Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy

  • 540 Replies
  • 58930 Views
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #420 on: February 01, 2020, 09:10:50 PM »

1: a infinite plain has no center.
2: all particles have Gravity: a field that stretch out in all direction, for a infinite distance.
3: the thickness of the plain is unknown, will this make a difference?
   the density, and composition of the plain is unknown.
   What would it have to be, to have Gravity at (9.8m/s-2) at it’s surface?
We find our selves in a pickle.
A. Can a object stand on the plane and not be drawn into it?
The object creating a in balance of gravity causing a collapse of the plane.
B. There can be no orbital mechanics with an infinite plain, no weather satellites, no GPS, no exploration of outer planets, not even men walking on the moon.
C. How would tides work?
D. As for point 0,0,0 any point you choose will do.
E. I have a hard time seeing the earth disk with its dome above it, any where on the infinite plain. (point 0,0,0)?
Your thoughts on each point be nice.

The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #421 on: February 01, 2020, 09:45:13 PM »
Yes
All those would have been great to pick on.
Except the one timies chose - 0-0-0.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #422 on: February 01, 2020, 10:48:08 PM »

1: a infinite plain has no center.
2: all particles have Gravity: a field that stretch out in all direction, for a infinite distance.
3: the thickness of the plain is unknown, will this make a difference?
   the density, and composition of the plain is unknown.
   What would it have to be, to have Gravity at (9.8m/s-2) at it’s surface?
We find our selves in a pickle.
A. Can a object stand on the plane and not be drawn into it?
The object creating a in balance of gravity causing a collapse of the plane.
B. There can be no orbital mechanics with an infinite plain, no weather satellites, no GPS, no exploration of outer planets, not even men walking on the moon.
C. How would tides work?
D. As for point 0,0,0 any point you choose will do.
E. I have a hard time seeing the earth disk with its dome above it, any where on the infinite plain. (point 0,0,0)?
Your thoughts on each point be nice.
1: Doesn't matter.
2: The gravitational above the infinite plane is constant and directed down into the plane.
3: Is comparatively easy to calculate and one reference did do that:
Quote from: StackExchange, Physics
Gravitational force when standing on an infinite disc
Just plugging in some numbers to see what we get. The gravitational constant is G=6.67×10−11 Nm2/kg. If the layer of mass is d meters thick and made of a material with the same mean mass density of the Earth (ρ=5.5⋅103 kg/m3) . . . . . . .
In order to give 9.8 m/s2 the disk would have to be 4.3⋅103 kilometers thick. Have in mind that the diameter of the Earth is about 12×103 kilometers.
So it's quite a reasonable thickness.

But as a flat-Earth "model" I think it "solves" one problem, gravity, but only partially then creates many more as you point out - especially your B, C, D above, for example:
B: What holds the Sun, Moon, planets and stars "up there" and causes their weird circling patterns.

And it still requires a flat-Earth "map" which impossible for a number of reasons.

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #423 on: February 02, 2020, 01:34:18 AM »
Over to me

Well i appear to be playing ball by myself because you refuse to yet again answer Where 0-0-0 is.


Ironically you smuggl just one post before your last, with this tidbit

OK let's see if you can follow this and I'll keep it as simple as possible for you to follow.
I said way in the beginning in one of my supporting posts that large stellar masses have been shown to collapse due to their own inherent gravity.


Ok smugass
Lets see if you can follow this.
A finite large celestial body with a definitive center collpases into a star or plaent or singularity of some kind - is your choice to use as an example of what would happen with an infinite plane.

Right...
So ill ask again.
Wheres 0-0-0?

I presented a string of points.
You chose instead to whine and cry about how superior you are.
Im not smart.
Congrats to you for being smart.
Please justify why and where we can find 0-0-0 on an inf plane of finite thickness

Ill end with your own quote bounced back to you.


With that now explained to you in simple easy to follow terms, do you still think it was an afterthought?

Going by your last post it appears that your not that interested in the science but more interested in catching me out. Why is that? Is the science too tricky for you to follow? Tell you what you stick to your page of iffy maths if it makes you happy.

Do you honestly think there is such a place as 000 on an infinite plane?
We have a bit of a standoff here as you appear to be very reluctant for you to pit your 'science' against my peer-reviewed papers. I just wonder why.

Ok finally the question is addressed... somehwat.

If we are in agreement (i assume we re in agreement) and there is no 0-0-0 on an inf plane, where do you beleive the inf plane will decide to pick as its center to collapse into?

I’m surprised you even needed to ask the question as the answer is so obvious.
As no one knows how an infinite plane would collapse it’s therefore anyone’s guess. Infinite plane, Infinite mass, infinite gravity, infinite points of collapse. Your guess is as good as mine.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #424 on: February 02, 2020, 01:37:49 AM »
I don’t get this rabid obsession over trying to get people to admit they are wrong!

I don't get this rabid obsession over people refusing to admit they are wrong and continuing discussions for no reason.

I agree Rabid Rab and the Black Jack should’ve admitted they were wrong pages back. The evidence speaks for itself. What can you do?
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #425 on: February 02, 2020, 01:59:46 AM »
The collective have still not caught up on the facts surrounding this situation.

If you are the kind of person who still needs stabilisers on their bike, or in this case possess limited cognitive faculties then by all means agree with Rabid Rab and the Black Jack. If on the other hand you are ready for some real thinking then you have to enter the relativistic world, where things are not so straightforward with one iffy answer. The Stackexchange website offered up a solution with stabilisers. The one John Davis offered up didn’t need stabilisers as it didn’t even have wheels. The various solutions, and this is the difficult part, there are far more than just the one solution if you consider relativity and the layered complexity that brings. Just how far do you want to get into it?
I posted this a while back and I doubt anyone read it for if they had this discussion would have ended pages ago, and dumb questions like where is 000 on an infinite plane! Would have never have been asked!

https://arxiv.org/pdf/0708.2906.pdf

If you are looking for an insight you will find some in this document, but as it admits it’s not the whole picture nor the final answer if indeed one exists, and It’s certainly not the Stackexchange clap trap that has been touted on this discussion from the start. That is why I’m not wrong, but neither am I right, something I’ve been saying for quite some time.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #426 on: February 02, 2020, 02:06:16 AM »
Tim, we all know how to use a library.

Use your own words.

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #427 on: February 02, 2020, 02:14:08 AM »
I will conclude with this. Only those with an open mind should read this:

As we have seen, in CM, GRT, RTG, if a frame is moving at a constant proper acceleration, relative to an inertial frame, then the inertial field due to the force of inertia, is a constant field. The expression of the Minkowski line element (4.15) is the same in GRT and RTG. In CM, it was considered that this constant field is indistingushable from a homogeneous gravitational field produced by an infinite material plane. But from (3.2), (3.3) and (3.4) we have seen that there exists a difference, even in CM, between these two fields. This is due to the fact that the gravitational force is a force of attraction. In GRT and RTG the difference between the constant field produced by an inertial force and the homogeneous gravitational field due to the presence of mass, is substantial. Bogorodskii’s solution in GRT, for the homogeneous gravitational field, is given by (4.16). As we have already discused, his solution has an unccountable singularity. The solution obtained in RTG has the form (5.8). Unfortunately, this solution can’t be kept because it doesn’t satisfy CP in RTG. The decision of the rejection of this solution, using CP, it’s right. Indeed, in the obtained space-time (5.8), the velocity of a free test particle can overpass the velocity of light in vacuum. Ending to this analysis, I can conclude that the problem of finding in RTG the gravitational field produced by a uniform distribution of mass concentrated on an infinite plane is a very interesting problem, but which remains open.
Acknowledgements. I would like to thank my teacher E. So ́os, for many helpful and interesting discussions which stimulated me to undertake this work.

The full paper can be read here:

http://cds.cern.ch/record/538836/files/0202058.pdf

Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #428 on: February 02, 2020, 02:16:59 AM »
Tim, we all know how to use a library.

Use your own words.

I think you could derive a great deal of learning if you stopped using your own very minimalistic and limited words and started using a library.

It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say. Are you into book burning by any chance?
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #429 on: February 02, 2020, 02:25:24 AM »
I’m surprised you even needed to ask the question as the answer is so obvious.
As no one knows how an infinite plane would collapse it’s therefore anyone’s guess. Infinite plane, Infinite mass, infinite gravity, infinite points of collapse. Your guess is as good as mine.
Please show where you have proven that "an infinite plane would" have "infinite gravity" and "infinite points of collapse".

And  please explain why you didn't introduce General Relativity for 9 days after you introduced your thought experiment.

It was obvious to everybody that the maths in these was based on Newton Gravitation.
Quote from: John Davis on January 11, 2020, 07:23:26 AM
An Infinite Wall: What is the gravitational field of an infinite flat plane?
StackExchange, Physics: Gravitational force when standing on an infinite disc
All you did was to falsely claim that the maths were "iffy" but you didn't mention GR! Why?

Look the maths in the above links are not "iffy" and you've refused point-blank to show where there is anything wrong with it.

Just face it!
You simply cannot get away with pointing a thought experiment and 9 days later claim that you meant that it should be analyzed with GR!

Yet you still have the audacity to write this:
The collective have still not caught up on the facts surrounding this situation.
It's you who refuse to face what you have done!
  • YOU have ignorantly claimed the the maths in the links above are wrong!

  • You didn't mention GR for 9 days after you introduced your "thought experiments".
    All you did was to claim the maths were "iffy", when the maths were quite correct.
The only way out now is to admit your mistake and we can then rationally discuss the problems presented by an infinite flat Earth.

Most of us have no problem with your General Relativity references, just with your pretending that you meant you original "thought experiment" to be analyzed using GR.

And now you're posting this crap!
Quote from: Timeisup
It’s certainly not the Stackexchange clap trap that has been touted on this discussion from the start. That is why I’m not wrong, but neither am I right, something I’ve been saying for quite some time.
There is no "Stackexchange clap trap"! Get used to it!
Get off your high horse, Mr Smarty Pants! The physicists answering questions on the Stackexchange, Physics know more about physics, maths and GR than you ever will!

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #430 on: February 02, 2020, 02:29:56 AM »
Tim, we all know how to use a library.

Use your own words.

I think you could derive a great deal of learning if you stopped using your own very minimalistic and limited words and started using a library.

It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say. Are you into book burning by any chance?

*balk

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #431 on: February 02, 2020, 02:31:13 AM »
It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say. Are you into book burning by any chance?
No! We're waiting for you to face the massive mistakes you have made.

No one is "into book burning" and if you bothered to read what is written you might realise that no one is (yet) questioning the veracity of your references just your own silly claims!

*

Ski

  • Planar Moderator
  • 8738
  • Homines, dum docent, dispenguin.
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #432 on: February 02, 2020, 02:35:19 AM »
Tim, we all know how to use a library.

Use your own words.

I think you could derive a great deal of learning if you stopped using your own very minimalistic and limited words and started using a library.

It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say. Are you into book burning by any chance?

*balk

What are the odds the superliterate chose to misuse the one word you, the simpleton, happened to have a grasp of...



This thread has amazing powers of copy and paste and inability to abstract a thought. Rab and now another!  Be still, my pounding heart.
"Never think you can turn over any old falsehood without a terrible squirming of the horrid little population that dwells under it." -O.W. Holmes "Truth forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the throne.."

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #433 on: February 02, 2020, 02:50:04 AM »

What are the odds the superliterate chose to misuse the one word you, the simpleton, happened to have a grasp of...

1:1

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #434 on: February 02, 2020, 02:50:53 AM »
ah...so no one has the cojones to admit they were wrong! Your loss if you would like to live in the world of the small-minded and ignorant so be it. The very fact that one of the more eminent researchers in the field says:-

I can conclude that the problem of finding in RTG the gravitational field produced by a uniform distribution of mass concentrated on an infinite plane is a very interesting problem, but which remains open.

That along with all the other evidence I have presented has fallen on stony ground. You would rather carry on blindly hanging on like grim death to you Stackexchange iffy sums. What can one do? I've tried to bring you all along to see the light, but you know what they say, you clan leed a horse...etc...

From the posts from the poster who uses the smug moose avatar, I can only conclude that people around here prefer uninformed debate, where ignorance can reign supreme.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #435 on: February 02, 2020, 02:56:12 AM »
Tim, we all know how to use a library.

Use your own words.

I think you could derive a great deal of learning if you stopped using your own very minimalistic and limited words and started using a library.

It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say. Are you into book burning by any chance?

*balk

What are the odds the superliterate chose to misuse the one word you, the simpleton, happened to have a grasp of...



This thread has amazing powers of copy and paste and inability to abstract a thought. Rab and now another!  Be still, my pounding heart.

It's a pity that you appear to have no amazing powers at all!
What springs to mind is the old biblical quote, you know the one as it says much about who you are. Don't often quote that book, but for you, it is so apt.

Matthew 7:5
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye;
and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #436 on: February 02, 2020, 02:57:52 AM »
amen
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #437 on: February 02, 2020, 02:59:07 AM »
1: a infinite plain has no center.
D. As for point 0,0,0 any point you choose will do.
Which is the point. No centre, no point to collapse to.

As no one knows how an infinite plane would collapse
So why come here with an argument saying it will?
Why not be more honest and say no one knows that an infinite plane would collapse.

infinite gravity
You are yet to back this up in any way.

The evidence speaks for itself. What can you do?
How about actually providing evidence which backs you up and dealing with the counter arguments?

I will conclude with this.
Why not conclude by either admitting your initial argument was pure garbage, or by actually providing evidence/a rational justification to back it up and refuting the counter arguments provided?

But does this mean you are finally done?
You will quit lying about science and pretending it supports you?

It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say.
The problem is that you are not doing that at all.
You are providing a bunch of links to avoid the fact that NOTHING backs you up.

ah...so no one has the cojones to admit they were wrong!
We are still waiting for you to do so.
Or alternatively, for you to show your initial argument was actually correct.
So far all you have done is repeatedly deflect.


Your inability to defend your argument or admit it was wrong, while lying by claiming you have references that support you and directly lying about what I had said shows you have no interest in honest debate.

Now how about you stop with the pathetic distractions and stop projecting your own inadequacies onto others and either defend your argument or admit it is garbage.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #438 on: February 02, 2020, 03:05:59 AM »

From the posts from the poster who uses the smug moose avatar, . . .

. . . better?

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #439 on: February 02, 2020, 03:16:15 AM »
1: a infinite plain has no center.
D. As for point 0,0,0 any point you choose will do.
Which is the point. No centre, no point to collapse to.

As no one knows how an infinite plane would collapse
So why come here with an argument saying it will?
Why not be more honest and say no one knows that an infinite plane would collapse.

infinite gravity
You are yet to back this up in any way.

The evidence speaks for itself. What can you do?
How about actually providing evidence which backs you up and dealing with the counter arguments?

I will conclude with this.
Why not conclude by either admitting your initial argument was pure garbage, or by actually providing evidence/a rational justification to back it up and refuting the counter arguments provided?

But does this mean you are finally done?
You will quit lying about science and pretending it supports you?

It says much about you that you bulk at some one using references to back up what they say.
The problem is that you are not doing that at all.
You are providing a bunch of links to avoid the fact that NOTHING backs you up.

ah...so no one has the cojones to admit they were wrong!
We are still waiting for you to do so.
Or alternatively, for you to show your initial argument was actually correct.
So far all you have done is repeatedly deflect.


Your inability to defend your argument or admit it was wrong, while lying by claiming you have references that support you and directly lying about what I had said shows you have no interest in honest debate.

Now how about you stop with the pathetic distractions and stop projecting your own inadequacies onto others and either defend your argument or admit it is garbage.

Throughout this 'debate' you have called me a liar and have said what I posted was garbage despite offering up peer-reviewed papers that support what I said.
I can't be held responsible for your inability to read and understand the papers I have provided, the fact that you keep asking those questions demonstrates they are possibly outwith you're intellectual reach. You never once provided a credible counter-argument, mainly because there is none, and you just refuse to take that on board. Its like debating with a flat earther who refuses to admit that satellites exist even when they see them. Your only response, just like that of the flat earther is to say I'm lying, pretty pathetic really.

What still amazes me is that you have produced zero evidence of your own to back your continual tirades. As Jackson Browne once sang you appear to be "running on empty".

Running on (running on empty)
Running on (running blind)
Running on (running into the sun)


Enjoy your run.....
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #440 on: February 02, 2020, 03:24:32 AM »
ah...so no one has the cojones to admit they were wrong! Your loss if you would like to live in the world of the small-minded and ignorant so be it. The very fact that one of the more eminent researchers in the field says:-
Look in a mirror when you say that, thank you!

Now let me remind you of your thought experiment:
Instead you appealed to the infinite mass.
Let me remind you:

Yes I think that a thought experiment on the earth as an infinite plane could be said to be entertaining.
the earth is an infinite plane it would therefore follow;
the earth would have infinite mass
the earth would have infinite gravity as a result of the infinite mass
light would not be able to escape the infinite gravitational field
the earth by implication would have to collapse into a black hole to obey the laws of physics
We would not and never have existed due to the earth being a black hole

So it seems more likely covering your mistakes than clearing up misunderstandings.
But don't worry, as I said above, it is still baseless.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Try to actually defend your claims rather than just doubling down and making more.
The only arguement you had back there was your totally false claim of "iffy maths" against John Davis, mathpages and StackExchange, Physics!

Now don't you dare try to move the goal-posts by resorting to Generally Relativity because to the best of my knowledge this is the first time you even mention relativity:

Why you feel you need to point out that you know more about relativity is a bit puzzling. Not only is it irrelevant but it interestingly points toward a possible insecurity you may have. It’s also a rather childish “mine is bigger than yours” jibe.
And even then you dismiss it with "Not only is it irrelevant"!

Your claim that "the earth would have infinite gravity as a result of the infinite mass" was wrong.

But you still refuse to face the simple fact that your claim "the earth would have infinite gravity as a result of the infinite mass" was wrong!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #441 on: February 02, 2020, 03:27:04 AM »
What still amazes me is that you have produced zero evidence of your own to back your continual tirades.
The only evidence needed is from your own posts! Is that good enough evidence?

*

NotSoSkeptical

  • 8548
  • Flat like a droplet of water.
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #442 on: February 02, 2020, 05:55:09 AM »
I don’t get this rabid obsession over trying to get people to admit they are wrong!

I don't get this rabid obsession over people refusing to admit they are wrong and continuing discussions for no reason.

I agree Rabid Rab and the Black Jack should’ve admitted they were wrong pages back. The evidence speaks for itself. What can you do?

Look at yourself.  You are wrong.  The evidence does speak for itself.  For an object to collapse on itself, it must have an absolute center or point 0.  You have stated there is none on a infinite plane, yet you still refuse to admit you are wrong.  Who is the obsessive one?
Rabinoz RIP

That would put you in the same category as pedophile perverts like John Davis, NSS, robots like Stash, Shifter, and victimized kids like Alexey.

Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #443 on: February 02, 2020, 06:07:36 AM »
Over to me

Well i appear to be playing ball by myself because you refuse to yet again answer Where 0-0-0 is.


Ironically you smuggl just one post before your last, with this tidbit

OK let's see if you can follow this and I'll keep it as simple as possible for you to follow.
I said way in the beginning in one of my supporting posts that large stellar masses have been shown to collapse due to their own inherent gravity.


Ok smugass
Lets see if you can follow this.
A finite large celestial body with a definitive center collpases into a star or plaent or singularity of some kind - is your choice to use as an example of what would happen with an infinite plane.

Right...
So ill ask again.
Wheres 0-0-0?

I presented a string of points.
You chose instead to whine and cry about how superior you are.
Im not smart.
Congrats to you for being smart.
Please justify why and where we can find 0-0-0 on an inf plane of finite thickness

Ill end with your own quote bounced back to you.


With that now explained to you in simple easy to follow terms, do you still think it was an afterthought?

Going by your last post it appears that your not that interested in the science but more interested in catching me out. Why is that? Is the science too tricky for you to follow? Tell you what you stick to your page of iffy maths if it makes you happy.

Do you honestly think there is such a place as 000 on an infinite plane?
We have a bit of a standoff here as you appear to be very reluctant for you to pit your 'science' against my peer-reviewed papers. I just wonder why.

Ok finally the question is addressed... somehwat.

If we are in agreement (i assume we re in agreement) and there is no 0-0-0 on an inf plane, where do you beleive the inf plane will decide to pick as its center to collapse into?

I’m surprised you even needed to ask the question as the answer is so obvious.
As no one knows how an infinite plane would collapse it’s therefore anyone’s guess. Infinite plane, Infinite mass, infinite gravity, infinite points of collapse. Your guess is as good as mine.

So we re all in agreement that timies is wrong?
Finally.

Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #444 on: February 02, 2020, 07:39:21 AM »
I will conclude with this.

"I can conclude that the problem of finding in RTG the gravitational field produced by a uniform distribution of mass concentrated on an infinite plane is a very interesting problem, but which remains open."

Doesn't much seem like you're concluding with it, as you keep going on.

Your reference claims the problem is open; reconciling CM, GRT, and RTG.

You stated unequivocally that "the earth would have infinite gravity as a result of the infinite mass."

Your reference does not support your statement.

Using this logic, you could have equally stated "the earth would have zero gravity as a result of the infinite mass."

Neither of these statements is a logical result of the reference.

If you now adhere to the proposition that the problem is open, you cannot also insist that you know the answer to be infinite.




*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #445 on: February 02, 2020, 12:29:06 PM »
Throughout this 'debate' you have called me a liar
No, that only started when you started to blatantly lie, such as claiming I said things which I never did.

I can't be held responsible for your inability to read and understand the papers I have provided
But you can be held responsible for repeatedly posting references which in no way back up your argument while pretending they do.


You never once provided a credible counter-argument
I have provided credible counter arguments which you have simply ignored.
If you don't think they are credible, then perhaps you can point out just what is wrong with them?
You not liking them or wanting to dismiss them doesn't magically make it non-credible.

If you really want to know who is acting like the FEer here, that would be you!
You are the one acting like Sandy. Posting a bunch of references, which in no way support your argument.
When you cannot rationally defend your argument you just result to insulting your opponents, repeatedly acting like they are morons completely incapable of understanding anything.
All while ignoring the arguments they have been presented and pretending you have done no wrong and that you are the smartest person in the world.

Should I start calling you Sandy from now on?

Now stop with the pathetic distractions and insults and projecting your own incarnadines onto others and start trying to actually defend your garbage.
Providing references which do not indicate that the infinite mass of the infinite plane will result in infinite gravity and cause the plane to collapse into a black hole is not supporting your argument in any way.
Providing references which indicate such a plane would be stable, opposes your argument.
Providing references saying we don't know what the gravitational field of an infinite plane would be likewise opposes your argument.


So like I said before, you really have 4 options:
1 - Admit that we have no idea how an infinite plane would behave and thus you have no basis for your claim that the infinite mass of an infinite plane would result in infinite gravity and cause it to collapse into a black hole, and thus your argument is pure garbage.
2 - Admit that while we don't know for sure how gravity would behave, we can speculate based upon the known laws of gravity and conclude based upon symmetry that such a plane would be stable, and thus your argument is pure garbage.
3 - Do the impossible, say that we can know how such an infinite plane would behave and provide evidence or rational arguments which clearly show that the infinite mass would result in infinite gravity and cause it to collapse into a black hole.
4 - Continue being Sandy.

I assume you will pick 4, as there is nothing you could use to support 3, and you have shown you are completely unwilling to admit you are wrong.

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 17754
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #446 on: February 02, 2020, 01:20:24 PM »
There is no need for personal attacks against other members of the forum.

Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #447 on: February 03, 2020, 08:13:30 PM »

1: a infinite plain has no center.
2: all particles have Gravity: a field that stretch out in all direction, for a infinite distance.
3: the thickness of the plain is unknown, will this make a difference?
   the density, and composition of the plain is unknown.
   What would it have to be, to have Gravity at (9.8m/s-2) at it’s surface?
We find our selves in a pickle.
A. Can a object stand on the plane and not be drawn into it?
The object creating a in balance of gravity causing a collapse of the plane.
B. There can be no orbital mechanics with an infinite plain, no weather satellites, no GPS, no exploration of outer planets, not even men walking on the moon.
C. How would tides work?
D. As for point 0,0,0 any point you choose will do.
E. I have a hard time seeing the earth disk with its dome above it, any where on the infinite plain. (point 0,0,0)?
Your thoughts on each point be nice.
Another thought: with infinite gravity you have fusion of the elements in the plane, as each element fuses into the next element the fusion goes on and does not end.
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

*

Timeisup

  • 3554
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #448 on: February 05, 2020, 11:13:23 PM »

1: a infinite plain has no center.
2: all particles have Gravity: a field that stretch out in all direction, for a infinite distance.
3: the thickness of the plain is unknown, will this make a difference?
   the density, and composition of the plain is unknown.
   What would it have to be, to have Gravity at (9.8m/s-2) at it’s surface?
We find our selves in a pickle.
A. Can a object stand on the plane and not be drawn into it?
The object creating a in balance of gravity causing a collapse of the plane.
B. There can be no orbital mechanics with an infinite plain, no weather satellites, no GPS, no exploration of outer planets, not even men walking on the moon.
C. How would tides work?
D. As for point 0,0,0 any point you choose will do.
E. I have a hard time seeing the earth disk with its dome above it, any where on the infinite plain. (point 0,0,0)?
Your thoughts on each point be nice.
Another thought: with infinite gravity you have fusion of the elements in the plane, as each element fuses into the next element the fusion goes on and does not end.

Infinite gravity would most likely lead to a singularity. The most obvious parallel is the creation of black holes.
The problem throughout this discussion is that some people have put forward views on infinite flat planes as though they have had actual experience of one!
The other interesting aspect of this discussion is that certain people don’t want a discussion nor are they actually interested in science. All they appear to want to do is be right and prove other people wrong at all costs irrespective of what the actual known science is.
Empty vessels sure do.
Really…..what a laugh!!!

*

JackBlack

  • 21558
Re: Thought Experiments and their Taxonomy
« Reply #449 on: February 05, 2020, 11:41:00 PM »
The problem throughout this discussion is that some people have put forward views on infinite flat planes as though they have had actual experience of one!
Which started by you acting like you knew that one would collapse into a black hole due to the infinite mass.
Something you still refuse to back up in any way, and instead just choose to repeatedly deflect.
You were happy to use the known laws of physics when you thought they backed you up, but now that you know they don't you act like we couldn't possibly know how such a plane would behave, yet still refuse to acknowledge that your argument was pure nonsense.

The other interesting aspect of this discussion is that certain people don’t want a discussion nor are they actually interested in science. All they appear to want to do is be right and prove other people wrong at all costs irrespective of what the actual known science is.
Again, that would be you. You cannot have a discussion if you just want to run away from the topic and act like no one has shown that you were wrong.