FLAT EARTH

[Seedz]

yes, actually, i like to challenge atheists to apply it to the cosmos as a system. it's almost always something they have never even considered, and they usually don't think that a 'Jesus nut' has ever heard of such a thing - if they've even heard of it themselves. i'm also fond of pointing out the observer effect ((re: de Broglie et al)) as it relates to corporeal reality as an whole.

Well the Incompleteness theorem shows the limitations of known axioms (statements established to be true through logic and reasoning within a particular subject specifically arithmetic using a set of rules).

For the people that have no idea what I'm talking about in short it means that any non trivial system cannot actually be proven because contradictions and incompleteness exits. Things that are not contradictory in one system, may be contradictory in another. It is basically impossible if you do not have all the known facts.

Assuming that the cosmos are real as they tell you they are you'd be running up against the fact that in an infinite cosmos you'd eventually run into many contradictions and unknown variables that would make it impossible to exist the way they tell you it exits.

The observer effect just goes to show that there is no absolute truth in any measurement because the very same experiment set up to observe something can alter the object that is being observed.

 

[Seedz]

We often call friends in China, sometimes right around dusk when the sun is setting in the west. For them it's early morning and the sun is rising in the east. Sometimes we'll call a couple hours after the sun sets, and it will be morning in China. How can this be if the earth is flat? Have the Flat Earthers come up with a theory for this?
.
.
(I asked a similar question above. Sorry if you answered it and I didn't see your answer.)

Think of the sun more like a spot light and not this Huge ball of fire and fission that will evaporate anything that gets too close.

The earth dwarfs the sun in the FE model.

 

[Seedz]

Everything in free-fall is being displaced, in particular things we know the density of. Including bowling balls and masses on strings ((re: the well-known experiment you're ignoring)).

Didn't you say you had vast knowledge?

Can you rephrase this post? I am not sure that I am reading it correctly...

 

[Seedz]

That's a deflection, not an answer.

Are you presenting an argument and justifiable conclusion or are you playing some kind of imaginary game where you try to amass 'cool points'?

I'm the furthest thing from cool.

I just want to see what kind of person I am talking to.

This is a whole other topic that I would love to discuss on another thread.

From the gist of your answer you probably have your own interpretation of Genesis 6.

 

[posthuman]

I give "cool points" for humility, and for not dragging the debate down by personal attacks.

You're counting cool points?
Would the 'not dragging down' bit be why you just made some vague insinuation about Einstein?

Y'all can pm me whenever there's an actual discussion. Am not here to play games and feed egos.

 

[Seedz]

You're counting cool points?

Y'all can pm me whenever there's an actual discussion. Am not here to play games and feed egos.

I am just answering or commenting on your posts. I don't see what I did wrong, but I do apologize if I did do something to leave a bad taste in your mouth.

 

[posthuman]

Well the Incompleteness theorem shows the limitations of known axioms (statements established to be true through logic and reasoning within a particular subject specifically arithmetic using a set of rules).

For the people that have no idea what I'm talking about in short it means that any non trivial system cannot actually be proven because contradictions and incompleteness exits. Things that are not contradictory in one system, may be contradictory in another. It is basically impossible if you do not have all the known facts.

Assuming that the cosmos are real as they tell you they are you'd be running up against the fact that in an infinite cosmos you'd eventually run into many contradictions and unknown variables that would make it impossible to exist the way they tell you it exits.

The observer effect just goes to show that there is no absolute truth in any measurement because the very same experiment set up to observe something can alter the object that is being observed.

That is not what the incompleteness theorem says, and it is not what the observer effect is.

 

[Seedz]

That is not what the incompleteness theorem says, and it is not what the observer effect is.

How else would you simplify it?

 

[posthuman]

How else would you simplify it?

Its not a matter of 'simplifying' it differently, you're just plain mistaken about what they are. You're confused about non-determinancy and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Gödel's mathematics have nothing to do with this at all, and the collapse of a wave function upon observation in itself is only related to uncertainty in that it's also part of the broad theory of QM.

Did you 'learn' all you think you know about physics and algorithmic complexity from conspiratorial youtube videos, by any chance....?

 

[Seedz]

Its not a matter of 'simplifying' it differently, you're just plain mistaken about what they are. You're confused about non-determinancy and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Gödel's mathematics have nothing to do with this at all, and the collapse of a wave function upon observation in itself is only related to uncertainty in that it's also part of the broad theory of QM.

Did you 'learn' all you think you know about physics and algorithmic complexity from conspiratorial youtube videos, by any chance....?

Mistaken? Really?

Okay show me.

 

[posthuman]

Lol what do you want, a youtube link??

What's your background in physics?

 

[Seedz]

Lol what do you want, a youtube link??

What's your background in physics?

Im actually not a physicists. Background is mechanical engineering and DC electronic modular systems.

Im not looking for you to prove it.

I asked you to show me.

I'm interested, you seem like you are involved with the study in some way.

 

[posthuman]

Lol what do you want, a youtube link??

What's your background in physics?

Nvm I don't know why I even asked that. Obviously if you believe the earth is flat you know relatively very little about it.

Have you ever heard of the double slit experiment? Do you know how bombs are tested without blowing them up?

 

[posthuman]

Here, this will teach you something about the observer effect:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.06218&ved=0ahUKEwipyKqz6vbXAhVFQt8KHYItDP4QFghcMAs&usg=AOvVaw0973U2HPe7bnk09q5Z8RG8


Its a link to a pdf paper about non-destructive bomb testing ((quantum mechanics in action in industry))

 

[Karraster]

Im actually not a physicists. Background is mechanical engineering and DC electronic modular systems.

Im not looking for you to prove it.

I asked you to show me.

I'm interested, you seem like you are involved with the study in some way.

If I recall, he is an accountant. He's also a "more than your average bear" NASA fan. Way more than average.

 

[posthuman]

Incompleteness on the other hand is the reason that Euclid could not do geometry without first making some assumptions that were left unproven, fir example that the shortest distance between two points is a line.
That doesn't mean planar geometry is self contradictory or that out of the infinite possible circles there must be one whose circumference isn't 2*pi*r !

 

[posthuman]

If I recall, he is an accountant. He's also a "more than your average bear" NASA fan. Way more than average.

I'm very much not an accountant Hahaha!

No Karraster, you do not recall correctly. I'm an analyst more or less, right now, and I've got a handful of degrees in math & physics and some other very much non-accounting related subjects.
I hate dealing with money. I could probably get an accountant job sure, but I would despise it. Anyone that knows me personally would laugh at the suggestion

 

[IamWhoIam]

Yeehaa I found my shoe I lost,

 

[Karraster]

I'm very much not an accountant Hahaha!

No Karraster, you do not recall correctly. I'm an analyst more or less, right now, and I've got a handful of degrees in math & physics and some other very much non-accounting related subjects.
I hate dealing with money. I could probably get an accountant job sure, but I would despise it. Anyone that knows me personally would laugh at the suggestion

I thought you did audits. My bad. You didn't deny the rest. Ha ha yourself, you are a big NASA fan, correct?

 

[posthuman]

I thought you did audits. My bad. You didn't deny the rest. Ha ha yourself, you are a big NASA fan, correct?

I have done audits off and on. Auditing is verifying data. It's not necessarily financial, which is what I associate 'accounting' with.

Suppose person is interested in the Bible. The watchtower society prints an enormous amount of writing about the Bible, maybe more than any other group in the world. Does that make anyone interested in the Bible a 'way bigger than average fan' of Jehovahs witnesses?