Like I've said many times, I is a scientist and you is a godwhack. You, just like any other priest, wish to discriminate, very narrowly, as to who or what will be considered scientific. The method is free to any and all who would inquire.
How Gravity Works
- Thread starter darkbeaver
- Start date
Like I've said many times, I is a scientist and you is a godwhack. You, just like any other priest, wish to discriminate, very narrowly, as to who or what will be considered scientific. The method is free to any and all who would inquire.
You're not a scientist and you know it; you identified yourself in the thread I started about my furnace problems as a service technician. Anybody who thinks as you do that Velikovsky was right doesn't know enough science to have an opinion about it worth taking seriously.
I know how gravity works. It works very well. It keeps our planet together and it gets fed stuff from the planet.
The last time I looked, no-one could give a definitive and conclusive answer as to how gravity worked. There are lots of ideas around, though.
The last time I looked, no-one could give a definitive and conclusive answer as to how gravity worked. There are lots of ideas around, though.
Hmmm, so who exactly is a scientist hmmm let's see what the dic says.{ scientist= anyone who uses the scientific method } Well there you have it, I'm a scientist. We can all agree on that I wager. Or will you argue with the dictionary? I wonder?
It may surprise you to learn that many fine scientists are also service techs on the side, you got to eat while you discover eh. You have certain narrow religious restrictions that keep you from understanding the force, such is the curse of the faith based mind. I can't count the times I've seen you say "it is written". I would not want to be you when you have to incorporate as gospel, hehe, what you have scorned. Professor S Peter will meet you at the gates and you better not be wearing that big bang teeshirt. happy new year Dexter
PS; I may be a very very bad scientist :smile:
Gravity is like the government sucking money out of your pay cheque. No point in trying to understand it. It is just there.
I doubt I read it. lol
I was snooping a little and found this bit on gravity and time, though:
physics @ berkeley
I'm not awfully good with physics so I have to read slowly and think a lot. I'm about halfway through. lol
You lose the wager. That's not what any dictionary I have says, they all define it as somebody with deep knowledge of a particular field of science, which you manifestly do not have.
Sure you can. You've seen me say that exactly zero times.
Sure you can, zero's a perfectly good number for counting with. It's the number of elements in the empty set.
I am not really sure why you think that. I make my living researching gravity in fact. We think we have a fairly good understanding of gravity and are trying to nail down more and more predictions.
No, it is like this:
I can buy a fancy ring from a shop and take it apart into both a plain ring and a diamond. I cannot buy a diamond alone and make a ring out of it, I need to buy some metal to make the plain ring, then I need glue to stick them together.
I can take Einstein's equations and extract from them Maxwell's equations. There is no way to take Maxwell's equations and do the same, I would have to add fields to it.
The correct statement is: A ⊂ B, not A=B. Since ⊂ is not commutative one cannot say B ⊂ A.
I found another definition of gravity that I don't quite understand but it is a fact
Gravity is when a 4 ounce doughnut transforms into 5 lbs of fat on your ass.
Gravity is when a 4 ounce doughnut transforms into 5 lbs of fat on your ass.
That's just a reminder that you need a little more exercise.............:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Pardon please for the paraphrase? You cannot say, with scientific certainty, that I have no deep understanding of science unless you believe, faithfully, in your own deep understanding of science. In truth you can have no deep understanding of something which is infinite, you are to little. You have also modified the dictionary meaning to remove the common denominator which is the reference to the method itself, without which you cannot proceed, scientifically.
We are both standing in the same puddle, you think you are forty stories high, and I'm always stoned, (we are dead even plus or minus next to nothing.)<----math
There are legions of idiots who're convinced that they are scientists who have deep knowledge of things that do not exist. Isn't math magical and wonderful.
You bring me a quark a charm or a gravitron in a bottle and I'll kiss your arse and bark like a fox to draw a crowd, as it is.
"After all, to get the whole universe totally wrong in the face of clear evidence for over 75 years merits monumental embarrassment and should induce a modicum of humility." Halton Arp
“We have to learn again that science without contact with experiments is an enterprise which is likely to go completely astray into imaginary conjecture.” Hannes Alfvén
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman
Last edited:
Some of our early experiments pointed to this but our funding was cut off and we didn't finish the work. Am I correct in assuming that you understand up as essentially 180 deegrees from down?
Yes I can. I can tell by what you say and how you say it that you have no real understanding of science at all. You've apparently concluded, for instance, that Niflmir's saying Maxwell was wrong, which is such a basic misunderstanding both of what Niflmir posted and of how science fits together that there's no chance you'll ever understand a clarification.
I have not. No dictionary definition of scientist I found made mention of the method itself, the definitions were in terms of expertise. Dictionary.com, for example, offers these:
-an expert in science, esp. one of the physical or natural sciences.
-a person having expert knowledge of one or more sciences, especially a natural or physical science.
-a person learned in science and especially natural science : a scientific investigator.
Pay closer attention to that remark of Feynman's you're fond of citing.