0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: TheboxI thinkmy original assumpion that you are paddy or dy from the other forum is warranted. I noticed the turn in attitude once my ideas were extracted from me again.It's the obnoxious way that you treat others that gets you banned. Claiming that I'm stupid or that you have a high IQ is just plain dumb. Not one person on Earth would believe such crap coming from a deluded child such as yourself. We keep telling you that just because you type a string of words together and make it come out looking like a claim in no way makes it true whatsoever. You have never understood the concept of providing proof of anything. All you do is go around making grandiose claims, all of which we see right through as being so wrong that they're just plain crap.Quote from: Thebox... I am off and quiting Wonderful! Thanks!Quote from: Theboxbecause you are so insulting and I would love to meet you in real life.If I met you in real life I'd slap you silly you little punk.Quote from: TheboxCall me an idiot and get away with it over and over again to a situation where I hate you, you are a cyber bully .That's not what a cyberbully is, asshole. That's defined by the government as followshttp://www.stopbullying.gov/cyberbullying/QuoteCyberbullying happens when kids bully each other through electronic technology. I.e. its what happens when one kid bullies another kid. I'm no kid. In any case you're the one who starts all of this but you're too stupid to see it. You keep making claims of how much of a genius you are and how dumb everyone else is and you then think that everyone will accept that as true and worship you? Wow! Now that's what I call stupid.Quote am more IQ in my little toe than your entire body.Not from what we've seen. From everything we've seen its pretty clear that you have either an average or below average IQ. Mine, on the other hand, is about 130. That means that I'm more intelligent than 98% of the people on Earth and am eligible for membership in Mensa and the International High IQ Society. My level of intelligence is said to make me "gifted". You, on the other hand, are an idiot. You can't even write a grammatically correct sentence. And you think that makes you a genius? ROTFLMOA!QuoteYou deny science, ..Nonsense. I've been a physicist for three times as long as you've been alive and I don't deny science. I only know that you're understanding of it is sh1t
I thinkmy original assumpion that you are paddy or dy from the other forum is warranted. I noticed the turn in attitude once my ideas were extracted from me again.
... I am off and quiting
because you are so insulting and I would love to meet you in real life.
Call me an idiot and get away with it over and over again to a situation where I hate you, you are a cyber bully .
Cyberbullying happens when kids bully each other through electronic technology.
am more IQ in my little toe than your entire body.
You deny science, ..
I am an amateur , you should expect this if you have any sort of logic.
Quote from: Thebox on 03/04/2015 10:59:44I am an amateur , you should expect this if you have any sort of logic. Seriously, what every physicist needs to expect from an amateur (interested in learning) is for that amateur to ask questions without turning the answer into an argument! If you disagree with the answers garnered here, simply express your position of disagreement with the facts you have supporting that position. To date, none of your positions has been supported with any evidence. In fact, your explanations have been so difficult to logically understand that it has become impossible to even consider, with any clarity, those positions.Individuals that concede to ask a question should be humble enough to at least consider the answer they receive from those asked. It has been noticed by everyone here that you are humble enough to ask, but never humble enough to accept the answer given. For those of us kind enough to offer those answers, it has become increasingly difficult to continue offering them because you keep dismissing those answers with answers of your own. If you already had the answer, why was it necessary to even ask us?I personally believe you're not really interested in our answers and in the interest of tranquility and order, if you don't like the answers you're getting, quite asking for them. And if you truly think your answers are better, quite calling yourself an amateur.
Quote from: TheboxHow many times must I say it, stop expecting me to be a literate genius or a scientist who knows all the terms, Nobody, especially myself, has ever expected that from you. What we expect, actually what we demand is that you write sentences which make sense. The way you write the sentences are almost gibberish. I'm certainly not a literate genius and neither is anybody else here. But what we all have the ability to do is write sentences that everyone else can understand.Besides, I already told you to have your mommy and daddy proof read your posts before you make them if you want to be understood.Quote from: TheboxI am an amateur , you should expect this if you have any sort of logic. We all know that you're an amateur. That's why you shouldn't be trying to claim that everything you started a thread on in the "New Theories" forum is not wrong. Amateurs have no business creating new theories and redefining well-defined terms.
How many times must I say it, stop expecting me to be a literate genius or a scientist who knows all the terms,
My argument is that this - ''In physics, space-time (also space–time, space time or space–time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single interwoven continuum.''I do not agree with. Arbitrary time is observed by matter and relative motion dependant to the object or observer, we do not observe a space-time, space allows, time-in-space.
Quote from: Thebox on 03/04/2015 15:52:56My argument is that this - ''In physics, space-time (also space–time, space time or space–time continuum) is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single interwoven continuum.''I do not agree with. Arbitrary time is observed by matter and relative motion dependant to the object or observer, we do not observe a space-time, space allows, time-in-space.Your position is at odds with 99.9% of present cosmological theory. Look up Spacetime on Wikipedia and you'll find out how wrong you are about this position. Continuing to suggest that we should see things your way will not be successful. Time and space are not separate attributes of reality, they can only exist together as a single entity called space/time.To continue harping about this will only show your ignorance. And I reiterate, the word ignorance only means a lack of knowledge. It isn't meant to signal insult or to be demeaning in any way.
I'm looking forward to hearing the first cuckoo of spring.
Quote from: TheboxIt is really simple, try to destroy the space around you, ''punch the air'', burn it, explode it, try anything you want, the space is infinite in existence, therefore can not be measured , no space time.Yet another example of TB demonstrating his total lack of understanding of spacetime and it's relationship to the stress-energy-momentum tensor. Of course he has no idea what that is or what its relation is to spacetime.When you said try to destroy the space around you, ''punch the air'', burn it, explode it, try anything you want all you were doing was yapping about things totally unrelated to how space is created and destroyed. Frankly I can't understand why you'd say something as ignorant as that when you have no idea what you're talking about. What do you think makes you qualified to make such statements? What education, training or whatever do you have which tells us that what you claim to be true can be relied upon?When cosmologists say that space expands/contracts during the Big Bang/Big Crunch what they're doing is describing the creation and destruction of space. The existence of spacetime is governed by a mathematical object called the Stress-Energy-Momentum Tensor. You can read all about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93energy_tensorThe "components" of this object are obviously stress, energy and momentum. Clearly its the stress, energy and momentum of the matter which they're referring to which is altering spacetime. The following reasoning is similar to what led Einstein to derive his field equations for General Relativity (GR) in 1915. GR has been thoroughly tested time and time again since then and it's always been demonstrated to be correct. When used to describe the universe it tells us that if the mass density is small enough then there's a finite amount of matter in the universe and that means that the universe has a finite amount of space and matter in it. In any case space is now expanding and at an accelerating rate. That means that right now space is actually being CREATED.Everything you could possible present as an argument against it has already been done so and failed. And you think you know everything even when you can't even follow the derivation of those field equations. HA!In this case the reason you're so wrong is because you're trying to use reasoning based on Newtonian notions of space and time and are clearly and atrociously ignoring GR. GR can defy common sense a great deal of the time because our senses didn't evolve with relativity taken into account. I.e. we never had direct experience with the slowing down of clocks or the stretching and contraction of space. If you knew what the metric was and how it's used and what experiments have been done to test GR using the metric then you'd understand how we know that matter can alter space by stretching or contracting it.Another serious problem that you have in conceptualizing the decrease in the amount of space (i.e. it's "destruction") is that you're thinking of space as a physical object like a teddy bear which you can punch, rip or tear in half. What you've been unable grasp so far is the fact that space can only be manipulated by matter and that matter is represented by the stress-energy-momentum (SEM) tensor. The SEM tensor is defined and described here: http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/sr/energy_momentum_tensor.htmIf you had a real interest in physics rather than a singular desire to try to show everyone that you're a genius then you'd read the following paper and learn how stress can contribute to the inertia of a body. The inertia of stress by Rodrigo Medina, Am. J. Phys. 74, 1031 (2006)http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0609144Very few people (percentage wise) know about this aspect of relativity. If you had ever chosen to learn GR then you'd already know how matter can create and destroy space. Although "destroy space" is a terrible way to describe it.To learn why cosmologist have determined that the universe is expanding you could read:http://www.eftaylor.com/exploringblackholes/ExpandCosmos150212v1.pdfHowever, that would take a lot of work and I doubt that you'd understand what you're reading.
It is really simple, try to destroy the space around you, ''punch the air'', burn it, explode it, try anything you want, the space is infinite in existence, therefore can not be measured , no space time.
Quote from: TheboxI think I will just give up, science is weird in every sense, almost the same has religion with lots of false belief.Great idea. You really should give up. It's clear that it's way to hard for you to understand since what's very clear and well demonstrated to intelligent physicists all over the world is a "false belief" to the lesser intelligent such as yourself. Not to mention that we don't like liars such as yourself here giving false information about your date of birth when you joined. So please stop saying this ignorant crap based on zero knowledge and experience. It's far too hard for you to ever grasp and you don't demonstrate any willingness to do the work like the rest of us which is required to understand physics. So go away and just keep saying to yourself "It's all wrong. It's all wrong. It's all wrong. There's no place like home. There's no place like home. There's no place like home......"
I think I will just give up, science is weird in every sense, almost the same has religion with lots of false belief.
P.s My 8 year old thinks you are barking mad if you say you can destroy a space.
I am not lacking in the information I know now, I am tenacious to my own logic.
I will make my final stand in this thread. I am getting tired in trying.
4. White light is a mixture of frequencies (not observed)
4. White light is transparent and not white, the spectral range is interaction and only shows us that by interaction or observer effect, that the transparent light can be modulated into a frequency that we define, transparent light itself is an undefined frequency and not a mixture.(observed)
Here's a model of reality that may or may not be true, but it's worth considering. Imagine a long piece of string with knots in it. The knots are matter and the string is "space". It's possible to make knots that disappear if you pull the string on either side of them too hard (or they could "burst", thereby turning themselves into vibrations that race away along the string), and it would be possible for a knot to move along the string by rearranging itself. You can do the same kind of thing with a sheet - pull a bit up and tie a knot in in - the knot is matter while the unknotted parts of the sheet are space. You can send waves along the string or through the sheet. If the string or sheet is made of elastic, it can be stretched. If it is made of something more exotic, it may be possible to expand it without it trying to pull back together, and whatever it's made of, it may be able to source new material from somewhere to enable that expansion. It is hard to imagine how it would do that, but there may be a whole sea of such material sitting alongside the universe in another dimension. The key thing you need to take in from all this though is that "space" is not nothing. If it was nothing, how could there be any spatial separation between two items in space? If there is literally nothing between them, they must be touching.
David - May I make a suggestion? TB has demonstrated time and again that he doesn't have the capacity to understand nearly anything in physics. As you can see from his last post he's now resorted to quoting an 8 year old to support his twisted logic. The more we respond to him the more craziness he brings to TNS. The only way that he can post anything is when he is given something to respond to and then he has the opportunity to respond with lunatic reasoning. It's for this reason I will never respond to him again. The combination of his intense arrogance and shear stupidity has made him the worst crackpot that I've ever seen on the internet during the nearly 20 years that I've been helping people learn physics. He even thinks that it's *I* who has asserted that space can be created and destroyed and has totally refused to acknowledge that it's the entire community of relativistic cosmologists who have determined this many decades ago using general relativity. It's a very simple concept which is beyond his understanding. And for that reason he's incapable of learning. So please join me in restoring some sense of sanity even to this shady portion of the TNS.
The problem with myself, if it is not logical it can not be true. For a strange reason I see what I consider reality and unless something is 100% then I can not accept it to be a truth.
Quote from: Thebox on 05/04/2015 00:24:51The problem with myself, if it is not logical it can not be true. For a strange reason I see what I consider reality and unless something is 100% then I can not accept it to be a truth.That's a good principle to stick with, so I'm with you on that. The thing you need to be really careful with though is checking whether you're doing your reasoning correctly or not. Running your ideas past people on a forum like this is a good way of having your reasoning tested, and what you have to do if they still disagree with you is try to work out why that's happening. You need to identify the point where your reasoning and their reasoning don't match up, and then you can point out that issue and see how they respond to it, but you need to express your ideas clearly and strip out any wild claims that will invite people to go off on long diversions where they attack those claims while they fail to recognise any crucial point that you may have made and that they may have missed. I think your biggest problem is with communication. If you can fix that, it will then be easier to explore how you reason.
A point where time began for instance? a big bang that before it nothing existed, not even space. Now if any one in the world can imagine a singular point and nothing else, not even space surrounding the point, then I take my hat off to them, it is logically impossible to imagine a point that is not surrounded by dark space, shut your eyes and try it, the point is always pictured in the dark space.
Quote from: Thebox on 05/04/2015 22:11:32A point where time began for instance? a big bang that before it nothing existed, not even space. Now if any one in the world can imagine a singular point and nothing else, not even space surrounding the point, then I take my hat off to them, it is logically impossible to imagine a point that is not surrounded by dark space, shut your eyes and try it, the point is always pictured in the dark space.Physics often steps beyond logical limits in the way it states things, and that can mislead the believers and repel the disbelievers. The way to fix that would be to get physicists to be more careful in the way they use language so that they don't make claims about things not existing when they might exist, or that there was no time before the big bang. It is not certain that the big bang came from a singularity - it may just have been a very dense clump of stuff. The fabric of space that the stuff we see resides within was also compressed into that clump of stuff, but that doesn't mean there can't be an external space fabric (potentially infinite) within which the other space fabric is expanding - physics doesn't talk about such an external space as we have no way of detecting it, so it's left for philosophy to consider it and speculate about it, and indeed to think about whether it needs to exist at all. What is wrong is for physics to state that it doesn't exist when physics doesn't know. This is an area where you are actually free to imagine for yourself without being told that you're wrong. The idea that time started at the big bang and that there was no time before that is also just an assertion which is "true" within the bounds of a favoured theory, but the theory is not guaranteed to be correct. The problem we have in this case is that a lot of people have bought into that theory so heavily that they consider it to be true (and in many cases they regard it as proven), and that makes them assert things without qualifying their assertion with an "if" tag.This makes it hard to get your foot in the door when discussing the nature of reality, because you don't know whether people are talking out of their hats or if they're standing on firm ground, and the number of qualifications tied to their name isn't always a useful guide. When you make a suggestion and get shouted down by someone holding to the official line, you need to know enough about the theory/theories they've bought into to be able to tell whether they're parroting dogma or thinking for themselves, and once you know enough to be able to tell the difference you can then press them to clarify where their assertions come from and whether they're backed by experiment or ideology.The key advice to follow is the old one: know your enemy. Study what they believe and do your best to see if you can make their beliefs fit reality as you see it, and then go on the attack, homing in on the parts that don't seem to match up properly. Pick one issue at a time and become an expert in that. Don't go for everything at once, because you won't have had time to think more than a fraction of it through properly. Latch onto a single problem and explore it in depth - lay bare the problem by analysing it in great detail so that everyone has a chance of seeing the fault that you have spotted (or of spotting the point where your reasoning has gone astray). At the moment you're a drunk man in the dark with a blunderbuss shooting lead shot into everything you can hear rustling around you. Buy yourself a bright torch and study one thing at a time with great care.