|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
 Posted - 03/15/2005 : 17:59:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by woolytoad
Lawrules, do you even know how to construct mathematical proofs? Do you think its reasonable for someone to have infinite amounts of rice Lawrules?
Actually, I thought that was his point. That math is not directly reproducible using real world objects, therefore making it "not accurate" or "real" or whatever. This is the same problem he has with time, referring to it as an abstraction with no bearing on reality.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 03/15/2005 18:55:11 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/15/2005 : 18:21:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Actually, I thought that was his point. That math is not directly reproducable using real world objects, therefore making it "not accurate" or "real" or whatever. This is the same problem he has with time, calling it an abstraction with no bearing on reality.
Interesting... By extension, formal logic - the basis of mathematics - is also an abstraction with no bearing on reality. I think I'm beginning to see the problem here. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2005 : 04:13:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by H. Humbert
quote:
Originally posted by woolytoad
Lawrules, do you even know how to construct mathematical proofs? Do you think its reasonable for someone to have infinite amounts of rice Lawrules?
Actually, I thought that was his point. That math is not directly reproducible using real world objects, therefore making it "not accurate" or "real" or whatever. This is the same problem he has with time, referring to it as an abstraction with no bearing on reality.
Well, thats nice. If you consider many nowdays commodities had their mathematical foundations established centuries before they could actually be applied, we wouldnt have anything whatsoever. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2005 : 10:21:01 [Permalink]
|
Let's see now.
Lawrules has stated this (paraphrased):
1) Einstein has a mathematical formula "X" describing a real event and makes a prediction.
2) Eddington makes measurements that does not agree with what formula "X" predicted.
3) Therefore formula "X" is invalidated, and should be removed from science.
OK, time for me to prove that Lawrules is wrong in his reasoning.
1) My Newtonian physics school book has formula "Y" describing a real event. With it a prediction can be made.
2) I make a measurement that does not agree with the prediction of formula "Y".
3) Therefore the formula "Y" is invalidated and should be removed from science.
Notice that both examples are identical, except different formula, and different people.
Let's examine the formula, the numbers put into it, and my measurements:
1) My book says s=v*t, distance = speed * time.
I want to travel to my friend Marcus who live 300 km from me. I know that the roads are so good that I can ride on cruise control at 100 km/h the entire stretch, with the formula I can make the prediction that the trip will take three hours.
2) When I leave home I accelerate to 100 km/h and engage the cruise control. With lady fortune smiling upon me, traffic was so good I didn't have to disengage the cruise the entire time.
But I arrive 18 minutes late! The entire trip took 3 hours 18 minutes.
3) Therefore the formula s=v*t has been invalidated and must not be used in science.
Check out the facts! Using Lawrules' logic, I have disproved the relationship between distance, time, and speed.
Using Lawrules' logic, it will not matter that Marcus later makes the same trip, with the same speed, and arrives in time. My girlfriend also arrives in time. But since I have demonstrated that s=v*t is false, then it does not matter that the prediction matched the other trips.
Lawrules, If the Law of Perception follows this kind of logic (and all your posts thus far has been littered with these and similar kinds of flaws of logic) then there really is no reason for you to post the rest of your introduction. The only thing that will happen is that we will waste our time, while having a laugh on your expense at the lack of logic support, ignorance of science, and ignorance of specific theories you address. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2005 : 16:13:07 [Permalink]
|
lawrules seems to have "evaporated".
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2005 : 20:28:54 [Permalink]
|
| It's only been a day or so longer than his longest previous absence. Give him a little time. After all, he's been asked to support the idea he's put forth that the 1919 Eddington measurements were the only possible source of validation for Einstein's theories. Might take some real work to do that. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2005 : 06:04:21 [Permalink]
|
yep, plain old evaporation.
Oh well... I was going to ask him if he knew anyone who has ever had cardiac bypass surgury, or even angioplasty. Just wanted to ask him if he thought the problems that lead up to these treatments were a rasult of the accumulation of small, thin coins (the original definition/use of the word plaque, with a slightly different spelling). Or if maybe the plaque that accumulates in arteries was little miniature people hanging their "plaques" on the "walls" of arteries. Or maybe they just forgot to apply enough toothpaste to the brush, and brush thoroughly, before brushing the plaque off their arterial lining.
Because if evaporation of black holes has to mean that black holes are liquid.... then I just want to know which of the many different definitions he goes with for "plaque". Personally, I like the old European meaning, small thin coins.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
belt
New Member
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2005 : 10:01:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Good one. I still like "orbit," though. It implies that electrons are planets, and atomic nucleii are stars.
But duuude, what if they are....like....our universe is just an atom of a larger organism.... [/stoner] |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
belt
New Member
USA
17 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2005 : 10:33:48 [Permalink]
|
| Sure, why not. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2005 : 10:34:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
quote:
Originally posted by belt
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Good one. I still like "orbit," though. It implies that electrons are planets, and atomic nucleii are stars.
But duuude, what if they are....like....our universe is just an atom of a larger organism.... [/stoner]
Would our solar system be an atom and the organism be the universe?
Sure, and this is why we know the universe to be banana shaped. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
