/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11627161
It works well but it's convoluted and incomplete.

inb4 wall of youtube links and 90 replies of incoherent samefagging

Point out the error.

>>11627211
time isnt a thing

>>11627161
find a theory that works better.

>>116272 kek

>>11627225
Time must exist otherwise objects wouldn't be able to occupy the same space

>>11627300
The answer you'll get from these types is that space isn't a container, nor is the universe. Location can't be both the coordinate and the "cell" the object occupies.

Basically, there is no knowable, logical answer to the basis of existence. People like to argue anyway. Look up the munchausen trilemma.

>>11627198
>convoluted
Could it be simplified?

>>11627225
>>>/x/

>>11627198
>convoluted
Is the most elegant theory out there and not convoluted at all.

>>11627225
>>11627309
Time isn't a coordinate "place," it's movement. What we perceive as time is just movement across the physical geometry of space.

>>11627887

Yep.

>>11627887
>>11628497

Also, just occurred to me that time is defined by its energy-matter configuration. Identical energy-matter configurations are the same time... even if separated by... what we think of as time.

>>11627161
Prove it wrong

>>11628502
>Also, just occurred to me that time is defined by its energy-matter configuration. Identical energy-matter configurations are the same time... even if separated by... what we think of as time.

Oh and this one is def getting credited to OI by the way... don't know what the implications are of that but I'll think about it.

>>11627309
>Location can't be both the coordinate and the "cell" the object occupies.

Interesting... Would this mean that the cell content is the real coordinate? That would be energy-matter. Energy-matter is infinite at every point so that MIGHT also give every cell a unique coordinate... hmm

>>11628508
prove it right

>>11627198
It's literally just defining a geometry and applying all the other classical physical postulates that were being used before.

>>11628584
It's been proven to work so far.
Prove it doesn't work.

>>11627652
>>11628597

Yeah, there is nothing convoluted about twisting the madeup concept of "spacetime" just to keep c constant.

>>11627161
I think denying ether by misconcluded results of "evidence" based proof is also bullshit.

There's ton of bullshit in physics nowadays.

>>11627240
>we don't have a proper theory right now
>therefore this theory a jew pulled out of his imagination must be right!!!!!!!

>>11627652
>Is the most elegant theory out there

>>11627887
>movement is subjective to time (dx/dt)
>movement is time (t=dx/dt)
Pick one and ONLY one, you collossal moron.
>>11628508
Burden of proof.
>>11628584
Based.

>>11628597
The geometry of the Universe is not subjective to some crazy Jew's imagination-based definition.
>>11629098
>2020
>not being brainwashed by the scientific establishment
Absolutely based.

To believe in "black holes" you must be a schizo. It requires a schizo mind. It requires doublethink.

"Black holes" violate Einstein's Relativity theories (let's just pretend they're correct), yet in the institutionalized "settled science" dogma, they simultaneously believe in Relativity. And "black holes" (as defined by the "black hole" believers themselves) can't exist in a Big Bang Universe, yet they simultaneously believe in the Big Bang. And by the official "black hole" """science""" there can't be /multiple/ "black holes" in the same universe simultaneously, yet they believe there are. It's 100% schizo and idiotic.

Institutionalized "settled science" followers are basically religious - they ignore any science and facts which contradicts their belief system.

To everyone who wish to learn and educate themselves, here's an excellent scientific paper describing the problems and contradictions with "black holes" and Relativity: https://files.catbox.moe/b3aur6.pdf

And here are great educational videos for those who don't want to read (all the following is based on /real science/ and observations of facts, as opposed to the "settled science" dogma):

https://youtu.be/kI14fpM3ouU

https://youtu.be/Iz8RRN8rY00

https://youtu.be/yc9PB_4F-OU

https://youtu.be/J4NffTr_GMk

https://youtu.be/Dk2-lH9ewuA

https://youtu.be/ev10ywLFq6E

https://youtu.be/I8y3VrrVEpI

https://youtu.be/Dz2A4qXJQjc

https://youtu.be/-FdWTH08u30

https://youtu.be/Q185InpONK4

https://youtu.be/CHZ5O0jTH8A

https://youtu.be/lmROfjgViLE

https://youtu.be/p8lKQMEYYLw

https://youtu.be/FIgmsQOKnmk

https://youtu.be/kz-Bwi5xTTs

https://youtu.be/xUC_a-IMmGs

https://youtu.be/nLC4MA6_Oq0

https://youtu.be/MvNCWMD6so4

https://youtu.be/4IdMz8PkGZM

https://youtu.be/SeIHTCdOGWs

https://youtu.be/_c9M33FLH40

https://youtu.be/-03lh_tHMJ0

https://youtu.be/TiKYvUtpJXA

https://youtu.be/hC_KkLvG22A

https://youtu.be/ot-9R2GZxp8

https://youtu.be/TdYrgJrBFr0

https://youtu.be/-03lh_tHMJ0

>>11629934
I love this pasta

>>11627887
Time is based on events

>>11627240
We already have one. If you don't know it, you shouldn't be posting here. Lurk moar.

>>11629098

c can be constant even without twisted spacetime.

>>11630069
same
>>11630325
What is it? I am on your side, I don't believe in ERT. I genuinely want to know what theory you think is the best alternative so I can look into it.
>>11630606
Constant to the aether or to some other point of reference (say, the photon's source), sure. Relative to each observer, no.
Not saying it is constant relative to it's source btw just saying it hypothetically could be without fucking with space or time.

>>11627161
Tell that to the anomalous perihelion precession of mercury, the LIGO gravitational wave experiments, atomic clocks and every other experiment affirming relativity, dumbass. Reality disagrees with you.

>>11631677
>anomalous perihelion precession of mercury
Maybe you should stop being so judgmental and its perihelion precession is actually just fine.
>the LIGO gravitational wave experiments
Call me back once they do a serious experiment not made out of LIGOs.
>atomic clocks
Why would you use that? Radiation interfering with results.
>and every other experiment
Name a single one that did not involve jews.

>>11631708
>Maybe you should stop being so judgmental and its perihelion precession is actually just fine.
kek

>>11627161
>muh Judische physik

fuck off back to /pol/

>>11631708
>Name a single one that did not involve jews

Eddington experiment, performed by English astronomers Arthur Eddington and Frank Dyson, which measured the deflection of light rays around the sun, which agreed with the predictions of general relativity.

>>11631733
Fuck. The eternal anglo strikes again.
>which measured the deflection of light rays around the sun
Can't trust the sun man. It's deflecting.

>>11631744
Fuck i guess the earth is flat and it’s turtles all the way down

>>11629098
Wasn't it found that a constant related to C isn't actually a constant? Like the strength of electromagnetism.

>>11631746
Still seems like the simplest explanation to me.

>>11629098
You’re not twisting anything. Literally the only thing you need to make the special theory of relativity from spacetime is to change one positive sign into a negative sign. It’s not hard.

>>11631759
What myth is the turtle even from?

>>11631759
You’re right. How could i have been so blind.

>>11631759
Ok, but why the fuck is the turtle even giving a shit? Why not just toss off the disk and the elephants huh?

>>11631774
It has to deliver us in time or we're free.

>>11631708
>math is valid for some applications
>therefore the theory is correct
NON SEQUITIR

>>11631787
If I were the Turtle I'd call the quits. Millenia carrying a heavy disk? Pfft, I can get my mortgage paid far easier than that. Besides I already have a house on me. Who even is employing me?

>>11631845
Show me your theory that can predict all of those phenomena and more. I’ll wait.

>>11627887
You speak of time being nothing specific, further negating that time is something.
>>11630087
>Time is based on time
lol

>>11627211
"Time" and "Space" were conventions and placeholders used. Eventually they got confused for being actually something that does something. Neither are something, nor do they act on something else or have they properties to be measurable, yet physicists insist there is actually something of note to be discussed about them. Now you might say:
>but it's just a model

But it still fails to provide evidence of what's being modeled. Assumptions? Cool story bro. Maybe if I can woo an audience with a description of a painting that doesn't exist, they'll buy my description of the painting and treat it as if it were as valuable as the painting that I never showed or even proved exists.

>but space and time do exist!
and only circular reasoning, 0 empirical evidence, and 0 scientific experiments have been provided for them.

>>11631754
>Like the strength of electromagnetism.
Light is a form of electromagnetism.


>>11628634
>prove a description doesn't work
It's one thing to see something and describe it, and another to explain why it is the way it is. "Spooky action" doesn't cut it unfortunately, but it's not an incorrect description! It is indeed "spooky", since we're superstitious about things we don't understand. In fact "spooky action at a distance" sounds like a description that a homeless person would give me. Does that make it wrong? Would that mean if I described Einstein as a fuzzy haired crackpot whom a homeless person could outdo in descriptions, that it's automatically right since I described it accurately?

>>11631708
Incredibly low IQ post

>>11633426
VERY low IQ post

>>11633426
>It's one thing to see something and describe it, and another to explain why it is the way it is.
sorry not science or math, philosophy questions belong on /lit/

>>11633443
>sorry not science or math

Correct. Time and Space have nothing to do with science. Maybe Math, since math is a language and is made up like time too. But past the various standard of measures used to describe time, it has no meaning. It is not a force, modality, cause nor does it interact with anything physical. Same goes for space. Time and space does not exist, describing them is "not even wrong" since you can always describe an imagination any way you choose.

>>11630325
What is this model?

>>11631766
Hinduism iirc

Good post op

>>11629458
name a more elegant one
(you can't)

>>11634428
Name a less elegant theory. Protip: You can't.

>>11634622
Classical mechanics
Classical electrodynamics
Quantum field theory
Quantum mechanics
Special relativity

>>11629457

It's predictions align with observable and repeatable experiments. Make a theory that can do that but with a higher sucess rate.

>>11627161

>>11634377
Thanks
>>11634926
Thanks
>>11634629
>>11634629
>SRT is less elegant than SRT and GRT collectively
Okay? Are you fucking retarded? Does it matter if one part of ERT alone is more or less 'elegant' than ERT as a whole?
>CM, CED, QM
All more elegant than than ERT
>QFT
Essentially a combination of QM and ERT (and yes, I am aware it does not really include GRT), so whether it's more or less 'elegant' than ERT alone is meaningless
>>11634735
>Make a theory that can do that but with a higher sucess rate.
This is a simulation and the aliens controlling the simulation choose to make everything happen exactly how it does cause they feel like it.
Dumb theory? Yeah. Almost as dumb as ERT, and it goes to show that a theory producing predictions for observed observations is not proof (and often not even evidence) that the theory is correct. ERT is fucking retarded.

>>11634980

Then make atheiry that has a lower margin of error. Our current model of the cosmos exists because successive generations used improved instrumentation and methodology to simplify and then eliminate models of antiquity. What is your contribution?

>>11635003
>Then make atheiry that has a lower margin of error.
Are you fucking retarded? As in actually literally retarded?
>hey we came up with a few theories, the one with the lowest margin of error must be right!
instead of
>the universe is complex beyond our comprehension, and there is a 99.9% chance that all of our theories are wrong
Do you even realize how retarded you sound when you take the former position? You are literally everything that is wrong with the scientific community and, for that matter, academia.

>>11635014
imagine being this much of a defeatist loser, i'm glad no great scientists in the past were this pathetic. Go fucking live in a cave.

A question on relativity.
Was it known at some point before Einstein that gravity was special and didn't cause "proper" acceleration?
That's something that could have been tested right?

People treating spacetime, bending, and all of that GR woo like if it they were religious gospels are CANCER. Science is always about aproximating reality and ultimately all theories end up bitting the dust, but if there is a huge mass of believers in Einstein that situation makes everything just worse. There is a huge bias in academia just because it's been proven to make a lot of predictions but that doesn't mean anything in practice: the theory is wrong because it is incomplete. That's 100% undeniable.

Science is about the infinte process of moving on after falsifying one theory after another. We should always treat SR, GR and all theories like potential failures and incomplete things because that's what they are, objectively.

Stop talking about relativity like if it was a religion.

>>11635014

what proof do you have that the universe is incomprehensible? It clearly is not, because we are experiencing it and have to comprehend it in order to rise from beasts.

>>11635101

if you have abetter idea than suggest it along with repeatable experiments. Many people study their whole lives to do this.

>>11627161
What is with all the schizo threads trashing Relativity? Do the mentally ill get a hard-on every time they intentionally misunderstand a scientific or mathematical concept?

>>11635133
I'm not saying I have a better idea, all I'm saying is that you should NEVER treat a THEORY like if it was written in stone, because that's the domain of religion, pseudoscience and fanatism. People questioning Einstein should be mandatory in academia because there is an awful lot of naive idiots of all ages who ACTUALLY believe there is a real thing called SPACETIME and that it BENDS thanks to pop sci. We have a name for the mental disease of the people who cannot distinguish between reality and mathematical devices and it's called schizophrenia.

>>11635137
You do understand that Relativity isn't a real thing and that's also incomplete, right? I can only assume you aren't schizophrenic enough to believe in a thing called spacetime.

>>11635151

Honestly, if you're so upset then don't be a physicist. People will reference Einstien because in most lines of reseach spacetime is an acceptable given until a new set of portable mathematics based on a better theory emerge.

>>11635173
Then I would say if you are gonna be a cult follower of a particular theoretical physicist then don't be a scientist. People like you are worse than the inquisition and, if anything, you make science as a whole even worse.

>>11635206

You refuse my invitation to use the scientific method? If you want a better theory, even one that is only suitable to a niche range of tasks, then build a better one and prove it's worth through testing. Otherwise there is no reason to argue with existing theory, especially when 90% of science is unaffected by it's flaws. For the other 10%, there is still no better explanation of phenomena realtivity describes despite lenghty efforts to do so.

>>11629098
You need to let go, schizo.

And no, this is not about c. Velocity is not appropriate. In relativity, you talk about rapidity. Velocity is just the linearization of that. Rapidity can become ever higher and there's no problem anymore.

>>11629458
Why do schizos always use that image? It's such a giveaway.
Or are you always the same guy?

>>11635295
You literally have no idea of what you are talking about lmfao. Congrats on your cripling Dunning-Kruger.

>>11635330
>cripling
*crippling

>>11629934
>Einstein's Relativity theories aren't correct
do they have to be correct?
do you even know what science is?

it's just making toy mathematical models that explain the world...

thermodynamics for example is just the math of tiny balls hitting each other... Of course matter isn't just a bunch of tiny balls ... this contradicts quantum mechanics but still is concidered 'settled science'. Why? Because it's useful as fuck...

these models often break at some point
There's bound to be contradictions... Why? because the world is too complicated and we are very limited in trying to understand how it all works...

Relativity isn't the bible and einstein isn't jesus.
the only schizo here is you because you want to be contrarian to 'pop' science...
please drop your ancient scrolls and stop watching conspiracy theories.

>>11634980
>>SRT is less elegant than SRT and GRT collectively
dude you're retarded I was clearly talking about gravity not special relativity

>>11635128
I didn't say that the universe is incomprehensible, I said that the complexity of the universe is incomprehensible, you stupid fucking moron.

>>11635057
>recognizing we don't have all the answers yet
>defeatist
I don't think you know what that word means.
>>11635101
Based as fuck
>>11635133
See >>11635014
Not having a better theory doesn't mean that a current theory is correct, you absolute fucking retard.
>hey I bet that the graham's number-th digit of pi is 7
>hey I bet it's not
>well do you have a BETTER theory?
>no
>oh well then it must be 7!!!!!!!
Literally what you sound like with your Einstein worshipping. More zealous than a fucking gnostic Catholic.

>>11635151
Absolutely based
>>11635173
Using spacetime, GRT, and SRT as a mathematical framework is completely acceptable and valid in some sitautions. The problem is that many scientists treat it as gospel/absolute truth. And that's exactly why the anon you replied to SHOULD be a scientist, because unlike most fucktard scientists, he is actually reasonable and competent.
>>11635206
This

>>11635220
>Otherwise there is no reason to argue with existing theory, especially when 90% of science is unaffected by it's flaws.
>oh let's just assume a theory accurately describes the objective nature of reality because its math works out 90% of the time
hurr durr

>>11635378
>do they have to be correct?
no
>do you even know what science is?
yes
>it's just making toy mathematical models that explain the world...
That's not what 90% of retard physicists believe about ERT
>Relativity isn't the bible and einstein isn't jesus.
But most 'physicists' think the contrary
>>11635420
Yet you were replying to a string of posts starting with >>11627198 which directly replied to OP which is explicitly about SRT and GRT collectively, and nowhere in that string of posts did anyone give the slightest indication that the conversation had shifted to being explicitly about GRT. Admit you were wrong and move on or make yourself look even more retarded. The choice is yours.

>>11635532
If what you mean by "physicists" are pop science fans who frequent reddit than you are correct.

if you mean actual physicists, they do worship einstein and who wouldn't, the guy is a fucking genius and his theories are elegant and accurate.
Shittalking einstein for the sake of shittalking just means you're a sore asshole.
If you really mean business come up with a theory that's more accurate and publish it.
of course you won't be able to do that because all your education is based on youtube.

>>11635532
>Yet you were replying to a string of posts starting with >>11627198 which directly replied to OP which is explicitly about SRT and GRT collectively, and nowhere in that string of posts did anyone give the slightest indication that the conversation had shifted to being explicitly about GRT.
You are truly retarded. I can tell you only have a popsci understanding of Einstein gravity for if not you wouldn't say the words you are saying. Be gone simp.

>>11635547
"Physicists" and pop science fans worship Einstein and ERT. You are a fucking retard if you believe ERT.
>If you really mean business come up with a theory that's more accurate and publish it.
HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO WE NEED TO FUCKING TELL YOU, YOU FUCKING MORONIC FUCKTARD? The lack of a better theory is not proof, or even evidence, that a given theory accurately describes reality, you absolute fucking retard. We do not currently have an accurate theory to model the objective nature of the universe (hence we don't yet have a true unified field theory/TOE). I honestly can't tell if you are genuinely retarded or just trying to troll. See >>11635014
>all your education is based on youtube.
The only thing I use youtube for is watching RuneScape videos and I only do that like once a month.

>>11635557
>not refuting the argument
Note that when you listed SRT in >>11634629, you were replying to >>11634622, which asked for a less elegant theory in response to >>11634428, which was asking for a more elegant theory in response to >>11629458, which was mocking the most elegant theory claim in >>11627652, which was a direct response to a claim that ERT is convoluted and incomplete. Now please name a single fucking word in any one of those posts that even REMOTELY implies the discussion was specifically about GRT.
>using the word simp
Go back to facebook.

>>11635560
>using the word facebook
Go back to facebook.

>>11635330
Refute anything I said, schizo.

Don't delude yourself. Your attempts here are pathetic.

>>11635558
>The lack of a better theory is not proof, or even evidence, that a given theory accurately describes reality

is this why you believe in the bible?

>>11635628
>is this why you believe in the bible?
Quite literally yes. People put their faith in a secularized metaphysical belief. Physicists for instance are "atomists", one of those secularized metaphysical beliefs. Given that the physicists descriptions are just about as batshit insane as a Christians when trying to describe reality, it's no wonder that people just say "fuck it" and go with the belief that's easier to follow. It doesn't have the batshit mathematics behind batshit descriptions, all you have to do is go to church once a week. What sounds more appealing?
listening to a bumbling fuck preacher trying to soul win people with descriptions and some charisma added in
vs
listening to a bumbling fuck on the discovery channel trying to soul win people with some charisma added in
It's the same shit.
>but one batshit insane description has more people agreeing with it
Which doesn't make the empirical proof for it just pop out of nowhere. It just makes the lies pile up more.

>>11628522
>interesting....
>....hmmm

not to be an asshole, but im gonna be an asshole

Nobody cares about your pondering nonsense that even you don't understand. Fuck off

>>11635558

Universe runs on Excel bro. Thought everyone knew that.

>>11627161
ERT is kinda bugged.
They mistake movement speed for time.

>>11627211
>Point out the error
You should understand that even if they couldn't point out the error, relativity could still be wrong.

>>11627161
What is your rebuttal to the fact that satellites need to be constantly corrected for relativity?

>>11628584
>WHAT IS FALSIFICATION
>WHAT IS POSITIVISM
>WHAT IS THE FOUNDATIONS OF MODERN SCIENCE

omg go read a book seriously "prove it right" get out of /sci/ you imbecile

>>11637982
>>11637982
Doesnt mean anything. This just means that gravity influences machines.
That is like saying if a clock runs slower because the batterie is low, the batterie is freezing time.
Dont mistake positioning for general time.

>>11629457
Nothing can be proven right. We can only prove something wrong. So far nothing has proven this theory wrong so it is most likely true

>>11639008
>This just means that gravity influences machines
And by what mechanism does it influence machines pray tell?

>>11640181
not to mention the fact that it effects every type of clock the exact same amount, whether it be a quartz, mechanical, or atomic.

>>11627161
>ERT (Einsteinian Relativity Theory) is pseudoscience.
Yes but this is a forum for pseudo-scientists dear boy so why are you telling them? They are neither smart enough to understand nor smart enough to do anything with this knowledge with you correcting them about it.

Really, can you set up a box? Just compare to static observer, we're moving across the universe,

Take thine meds.

>>11635621
I can easily refute the idea that you don't have the worst case of Dunning-Kruger in all of /sci/.

The "laws" of physics or the "constants" of nature are not constant across our own local, measurable world
https://phys.org/news/2020-04-laws-nature-downright-weird-constant.html

>>11627161
Woke.

>>11641361
Be my guest. I made coffee. Now deliver.

>>11627201
>inb4 wall of youtube links and 90 replies of incoherent samefagging
I fucking called it.

>>11643004
fuck the shut up faggot nigger jewish tranny faggot kike israel glow nigger faggot kike

>>11639008
It slows down processes obviously, retard. Hence why SRT math sometimes produces correct predictions despite the theory being wrong
>>11637919
/thread
>>11635628
No, it's why I DON'T believe the bible. Dumbfuck.

>>11635565
>can't refute the post
kek, btfo dumb nigger 33 IQ

>>11640670
true

>>11635101
It is a religion to them though. Not just relativity bit scientism, they don't even understand relativity in fact their mantra is simply "never question the priests, wait until they tell is what is true". They are like drooling zombies.

>>11643302
redpilled

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TttHkDRuyZw

>>11640168
if you can prove a statement wrong, then you have just proved the statement's inverse.
naive hypothetico-deductivists btfo

>>11627161
If it's been holding things back, why haven't we realized results without it are superior to results with it?

>>11627161
the singularity isn't real we now know they are stars that are bigger then our own sun. and thinking the fabric of space looks like a screen door is stupid. they already told us they can't measure it.

>>11643451
>the singularity isn't real we now know they are stars that are bigger then our own sun.
NO THERE'S NOT REE THE SUN IS THE BIGGEST STAR AND EARTH IS THE CENTR OF THE UNIVERSE AND EINSTEIN WAS REALLY SMART

>>11643467
you forgot that the planet is flat and jesus love you.

Why dont people realize that EVEN IF you have a model of physics that completely describes observed phenomenon, that model still does not in any way say anything about how the universe "actually is"? A perfect model is still a model, it does not matter whatsoever that it completely predicts everything, it still does not actually say ANYTHING about what reality actually is.

>>11643004
if you don’t refute each and every one of those YouTube links you just have to admit that OP is right.

>>11643849
There's a very small picture of your mom's butthole orbiting pluto. Refute this, or you must accept that I'm right.

>>11643872
You are right, because it can not be refuted.
If something can not be disproven, it MUST be accepted. Denying this is peak midwit cope. Russell was a fucking midwit and Russell's teapot is a midwit argument, a reflection of it's creator.

>>11627198
>convoluted
Try using the Fourier transform then, it should turn the convolution in multiplication

>>11643837
This is what reality is
http://esotericawakening.com/what-is-reality-the-holofractal-universe

your welcome for solving it for you

>>11644067
That's indeed an interesting approach to logic oh wait I meant dumb.

>>11643837
based as fuck

>>11635101
/thread

>>11635101
despite what our resident schizos might say, relativity hasn't failed

>>11644624
despite what the resident relativity scientism cult might say relativity is quack tier shit for retards

>>11643837
This should be obvious to anybody who actually studies physics. This is not some mind-blowing thing, it is well-known by most physicists that the formalism of a theory does not necessarily equal its ontology. Curved spacetime may not be true after all, for example in the ADM formalism, general relativity is treated as a theory of curved SPACE evolving over time, not curved spacetime. The curved spacetime model is preferred for historical reasons, elegance and for simplicity.

Don't they use relativity for gps or something?
And nuclear energy?
What else is there to prove really, people have made stuff with einstein's equations.

>>11636903
not sure if troll or just retard...

physics has nothing to do with religion, you'll find many physicists who made up all this "batshit mathematics" to be religious themselves.

>>11644150
You, it isn't, you fucking moron.
First of all, that shit would just be another model and therefore is not what reality actually is
Secondly, that model is fucking wrong and retarded, so you are a stupid fucking retard.
>>11645809
Yes, this is the point. Relativity is TRUE as a MODEL, it does in fact accurate predict observed phenomenon and it is TRUE in that sense, anyone who disagrees is a fucking retard.

>>11646350
>physics has nothing to do with religion

It does and I stated why in the very post you quote. Learn to read an entire post. It is an atomistic belief system by definition: A secularized metaphysics that interprets what is analyzed as discrete and indivisible units.

>b-but it's d-different than religion cause science backs it up!

Oh really? Is there any empirical evidence of a discrete indivisible unit?
>well theoretically
That's right, thought experiments and theories aka BELIEFS say that these units exist, but no actual proof.
>Well there's a community of groupthink that all agree that it's true
Cool Story Bro. Tell them and their bicycles to stay the fuck away from home on Saturday morning.

>you'll find many physicists who made up all this "batshit mathematics" to be religious themselves.
As expected from a religious nutcase. More mathematical descriptions of what was never empirically shown. Just like a preachers description of God.

>>11646354
stop posting simple minded fool, that is far above your IQ to understand. No one cares what your opinion on it is

>>11627198
>It works well
>but it's convoluted and incomplete.
So... it DOESN'T work well. Gotcha.

>>11630325
>>11631054
Look into the Axis of Evil.

>>11643837
What do you think reality actually is?

>>11627161
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele–Keating_experiment#Kinematic_time_dilation
Explain this experiment with out bending space time

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity
I mean if you weren’t a brainlet and had the power of google you can search experiments proving general relativity. It’s not that hard unless you have a an EU retarded counter explanation with math which you don’t.

>>11627161

>>11649997
More importantly the model predictions match experiments. We did math with a model and the math matches reality... this is as scientific as you can get. We did this over and over and over again with general relativity and it has always matched reality.... your pseudo science doesn’t that’s why it’s pseudo science and you are no body and why Einstein theory is not pseudo science and he is famous.

>>11635378
>as fuck...

Chill out with the radical expressions dude.

>>11635378
I know you hate math but math is important. If you do math with a model and it matches reality this is a good model. You anti math retards are exactly it retards. Too much of a brainlet to do math so the only thing you have is conjecture. is nothing. It’s like the EU theory all conjecture no math. Same with all the other pseudo science theories. All conjecture no math. Do some math with your Retarded counter model and see if it matches experiment oh wait you can’t because your theory is just mindless conjecture and you can’t. I hope you and all your Retarded YouTubers that pump out All pseudo science conjecture kill theirselves and do this world something good for once.

>>11627161
>>11627198
Isn't this sort of the topic if the ERP paper = Einstein Rosen Podolsky?

https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777

Rosen, Nathan. “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?” In Albert Einstein, 57–67. Springer, 1979.


Also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox

Maybe even this, but less sure if applicable:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7rd04KzLcg

>>11650050
>set a standard of measure for what you believe has no standard of measure
That's been done already, and will continue to be done countless times through history. And for what? To despise intuition?

>All conjecture no math.
So you'd rather do math about conjectures? Cause that's what ERT/SR/QM basically is. Math of that which was never proven to exist.

>If you do math with a model and it matches reality this is a good model
Math has absolutely nothing to do with reality or what takes place in reality. What's measured is what already existed, not the other way around. It does not create, destroy, cause or uncause anything. It quantifies the "thing" being spoken of, which is a fancy way of saying that it describes it in a way that certain people understand. A language basically. It's like saying that you're only allowed to describe something in English or Spanish and that no other language is allowed to make up words for it.

>see he's retarded! Can't even into maths!
Math is used for describing, copying/repetition, equating, limiting, comparing, and standardizing to name a few. Which is very useful when it comes to manipulating and altering the qualities of the real things that actually exist. However, it fails at explaining why or how those things exist in the first place.

>Do some math with your Retarded counter model and see if it matches experiment oh wait you can’t because your theory is just mindless conjecture and you can’t.

Experiment? Oh you mean like a scientific experiment that tests things that empirically exist? Would you care to show me one of these experiments that tested "space" and/or "time"? Oh wait let me guess, I have to "know the math" right? I have to take the time to learn a language because sophisticates don't want to explain it in a way that can be understood by all? "It is" or "it isn't" something to be tested, a yes or no answer basically.

>>11651525
> Cause that's what ERT/SR/QM basically is. Math of that which was never proven to exist.
WRONG there are experiments if you cared to google you could find them right now that match the models of ERT SR QM. you basically shown your stupidity and lack of knowledge right there. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity for special relativity you can look at some classical experiments for that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity we did math with the models and in each experiment the experiments backed up the models
>Math has absolutely nothing to do with reality or what takes place in reality
it does if you go based off a model that you can make predictions with math based off of.

then again you should knew this if you were in anyway formally educated beyond retarded youtubers.

>ctrl+f

>christopher langan
>CTMU
>sheldrake
>morphogenetic resonance

>0 results

>153 replies
Into the trash this thread goes

>>11651720
>no pseudoscience into trash it goes
okay retard

>>11631766
native american creation myth

>>11631718
This...srsly /pol/ is fun and is sort of based on /tv/... But in /sci/ is pure cringe.

>>11627211
How about that it's just aether theory but stripped of the underlying physical mechanism that made pre-Einstein physics intuitive?

inb4 muh MM experiment.
That only proves that the aether isn't fixed relative to space. It is either defined relative to moving objects, or in some non-real space like frequency space or complex phase space. It's not hard to modify the working theory based on MM, but the never-ending propaganda campaign to teach plebs how wrong aether theory was and how thankful we should be to Einstein is suspicious.

kind of sad there is so much pseudo science now a days

>>11652311
Right?
The fact that people think their degree in indoctri-education is worth a damn and makes them smarter than average because it costs big money is beyond reason.

Pity the fools.

>>11651776
So experimentally verify your theory, if it's so great it shouldn't be hard, and if you can't fuck off and stop wasting everyone's time.

>>11652325
yes its said that people listen to retarded youtubers with no formal education and make up a bunch of bullshit pseudo science they are getting indoctrinated by complete bullshit then they come here and push their retarded bullshit its sad.

>>11651776

Its suspicious because Einstein and MM were smokescreens to distract from nasant rocket and atomic development. Like "carrots improve eyesight". GR and MM are both plainly on their face fucking garbage bullshit, but now so much ego is involved that even I, a professional physicist, give them both lipservice just to avoid being crucified at that alter.

>>11652726
GR is backed up by experiment so many times. do you have an alternative model that explains this experiments with the same precision or maybe even greater?

>>11652735
>>11652735

Are you talking about clock experiments where the clocks are off? They fall within margin of error. And in arguably the most famous case a downed satellite was used to prove that clocks are different, no one in goyim cow space bothered to think that maybe the satellite downed because its clock was fucking broken. They are laughing at you, you must know that.

As for "satellites must calibrate for GR" what they really mean is they calibrate for doppler shift of light. Well no fucking shit. That is exactly what one would expect of a waves moving in an aether medium.

Again, they are laughing at you.

The best engineers are laughing at you. They maintain the visage of GR because they don't want you to understand how things really work, creates a deeper barrier to competitive entry.

>>11652735
>>11652745

Think of it this way. Remember when mom and dad lied to you about Santa? They did that to keep you well behaved. The top engineers are lying to you abou GR. It keeps rival nations and others without suitable brainpower from meddling. Aether is real. 100%. Why would I leak this? Because I'm sick of the bullshit. It's not optimal to keep our people fucking retarded, surely you can see that. Retarded people make retarded societies, and then we all suffer.

>>11652745
the atomic clock experiment was actually a test of special relativity actually. SO every single scientist was wrong about the atomic clock and it doesn't prove anything? this experiment was a huge amount of times with different clocks.... im not sure if every single experiment done with atomic clocks was false and fell in the margin of error maybe you watch a crappy youtuber talk about one but this has been done multiple times by different with different clocks. you can see all the different observations and experiments done on this page that all back up GR model.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity

>>11652753
>larping this hard

>>11652325
This

>>11651525
You are smart as fuck, unironically
>>11651665
So the mathematical framework of ERT works in some situations, so what? That doesn't mean ERT objectively describes the true nature of reality

>>11651720
Being great at understanding things does not mean you understand everything. High IQ is not enlightenment.

>>11652756
>SO every single scientist was wrong about the atomic clock and it doesn't prove anything


Not every, please be less cultish, but every scientist vetted to work at LHC, yes. And they were paid WELLLLLL for it.

>>11653136
Are you the same guy that said that aether is real?
Okay, give an example of an application that uses aether you troll.

>>11652726
You’re not a physicist