/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15280575
Here's your (you)

I would read this but I am le tired. Maybe explain your reasoning for this in 5 sentences or less.

Occam‘s razor suggests you have a minimal grasp on the subject.

>>15280575
indeed. you're not the only one here. all of theoretical physics is fake for that matter. antimatter, black holes, dark matter, you name it, its all fake. just math on a chalkboard to make their equations come out to a desired result because they wouldnt otherwise

>>15280575
pic related is just a drop in the bucket for how (((cosmologists))) make shit up. Venus is the planet representing Lucifer and "coincidentally" every major number from its rotation to its distance etc is "666".

you know why? because the Vatican and Freemasons have controlled astronomy for hundreds of years and they literally "made it all up". the Vatican owns all the large telescopes look it up.

OP is a coping retard who's salty because he wasn't accepted into Phd
>>15280583
Cosmologists don't study planets

>>15280575
>Cosmology is rooted in the abstraction, infatuation with the hypothetical.
Yes...but so were the Physicists working out what an atom will do when X or Y is applied way back when. It HAS TO be this way and it Very Slowly becomes "fact". Deducing atomic properties using axioms of known knowns is VERY difficult, so few attempt it (though Cosmology has plenty to work with nowadays.)
t.

>>15280581
Not a Cosmologist? Yeah...yeah...

>>15280682
>Cosmologists don't study planets

...I fucking hate having to post wiki-definitions but...
>Physical cosmology is the branch of physics and astrophysics that deals with the study of the physical origins and evolution of the universe
Thats exactly what they study.
>Geneticists dont study living things.

It *can* sometimes not, like a Chemist based Geneticist doesnt study living things, but a Biologist based Geneticist does.

Im a Bio-Gen, and I like Dr.Tour because he is a Chem-Gen, and he sees what I dont.

>>15280694
Retard, planetary science studies planets and shit. Cosmology starts with principle of homogeneity and isotropy, symmetry and killing vectors then moves on to space time properties and origin of universe. There's a slight discussion of Rayleigh Jeans limit, galactic formation, star formation etc though.

>>15280698
>astrophysics
Apologize...or die for a lie.
>a bunch of nue-physics terms to infinitely differentiate what is One study

This is why you cant see unity in reality.
SEE; >>15280660

>all humans are the first species of a new animal and have NO CORRELATION TO EACH OTHER
Yeah...you can die on that hill...if you desire so...

>>15280575
gravity, big bang, expanding universe, black holes.. all of this is a religion. you can't prove it. it's nothing more than a belief.

>star
Planets are just star moons. Stars are just black hole moons. Black holes are moons of the center of the universe.

Everything that isnt me is a MOOON.

>>15280715
imagine ur mom is a supermodel, but you got ur great looking hair from your dad's side. meanwhile brandon's kid is an ugly balding manlet, hunter is 5' 7".

>>15280728
>imagine ur mom is a supermodel
Would. Dont care. Would.

B^l

>>15280728
Except his mom is a jerky-skinned slav whore with bolt-ons and his dad has a comb over.

>>15280741
you seem upset

>>15280575
sorry you failed cosmology bro, theres plenty of other courses out there

>>15280575
No science is real, it's impossible to demonstrate anything, we improve our models, but we never reach the real truth, whatever the field.
And it's already good like that

>>15280895
emotionally triggered by seeing your textbook dogma disregared, but not knowledgeable enough to form a meaningful response better than
>ur a dummy!!

>>15280575

Mhm mhm. All of materialism is a religion with extreme dogma. We're breaking through though. It's a dead ideology and where here to stomp it out for good.

>>15281036
Rent-free. :^)

>>15281024
Everything you said applies to all science, not just cosmology.
There is always an unknown variable, and we always rely on what we know, to have the most credible model.
It was never about getting the truth, just finding out what works best, and the best way to do that is to get other models wrong.
For example, the big bang model is chosen because we have 6 arguments that it explains and that other models fail to explain.
(-Olbers' paradox
-Recession of galaxies
-Age concordance
-The fact that there is an evolution of galaxies
-Cosmic Microwave Background
-Primordial nucleosynthesis BBN)

>>15281042

Lol you go from thread to thread fishing for replies. Talk about rent free! I would talk to you again but you've never demonstrated a willingness to have an open mind, so goodbye again unless you have something to contribute.

>>15281093
Completely delusional.

>>15281047
>Olbers' paradox
the infinity meme, ignorance of basic optics
>-Recession of galaxies
not observed, only imagined.
>-Age concordance
singularities are evidence of flawed mathematics and nothing else
>-The fact that there is an evolution of galaxies
not observed, but still taken for granted.
>-Cosmic Microwave Background
just a measured temperature, you can measure the temperature of our own atmosphere similarly.
our atmosphere surrounds us completely and has a roughly uniform temperature, is that evidence of the big bang too?
>-Primordial nucleosynthesis BBN)
presumed, not observed.

you didn't think through a single one of your points, its all just memorized textbook dogma, you've never thought about them at all

Why are religious schizos, non-materialists and other kinds of mentally ill people so threatened by the scientific field of cosmology?

>Why are religious schizos, non-materialists and other kinds of mentally ill people so threatened by the scientific field of cosmology?

>>15281148

Prove that materialism doesn't necessarily result in determinism and disallow for free will. Go.

>>15281155
r&3

>>15281155
What does that have to do with the question in my post?

>>15281141
>the infinity meme, ignorance of basic optics
you have never done optics, the paradox works perfectly considering the stars as a surface, since the distance and the number of stars compensate each other perfectly.
>not observed, only imagined
What is doppler effect.
>singularities are evidence of flawed mathematics and nothing else
I was talking about the fact that we've never measured things in the universe older than 13.8 billion years.
>not observed, but still taken for granted.
If the Universe was eternal, then all galaxies would be entropically identical and would not be at an evolutionary stage in line with a universe that began 13.8 billion years ago.
>just a measured temperature, you can measure the temperature of our own atmosphere similarly.
>our atmosphere surrounds us completely and has a roughly uniform temperature, is that evidence of the big bang too?
Do you understand what "measuring a temperature" at least means?
>presumed, not observed
Presumed AND observed.
You talk as if measuring the absorption and emission spectra of surrounding stars is science fiction.

>you didn't think through a single one of your points, its all just memorized textbook dogma, you've never thought about them at all
Stop projecting yourself because you are obsessed with the idea of debunking all the scientists of the XX and XXI century and not wanting to admit the slightest concession. I've never seen in my life anyone presumptuous enough to deny shit like the CMB. Thousands of scientists have torn their hair out trying to find paradoxes without success, it is not the average 4chan who thinks he is based because he doesn't believe in the commonly accepted theory that will find a counter argument on ALL points.

>>15281741
your idiotic non-paradox from no-name nobody soientist is only plausible to you because of your ignorance of optics. you go outside at night an look at the milky way, which you've probably never done, its a vaguely bright haze just like your loser authority figure says. the human pupil is 7mm in diameter and the ratio of that distance to the wavelength you're observing at sets the diffraction limit of the optical system, about 3' for an average npc in the visual frequency rage. so then you look again with binoculars and you see stars with dark space between them. if you could shrink your pupil down so it was the same width as the wavelength you're observing then the whole sky would be a vague haze and you'd see no stars at all. has nothing to do with how many stars there are, has to do with making them visible against the background noise.
ur paradox is pilpul
>I was talking about the fact that we've never measured things in the universe older than 13.8 billion years.
you've never measured the age of anything, nitwit, if some jews play backslappy with the peer review butt buddies then they can publish all the grandiose lies they want and you can presume they're true if you want, go ahead and make worshiping soience faggots your religion, seems like you already did, but their bragging and lies still only means nothing to people who can think clearly for themselves. how many boosters are you on?
>evolutionary stage of galaxies
what the goddamned fuck are you talking about?
you think an Sc morphs into a lenticular over time or something gay like that? its never been observed, nobody in the profession thinks it happens that way, the only person i ever met who was dumb enough to go that presumption was an alcoholic roastie who taught earth science in a high school

>>15281741
>Do you understand what "measuring a temperature" at least means?
astronomers don't measure temperature, they measure color-temperate, whole different ball of wax, hinges on the presumption of observing a blackbody spectrum, which they never do, and on the presumption that planck's black body law is accurate, which it isn't.
all that cavity radiator crap is just a thought experiment, if anyone were to try it out they would not measure a blackbody because theres background radiation that fucks up the curve no matter where you are. you can do integrated total flux and try to convert that using stephan bolzmann, but don't forget that bolzmann committed suicide cause he was an idiot and sigma teeee to the fortran is just as shitty as planck's law.
>reeeeee you insulted muh long dead soience worship figures that i pray to like they're infallible gods
>muh appeal to authority muffugguh
>gibes me dat authority fo free
>i memorized muh ZOGschool astro101 textbook am i a goodgoy now!?! please!!!!
gullible nitwit

>>15280575
There are clear repeatable and experiments like redshifts and Hubble constant, planet orbits etc. That is science per Definition. What you regard as science is the usual media lie the normals demand because the need an explanation. Doesn't matter how idiotic.

>>15281897
>reeeeee you insulted muh long dead soience worship figures that i pray to like they're infallible gods

My first fucking post was:
>No science is real, it's impossible to demonstrate anything, we improve our models, but we never reach the real truth, whatever the field.
>And it's already good like that

It's not me who has dogmas, but that doesn't mean that I believe that the Jews try to make me believe in random stuff that the majority of people don't understand anyway.
Wanting to question things is fine, then come up with a better model, if you can't come up with anything better then you better shut up.
It's not a sign of intelligence to want to debunk models just for the sake of debunking, because you think it's a jewish government project or some shit like that.
You haven't even tried to understand the logic of Olbers paradox, you think you're a genius endowed with an infused science and rushes to deny something that has already been explained (consider the stars as a surface because of the perfect compensation between the distance and the number of stars which increases with distance).

>REEEE It's the Jews who make you believe that they measure things but I don't understand how they could do it, that means it's impossible
Take classes to learn how to analyze emission spectra, you can start with NMR signals, I imagine that guessing a molecule form must already be something too magical to be real

Learn to be humble and not believe that you can debunk everything.

>>15281156
>>15281160

0/2

the big bang is real because jannie bans everyone who disputes it

u-universe-chan, w-what are you doing??

>>15280582
>their equations come out to a desired result
It half full or half empty. That's usually their debate.