[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.10561371 [View]
File: 781 KB, 1223x790, berserk3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10561371

>>10561326
>ohhh you're the same idiot who got shut down once somebody asked you what your holographic model implies.

Don't know what you mean by "shutdown" but all it means is "point nonspecific self-similarity".

>i thought the conclusion was that you're just word salading and couldn't into science if your life depended on it.
No, which is why I don't use terms such as "space-time", "time", "space", "quantum", "time-dilation", "waves", "particles" and all the other concepts that don't pertain to reality. That is word salad.

>seriously, you say you know something about science,
It forms and organizes knowledge with testable explanations and predictions about the universe. That is what science does
>it contradicts all of known science
Not at all. "Settling science" is what contradicts science. Making theories based on no empirical evidence and forming false premises then testing them.
>the universe isn't physical, it's really a hologram but this fact has no measurable evidence.
So you tell me how to measure what has no quantity. Also it does, it's called a FUCKING "HOLOGRAM". Magnets, cells, you and anything else that grows and is self-similar is also "holographic".
>this is what is defined as "not scientific"
Why don't you explain to me what "science" is supposed to do. It's not supposed to dictate what is or what isn't.

>so why do you believe it?
Because there is literally empirical evidence of it.
> how about you argue the logic at how you got there?
You're right, I agree. There is nothing more logical that making an observation of empirical evidence. Go split a magnet sometime and tell me what happens.
>clearly it has nothing to do with the scientific method.... what is your alternative thought process here?
>Test self-similar things and observe how they form
>verify that it indeed self-similar
>material is formed
>The form is in no way "physical", what is formed is what is physical

How much more proof do you want?

>> No.10479626 [View]
File: 781 KB, 1223x790, berserk3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10479626

>>10479600
What's stopping you now? You'll even have a head start. See you tomorrow afternoon granted all my posts aren't deleted.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]