Does Socratus write an unintelligent garbage?

[socratus]

Does Socratus write an unintelligent garbage?

Another inane post by Israel Sadovnik/Socratus.

You have been banned from how many forums for posting
this unintelligent garbage? Yes you are a legend on the net
you even surpass our mate Preearth as I am pretty sure
you hold the record for the most forum bans.

At 68 you think you would have learnt how to communicate
or has the devil and your madness got to you?

Most on the forum here are happy to discuss almost
anything but the key is discuss.

So I will ask you one more time if you have something
to discuss tell us in CLEAR language.

I do not want to see another pile of drivel and quotes
masquerading as something meaningful.
Orac

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=44488#Post44488
========…

For example I say:
Quantum Theory become clear and logical
then we take as a fundament T=0K.

Is this opinion ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?

===...

 

[taxslave]

At the very least it is beyond most people's knowledge of science.

 

[Kreskin]

What is T=OK?

 

[55Mercury]

It's a struggle to understand your meaning sometimes, Izzy. If you put as much time into improving your syntax and studying contemporary vernacular as you do into quantum theory (which is a fetch in itself, at the best of common reasoning) then you'd be quite understandable, even if marginally less informed. heh heh

Say, you're not related to 0micron by any chance?

 

[socratus]

At the very least it is beyond most people's knowledge of science.

Maybe my knowledge for the XXIIc

It's a struggle to understand your meaning sometimes,
Izzy.
If you put as much time into improving your syntax
and studying contemporary vernacular as you do into quantum theory
(which is a fetch in itself, at the best of common reasoning)
then you'd be quite understandable, even if marginally less informed. heh heh

Say, you're not related to 0micron by any chance?

1
Yes, my English must be much better
2
I tried to find 0micron's Profile but :
This user hasn't composed a public description yet.

Thanks to everybody

 

[socratus]

I don’t think that to understand my ideas is difficult.
I try to explain my ideas as simple as possible.
For example:

Why we cannot understand Quantum Physics.

The problem is that physicists draw the Quantum Physics
with ‘ math point-particle’ and therefore they ‘kill the picture
of ultimate reality.’
Of course, physicists know very well that the particle isn’t a
math point, but any another model of particle brought difficult
which they could not solve. Therefore physicists prefer to think
about particle as a structureless point
===.
At last from 1968 physicists decided that instead of a
‘point particle’ they will use ‘a string – particle’ and developed
‘ string theory’. The problem is that there are 5 or 6 ‘ string
theories’ in 10 or 11 dimensions .One theory is better than
other one. And they decided to unite them in one
‘ M-string theory’ . This theory is still in a cultivation.
=.
So, now we don’t know what elementary particle is and
therefore we don’t have the Philosophy of Physics.
=.
Is my opinion difficult to understand , is it ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?
=.
Socratus

 

[L Gilbert]

Quantum Theory is easier to understand. But it's not all that hard.

 

[socratus]

Quantum Theory is easier to understand.
But it's not all that hard.

Einstein said:

" Some physicists, among whom I am myself can not
believe that we should once and for all abandon the
idea of direct images of physical reality in space and
time, or that we should agree with the opinion that
a phenomenon in nature like a game case."
==.

Can we understand reality if we use from beginning a ‘ math point-particle’ ?

 

[Nuggler]

U = fo

?

;-)


Do we give a ****?

 

[socratus]

Matter and Form .
=.
Wood is itself a matter.
Wood is itself a form, a geometrical form.
A cupboard made of wood is a real whole of form and matter.
Geometrical form and matter are 'grown together' in it.
No form exist without matter.
Nor can there be matter without form.
But in micro-physics, physicists took up another conception.
According to this doctrine matter does exist,
but the form is not a physical object.
The form is disappeared from the physical reality.
They works with a 'point'.
Question.
Isn’t physics a science of the matter, form, energy and motion ?
Aren’t all these subjects 'grown together' ?
Take away one subject and you have all modern paradoxes
in the physics.
=.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
=.

 

[karrie]

Why would you come post another forum's arguments on here?

 

[Niflmir]

For example I say:
Quantum Theory become clear and logical
then we take as a fundament T=0K.

Is this opinion ‘an unintelligent garbage’ ?

Yes. It is unintelligent and garbage.

First, you state "Quantum Theory become clear and logical..." which has some bad English that I am willing to forgive, so I assume based on the rest of the sentence that you mean to say "For Quantum Theory to become clear and logical..." And the unintelligent aspect kicks in: to the informed, quantum theory is clear and logical. It is not very intuitive, but most people would not have the arrogance to suppose their intuition about the way things work hold on nanometer scale levels and below. There are some interesting philosophical aspects to quantum mechanics, but clarity and logic are not missing.

Next off, what is T? You write 0K next to it, so maybe you mean 0° Kelvin? Right off the bat you are just assuming context that nobody else shares. What are we supposed to take as fundamental? That the temperature everywhere is zero? That there are peculiar things about zero temperature? The second we already do and the first is measurably false. Heck, just buy a thermometer, you too can disprove this claim--in the comfort of your own home.

And that is just one sentence. In your longer posts, these problems just multiply. Lack of context, lack of overall coherence, and then bald assertions which are demonstrably false.

 

[L Gilbert]

Yes. It is unintelligent and garbage.Lack of context, lack of overall coherence, and then bald assertions which are demonstrably false.

........... but quite funny sometimes.

 

[Niflmir]

........... but quite funny sometimes.

Well he asked, so I wanted to give an honest answer. I agree with your sentiment though. He doesn't seem to take himself too seriously, which is kind of refreshing, to tell the truth.

 

[L Gilbert]

Well he asked, so I wanted to give an honest answer. I agree with your sentiment though. He doesn't seem to take himself too seriously, which is kind of refreshing, to tell the truth.

He does seem to have a good grip on his ego, yep.

 

[Niflmir]

He does seem to have a good grip on his ego, yep.

Actually, it makes me wonder why people would ban him. Sure, some might see it as spam, but so many conspiracy theory nutters do so much worse, and then start yelling at people.

 

[L Gilbert]

Soc was banned? That's odd to me, too.

 

[Niflmir]

Soc was banned? That's odd to me, too.

Not from here, some physics forum apparently.

 

[socratus]

We are setting limits on things ( for example: c=1, T=0K )
that we don’t have a clue about.
From these two parameters (c=1, T=0K ) was started
all modern speculations in Physics ( SRT, QT, GRT ).

==..

 

[socratus]

Our Modern Scientific Philosophy.
=.
The simplest atom hydrogen consists of electron and proton.
Question.
Where did electron and proton come from?
Answer.
Electron and proton came from big bang.
Question.
Where the did big bang come from?
Answer.
The big bang was created when all electrons and protons
and all another particles were pressed into a singular point.
==..
If you don’t believe in such philosophy – you are ignorant man.
=.