have when you enter a bus and expect that the bus driver is not drunken.

I disagree they could just be mistaken not necessarily a fraud personally I don't have the faith to believe them or I'm  just not stupid or gullable enough.

How does me getting on a bus and believing the driver is not drunk
the same as me believing Einsteins theorys.

No, you just have no idea how these experiments and observations are conducted. Nor do you know why Special Relativity was postulated and how it was tested. Nor do you have the intellectual curiosity to learn about it.

How is it possible that every experimenter is "mistaken", when all he has to do is measure if clocks in airplanes go slower than clocks at rest? Or when he just have to measure the speed of mesons and note that they exist longer as their known properties would allow without time dilation?

You may not know that clocks only measure seconds and hours just because a clock allegedly goes slower on a plane does not prove that time itself goes slower.
 If this is what the people of your scientific religion call evidence or proof it is little wonder that millions of people don't believe in your religion.

I have never seen anything that would suggest time it self does exist it is just how we measure the passing of minutes hours  days ect.

Nobody has ever travelled through time and nobody ever will.

Nobody has ever slowed time down or  speeded time up and no one ever will.

I have no need to waste my "time"and  learn about your nonsensical religion

In your ignorance you are of course incorrect.
The muon time dilation experiment says otherwise, but as this is most likely outwith your comprehension level perhaps you should instead look at the following experiment carried out in the 1970s

The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In October 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four cesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks against others that remained at the United States Naval Observatory. When reunited, the three sets of clocks were found to disagree with one another, and their differences were consistent with the predictions of special and general relativity. The results were published in Science in 1972, so you can go and check.

Most likely you will throw your hands up in horror and deny this ever took place, or else you'll make up some other equally irrational excuse to refute its validity, such are the ways of the ill-educated But in the end the choice is yours, to learn or to forever wallow in self enforced ignorance. Regardless of what you think the experiment took place and stands as proof for SR.

Quote from: User324 on May 21, 2017, 10:37:48 AM

Where do you draw the line between true science and hypothetical science?

Easy.. The scientific world I live in (and true science) is a simple method.

Example...I have an idea about a compact pressure fed turbo pump. I say it will flow 15k cfm at 8k psi... So I build this design and test it, either it works or it doesn't. If it works, I will continue testing it, if it does not, then I will see the failure, make changes, and test again.

I then will record all the stats of it, how much power it consumes, efficiency, heat soak etc etc etc.

That's engineering.

This is science...Hard facts... It's binary, a simple yes or no.

Simple yes or no what? The hard facts are the the earth is spherical. Period. Yet people go on and on about how it isn't. Look at this website.

Hypothetical science, origins, macro evolution, general relativity, string theory etc etc etc.

All of those are scientific topics. GR has been widely tested and never yet failed. Evolution fits the evidence and nothing more plausible has displaced it. Yet. Origins of life and the universe are more difficult to test. String theory is still very much in its infancy - it's not been unambiguously tested. Yet.

Although I enjoy string theory, and I find it quite plausible, I am not touting it as fact. Nor do I call people ignorant for not thinking it is fact. I even find alot of plausibility in GE.

OK.

Simply this...I believe the higher power I have faith in is a fact. Hence the bolded word.. I can cite much circumstantial evidence for both a higher power, and the exact higher power I believe in...Though in the end, I am fully aware, despite whatever circumstantial evidence, it is a faith and a belief.

The issue I have with "hypothetical science" is all the yuppies cite "fact fact fact" "science science science" when it is neither.

Are the people you have the issue with scientists? "Yuppies" is not a very useful description, but suggests they aren't.
 

Then call all who don't agree cavemen, simplitons, and morons.

When in reality it is "faith faith faith" "belief belief belief"..

The question is: is there unambiguous evidence for what is claimed? If not yet, should it be possible to devise a test?

Faith is for ideas that can't be tested. That is outside the realm of science. "Belief" is vague: "I believe in God" - fine, but there's no test possible to test whether you're right or not. "I believe the result of the experiment means this..." means there needs to be a better experiment or better analysis of the result to reach a conclusive result.

See the difference? Probably not.

religion
rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/Submit
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms:   faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology; More
a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"
a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.
"consumerism is the new religion"

Another scientific fundamentalist in denial.

Science is not "a superhuman controlling power" and in particular not "a personal God or gods".

How is saying that the earth is meant to be an oblate spheroid but non of NASA's CGI or so called pictures confirm this incoherent ?

More like you have no coherent response.

Yes, I have a very "coherent response" and it's even very relevant.
And it's much "More like you have" have never even really looked at the claimed dimensions of the earth!

The currently accepted figures seem to be: polar diameter = 12,714 km and equatorial diameter = 12,756 km.
Making the difference only 0.34% or 1 part in 298, so the earth is an oblate spheroid, but so close to a sphere that a photo of it looks round. See this photo from the EPIC on DSCOVR: On that photo, as near as I can determine the width (equatorial) is 850 pixels and the height is 845 pixels.
So the diameters differ by 0.59%, nearly double what it "should be", but a pixel or two would make all the difference. To add to the problem, the atmosphere causes a blur of a few kilometres all around, making accurate measurement difficult.

But, the whole point is that the earth is very close to being a perfect sphere and this is not a new discovery!

Spherical Earth
The realization that the figure of the Earth is more accurately described as an ellipsoid dates to the 17th century, as described by Isaac Newton in Principia. In the early 19th century, the flattening of the earth ellipsoid was determined to be of the order of 1/300 (Delambre, Everest). The modern value as determined by the US DoD World Geodetic System since the 1960s is close to 1/298.25.

So please, before making outlandish claims, read a bit more and find out about the subject you are ridiculing.

Quote from: User324 on May 21, 2017, 10:37:48 AM

Where do you draw the line between true science and hypothetical science?

Easy.. The scientific world I live in (and true science) is a simple method.

Example...I have an idea about a compact pressure fed turbo pump. I say it will flow 15k cfm at 8k psi... So I build this design and test it, either it works or it doesn't. If it works, I will continue testing it, if it does not, then I will see the failure, make changes, and test again.
I then will record all the stats of it, how much power it consumes, efficiency, heat soak etc etc etc.

This is science...Hard facts... It's binary, a simple yes or no.

Try to look further than your own profession. Not everything is ME.
And even in ME its not binary at all, it's about probabilities...

Hypothetical science, origins, macro evolution, general relativity, string theory etc etc etc. Although I enjoy string theory, and I find it quite plausible, I am not touting it as fact. Nor do I call people ignorant for not thinking it is fact. I even find alot of plausibility in GE.

You know that a whole lot of chemistry/biology etc. is "hypothetical" to some degree, and they work with "models" that work in real life, but you do not know whether or not those really are true? Aditionally, those models or some "hard facts" we have nowdays started out as "hypothetical science" back in the days.

Hypothetical science, origins, macro evolution, general relativity, string theory etc etc etc. Although I enjoy string theory, and I find it quite plausible, I am not touting it as fact. Nor do I call people ignorant for not thinking it is fact. I even find alot of plausibility in GE.

Simply this...I believe the higher power I have faith in is a fact. Hence the bolded word.. I can cite much circumstantial evidence for both a higher power, and the exact higher power I believe in...Though in the end, I am fully aware, despite whatever circumstantial evidence, it is a faith and a belief.

The issue I have with "hypothetical science" is all the yuppies cite "fact fact fact" "science science science" when it is neither. Then call all who don't agree cavemen, simplitons, and morons.

When in reality it is "faith faith faith" "belief belief belief"..

I'm rather sure there is more evidence for GR, macro evolution etc than there is for a higher power. Because there is no evidence for a higher power.

http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html?m=1

Those proof only that the writer has bad education.