Minkowski Space Time Briefly Revisited

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by danshawen, Nov 24, 2014.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    Wise words.
    Scientists will always make mistakes, as even did Einstein.
    They learn from their mistakes.
    But sadly some people who are fanatically working to "put their names up in lights", [ the more common every day nobody] will do so at any expense, even that of abandoning the efforts of the giants of the present and past, as well as every day logic.
    What's even sadder, is the fact that due to their inane obsessions, and being shunned by mainstream science and the logical processes that it envelops, forums such as this by the very nature of being open to every Tom, Dick and Harry, must bare the brunt of such inane stupidity and fanatical anti mainstream approach.
    I don't have to name them, its obvious who fit into that category.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2015
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    Enough. Some of you are reading me dead wrong. I never wanted my name in lights. If that's what you want, by all means you go out and do it. Make us and yourselves proud. I never published (anything!). What Farsight has done to himself by doing so is only one reason I didn't. I meant no harm or disrespect to Farsight, who evidently wanted some sort of fame. Writing a book about a subject you haven't spent a minimum of Malcolm Gladwell's 'Outliers' requisite 10K hours doing hard work learning about and applying is a quick ticket to crackpot infamy of exactly the sort we all see far too often here and elsewhere. I have shown the folks here that I put in a lot of time understanding what little physics I know. The degree on my wall speaks to that. I'm only here to learn just a little more.

    I don't care if you think observation is not part of the scientific method. I don't care if you don't understand that mathematics is just another human language. Like any other language, you never really get deeper meaning out of it than the information you can express in terms of it. Don't expect me to be impressed if you predict something with math that doesn't pan out because you either made no observations to begin with, or missed some other means of binding it inductively to observational science and/or math we already know.

    It's been a distinct pleasure, all. Thanks for all the help with my little physics problem. Peace.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Nobody said that.

    What people said was that observation can only take one so far and that science is not about ignoring everything that we can't observe.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    Of course. What would be the fun in science if you couldn't do that once in a while (and science would be poorer for it)? I suppose that's one reason some of us (even us 'cranks') are here.
     
  8. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Do you believe that someone has observed an orbit?
     
  9. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    I fail to see what that has to do with what I wrote, but since you asked about 'observing an orbit': how about former military leader, congressman and astronaut John Glenn?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Glenn

    This was a big deal when I was only 10 years old.

    You're not even making as much sense as a typical google scholar now, PhysBang. Other than me, what's really bugging you? I can just stop responding on this thread if you like. You may even have the last word. No wonder Farsight gets upset.
     
  10. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Yeah, obviously. You have some kind of ignorant view of science that only things that are observed can be real. But one cannot observe the orbit of a planet. One can observe and record a series of relative positions in the sky and infer an orbit from that collection.

    You continually reveal your basic ignorance of how science works and of the nature of the mathematics you insult.
     
  11. Farsight Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,475
    Upset? Moi?

    I don't get upset. I get irritated at all the lies and abuse from trolls and quacks who know f*ck-all physics and who seek to trash every decent discussion that's going.

    And that's just the moderators!

    Oi!
     
  12. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    You have just described your own behavior and nature.

    Please, if your family still has anything to do with you, seek some help for their sakes.
     
    QuarkHead likes this.
  13. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    so , do not post, it's that simple. we are sick of your all the lies and abuse from trolls and quacks who know f*ck-all physics and who seek to trash every decent discussion that's going, as well
     
  14. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Blue_Dot#mediaviewer/File:PaleBlueDot.jpg

    Resolve to observe a little more and talk (write) a little less, if you can, Physbang. You're only embarrassing yourself.

    krash661: now I think I understand what you were talking about.
     
  15. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    A) That's not a picture of an orbit.
    B) If you think that is a sphere, you are again mistaken. That is a 2D image, so at best it is a circle. It is evidence that the Earth is a spheroid, but it is not an observation of the spherical nature of the Earth.

    So I think perhaps I'm not the one who needs to do more thinking, here.
     
  16. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    We still have all of the Voyager telemetry to go with that particular picture, as well as a pretty good idea of what it is that we are looking at.

    There are things about that particular photo, however, that I'm willing to admit, I know little or nothing about, other than that it was something of an epiphany for the career of Carl Sagan.
     
  17. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Yeah. A "pretty good idea" is theory. We use our good theory to put observations together to get information about things that we cannot observe. That's science. When you come along and deny everything that we can't observe, you forbid us from accepting that the Earth is a spheroid.
     
  18. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    Dead people don't know that they are dead; a characteristic they have in common with ignorant folk.

    But at least zombies try and get a brain, if they can.
     
  19. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Well, keep trying, then.
     

Share This Page