/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10288457
>Space expands, it warps and it contains matter and energy. Its transparent to electromagnetic radiation, it carries waves, it has volume.

So does everything else. Also if it was transparent to EM then how the fuck do you observe it? Like I said, a shadow can be "measured", but that doesn't make it exist. It is the ABSENCE of light. An absence is not reifiable. It is ABSENT of that which makes it reified (the light). You're basically saying that something that doesn't exist exists.

>I agree, we defined them
>humans defining thins makes them real
>And we have a thing in physics we call space-time that works with what we observe in our world
And surely to "observe" something, it must have properties. Can you "observe" absence?
>I am in absence observing it
>"I" in "absence"
Again, what properties does "space" and "time" have?

>Time has basically the same property as space
Oh so now it's a distinction without a difference? Get real.

>but I really don't think you get what space-time is, so it feels dumb arguing about it with you.
I could say the same to you only I "get" that there is actually nothing "to get". Space and time have no properties and therefore have no basis in reality. Unless you have evidence to prove otherwise...the evidence obviously not being the thing defining itself...

>>10083407
Yeah, and none of them explain what causes it. They describe the effect dubbed as "gravity", but none explain what causes the phenomena. The most you get is "well, uh spinning "mass" n shieeet" and other mathematical descriptions of what it does. What is fucking "pulling"?

>>9974228
>We will be using bottle rockets indeed.
As long as we're under the psychosis of GR and QM, sure.

>Reality is not Star Trek, my brainlet friend, we aint warping to the stars ever.

No shit. That fucking show has poisoned the brains of those inspired by it with notions that everything is a fucking particle/pseudo science made up "thing". "Oh uh we need more dilithium crystals captain because we need them for warp...because tachyons and shit".

>>9973063

>profitable
>only when you look at the stock value of the company
>and not the actual real world companies which are failing miserably
>doesn't even publish profits of space X
>neglecting the fact that a stock is not a profit. It is an investment, a promise of a return or gain of said investment.

So please tell me one government subsidized company of his that has turned a profit. How much and what is the 5 year outlook?

>>9946589
>Seriously bub, you have no rational point worth discussing,
Oh no you got me, if only you has some sustenance to back up that shitty opinion then people might actually believe you. Here's an idea, why don't you explain to me what the quantitative difference between a 1 watt laser and a 1 watt light bulb is? A magnet and a chunk of iron? There is none you fool!
Apparently your refueling at reddit didn't yield you any more arguments since all you seem to be doing is trying to fit in here by making "lol brainlet!" posts (again). Refute me.