Putting the final nail into modern science's coffin

Originally posted by EasyPleaseMe

Wheatstones experiment using rotating mirrors was genius but hardly accurate by todays standards.

I think that pretty much sums it all up in everything. People want to believe that in the past there were pockets of technology well beyond what we have today, well beyond even what we can understand. Those that do believe this are basically ignorant and so rely on magic and mirrors.

Even when we look at building pyramids, people can't fathom that those great structures can be built with very basic tools, knowledge, people power and lots of time. They then think that only ancient high technology can do it without really thinking that would mean that on one end their technology was only high enough to used raw rock and wood and on the other end they had super advance machinery to manipulate...hehe

reply to post by Xtrozero


I think magic and mirrors accurately describes modern science to the T. Dividing by zero in an elaborate mathematical maze designed to bewilder the simpleton. That's the wizardry of today.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust

I think magic and mirrors accurately describes modern science to the T. Dividing by zero in an elaborate mathematical maze designed to bewilder the simpleton. That's the wizardry of today.

How do you explain that computer you are using? Is it magic and mirrors?

How do you explain that GPS you use? Is it magic and mirrors...just a hint: The minimum error needed for your GPS to work as it does is so infinitely small that parts go into quantum mechanic realm of understanding.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

I think magic and mirrors accurately describes modern science to the T. Dividing by zero in an elaborate mathematical maze designed to bewilder the simpleton.

I'm no genius, nor do I pretend to be. But there's a difference between people like you and people like me. Where you'd say "looks complicated, can't be true", I'd say "looks interesting, I'll learn about it".

I guess that sums up the difference between the curious and the incurious. Oh well, it's your loss...

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
That the stark realities of our world show the complete opposite of a progressively upward worldview of evolutionists should be embarrassing enough.

i'm troubled by your wording here, could you rephrase or explain what you mean by a "progressively upward worldview of evolutionists"? and why is it embarrassing?

But to add even more insult to injury, they also adhere to these old, out-dated, terribly deficient and embarrassing concepts.

they are not outdated, deficient or embarrassing if they work, and they do..

The Big Bang

while not perfect it does a perfectly satisfactory job of explaining the start of our universe, and will continue to do so until it is revised or replaced by a better model.

Relativity

again, so far, it works fine.

A constant speed of light

the speed of light is not always constant and modern science accepts this.

Gravity

the current equation and explanation works fine.

A nuclear powered Sun

the main evidence for this comes from neutrinos, elementary particles which are produced in nuclear reactions in the center of the Sun and which have been observed using detectors on Earth.

Black holes

what's wrong with our explanation of black holes?

Dark Matter

Dark Energy

these are just theories at present, since we can't detect either.. but that doesn't mean they are wrong.

Curved space

this is directly observable and mathematically equatable, that means proven.

An expanding universe

again this is directly observable and mathematically provable.

Light composed of different colors

i have no idea where this comes from.. all light is the same, and (i guess you could say) contains all colours, it's when it is reflected and absorbed by our eyes that we differentiate colour.

Space as a vacuum

space is a vacuum.. is the problem with the scientific definition of a vacuum? outer space has very low density and pressure, and is the closest physical approximation of a perfect vacuum. but no vacuum is truly perfect, not even in interstellar space, where there are still a few hydrogen atoms per cubic meter.

A self-generating magnetic field (Earth)

earth generates the magnetic field. it's not self-generating.

I mean, shall we go on?

i kinda wish you went on a bit more about what you think is wrong with modern science.. you know how it gets to be called science and not pseudoscience? through vigorous experiment and analysis, peer review by other scientists, etc.. if you can't scientifically prove something, with proper mathematical fact, it's not science.

See The Speed of Light Measured with a Pulsed Laser in the search

courses.washington.edu/phys331/Pulsed_laser_SoL/laser_SoL.php‎ The Speed of Light Measured with a Pulsed Laser. A laser is pulsed at 1 MHz, and the laser light pulses are bounced off of a mirror and then detected by a fast ...

Light is light and mirrors are mirrors and thats the way measurement is done.
Wheatstone used the right tools.
There had to be a critic of anything faster than light or it would steam roll into
perpetual energy and ether theory which is true and not Einstein'ers mass is
energy approved by people like coal mine owners.

I told you how charge transfer was done due to fine matter charged particles
going faster than the speed of light. Perhaps due to the small mass Einstein
can't slow it down before reaching the end of the coil.

So, I'm still waiting for the mainsteram science to be laid to rest, and for the various alternative / pseudo-scientific / metaphysical experts to take up the banner. I'm looking forward to spaceflight, electronics, nuclear physics, molecular physics, etc. to be run by these theories, and see how far they can go, and how many people would die due to the incorrect theories being used.

All this talk about mainstream science being on the verge of collapsing... it's kinda funny and sad at the same time.

reply to post by wildespace


And yet MS science has already admitted that Relativity is flawed and crumbling, or did you conveniently forget that?

These ideas are spreading faster than you can mitigate them, and I'll bet that just burns you up on the inside, doesn't it?

reply to post by tachyonmind


That's a nice way of saying that you don't really have any answers. Thanks.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

That's a nice way of saying that you don't really have any answers. Thanks.

ummm.. answers to what questions exactly? i asked you to elaborate on why you think modern science is embarrassing..

do you have some questions you want answered?

reply to post by CircleOfDust

And yet MS science has already admitted that Relativity is flawed and crumbling, or did you conveniently forget that?

How exciting it would be if this were true.

Care to cite some references, OP? Peer-reviewed papers, popular writings by real physicists, even an article from a reputable science magazine or web site?

If relativity is 'flawed and crumbling', many of us would love to hear about it – particularly those of us who dream of an interstellar future for humanity.

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by CircleOfDust

 

And yet MS science has already admitted that Relativity is flawed and crumbling, or did you conveniently forget that?

...Care to cite some references, OP? Peer-reviewed papers, popular writings by real physicists, even an article from a reputable science magazine or web site?...

+1 on this, if relativity was crumbling then surely everything we've built upon it would crumble too, no?

what about quantum electrodynamics, the first theory where full agreement between quantum mechanics and special relativity is achieved? this theory mathematically describes all phenomena involving electrically charged particles interacting by means of exchange of photons and represents the quantum counterpart of classical electromagnetism giving a complete account of matter and light interaction, and it's base is relativity.

the fact is that relativity is self-evident and self-consistent. math is math, it doesn't crumble.

reply to post by Astyanax


You can chew on this.

reply to post by tachyonmind


Oh really? What happens when you divide by zero? That's right.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

Oh really? What happens when you divide by zero? That's right.

You seem to think that's a catch all phrase. You've used it many times, but do you really understand what it is you are asking when you ask that?

It's a simple math question, who's answer is infinity:

1 / 1 = 1

1 / 0.5 = 2

1 / 0.05 = 20

1 / 0.005 = 200

1 / 0.00000000005 = 20000000000

The closer the divisor gets to zero the larger the answer, to where when you get to zero, the answer is a impossibly large number, or a infinite number.

If you take an apple, you can halve it (divide by 0.5) and get 2 pieces. You can keep dividing those pieces, and end up with a extremely large number of pieces. If you could cut it up into it's individual subatomic components, you would have an insane amount of "pieces".

You are using the phrase "divide by zero" as if it is some sort of trump card.

Instead, it's making you look rather silly on the loosing end of an argument.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

Oh really? What happens when you divide by zero? That's right.

You get people who haven't a clue what they are talking about misunderstanding what has been said in a 'popular science' video pretending they are smart. Usually it's because of some invisible man in the sky. Or the electric universe.

Me, I spent a lot of time learning and doing experiments myself. How about you?

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

But notice that not ONE of the so called scientifically literate opposition posters on this thread and others dare bring into the equation that they could be wrong as science is a continuously learning endeavor. It's all: you're wrong, and this is right. Nothing but pure BS dogma.

Terribly ignorant statement here. Science is the process of discovery. It is not a dogmatic atheistic version of religion as you seem to think. Believe it or not, most of the "answers" science have given us are built upon the failures of earlier experiments or models. In fact, sometimes being wrong is what puts us on the correct path. Scientists are human beings just like you and as a consequence of that humanity, do make mistakes, just like you. The difference is we learn from the errors and account for them in future hypothesis/experiments. Sometimes the fun part is being wrong. With that said, you need to get off of Tesla's d!@k, he had a great mind but he was an engineer more so than a scientist. He was the guy who sifted through other peoples work combined the best parts and built something out of it. Sometimes it worked sometimes it didn't. Even Tesla made mistakes and learned from them. Give it a try sometime...being wrong and admitting it doesn't hurt that much, just your pride.

And...

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Why should I hold your hand? Why can you ask me to show my proof, but you can't show me yours of his being disproved?

Not to be a smarty pants here, but... the WHY is because this thread was started by you and thus it is YOUR responsibility to back up your statements with facts and links. Superfluous conjecture and hyperbolic rhetoric does not an answer make.

reply to post by peter vlar


I can't help it if you can't read all of my thread past that point to see my evidence.

reply to post by eriktheawful


You didn't watch the video.

"Therefor there's a fundamental flaw in the formulation of Einstein's theory of Relativity"

Michio Kaku

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by peter vlar

 

I can't help it if you can't read all of my thread past that point to see my evidence.

My reading skills are just fine, but thanks for the concern. however, what evidence have you used to support your supposition? You've posted no evidence except for some scant circumstantial possibilities. If I missed it, just relink it here for me but we both know that it won't be forthcoming. However, I'm happy to be proven wrong. And when I say evidence, I don't mean homemade youtube videos. Unless I missed something after grad school and they halted the process of peer review in favor of just open source publishing en masse to youtube. and what the heck, why not swing the door of hypocrisy open a little more, I'll link a video for you, but only because it is Dr. Kaku himself discussing gravity. And since not even Tesla can divide this by zero, why would your video be evidence where this is not? I'm no Tesla but if we're going down that road then you're not even Tesla's gardener.
www.youtube.com...