/sci/ - Science & Math

its all attached
>therefore
its one person

>>1961451
It would be united, right? Why would it be considered 'One'. Not trying to attract trolls, but wouldn't it be better to consider this 'One' or 'Unit' as a 'Cube'? I understand you require 'One' for many things in society, but surely, as this is science....

Ok, a question instead.

Will position 'a' of the Earth starting at the yellow side, in one full rotation, see the blue, red and green sides before returning to yellow?

>>1961539

Im guessing no, tell us why OP

>>1961551
I'm under the impression that it would pass through each of the sides before returning.

>>1961560

Why do you ask anyway?

>>1961565
Just seems like something is wrong here. If the above question was answered with 'Yes', then it would show that 4 semi-days occur at once on earth.

Is it fair to teach people about Death in schools, on T.V, etc? Surely that's best kept secret. Wouldn't it be better living life not knowing of the end?

>>1961684
do you really think keeping people in ignorance helps anything?

>>1961691
What would you say 'not knowing death' would feel like?

>>1961684
"You can't play in the street kiddo."
"Why mommy?"
"Because the cars go there, and they move really fast."
"So?"
"..........."

>>1961696
"You will get hurt!!"

>>1961684
>Wouldn't it be better living life not knowing of the end?
As far as I can see, God's done a pretty good job of stopping spoilers of the afterlife.

>>1961703
"So?"

Isn't pain avoidance just a smaller version of death avoidance? Being completely unaware of death is there any reason to avoid pain, assuming the reward seems worth the pain?

>>1961711
Why do we need to know death? I don't understand. We need to know pain, we require the knowledge of severe injuries, but why death?

-You may get hurt
-You may break bones

At no point, in my humble opinion, does one need to mention:

-You will die.

oh hey aether, how are you this fine evening?

>>1961725
... so is dying just this nonchalant thing now?
"you might get brutally mutilated!"
"enh, i really dont care"

>>1961731
I'm good actually, yourself? Are you here to claim troll, suppress or just to ignore every question/topic I put up? Or all three?

>>1961735
Lets think about the majority of sane people rather than the one-off mental case, please.

>>1961725
Injury is death, just death of parts rather than the whole. The concept of injury=bad relies on the belief in death. Serious injury=complete death. We need to know about how injured we can afford to be, because all work produces some injury and some work risks complete injury.

The other reason-

"I want to start a business, become the president of the US, build a house, and write the great American novel... I best hurry up, I only have about 40 more years to get it done."

vs

"I want to start a business, become the president of the US, build a house, and write the great American novel... I can start on all that another day, it's not like I'm going to die or something."

>>1961746
Okay. I'll leave it at that.
*continues praying for revolution*

>>1961755
Aether, I want to solve this problem or I wouldn't step in an state opinion - if you have a working answer I'd love to hear it. I think there is a practical obstacle or two here that we need to overcome or avoid.

I'm your fool.
Everyone’s got their chains to break
Holdin’ you

Would you born to resist or be abused?
Is someone getting the best, the best, the best, the best of you?
Is someone getting the best, the best, the best, the best of you?
Are you gone and onto someone new?

I needed somewhere to hang my head
Without your noose
You gave me something that I didn’t have
But had no use
I was too weak to give in
Too strong to lose
My heart is under arrest again
But I break loose
My head is giving me life or death
But I can’t choose
I swear I’ll never give in
No, I refuse

>>1961459

It isn't a cube. You can put a cube over it, but that does not make it a cube.

>>1961539

Why limit it to four sides? Why not segment the sides in two? Hell, why not overlay a sphere over earth and say that "one" day = infinitely many days?

>>1961803
It's more a cube than it is a one.

1 = 1
Top Bottom Left Right Front Back = Cubic

The cube question was a question, not a statement, yes/no answer.

Let's move on from there anyway.

>>1961725

And then the child swats a fly.

"Mommy, why isn't the fly moving anymore?"

>>1961815
It's in heaven.

Why do you keep changing your name aether?
We will still hate you.

>>1961809

No, let's go back to my question.

Why this cube? There are infinitely many "sides" on the earth, so why stop at six?

Likewise, there are infinitely many "sides" on the human body, so why stop at four?

Also, as a responce to the death question, I must repeat what this anon has said

>>1961815

>>1961823

And what if the parent is an atheist, or doesn't believe non-humans go to heaven?

And what about when the child asks how one gets to heaven, or when it asks how the body is there but the fly is in heaven? Eventually it will come down to an explanation of death, except you won't call it death.

>>1961831
You didn't answer my question.

What is an antipode?
Also, www.cubicao.com, you can find all the evidence you need that supports the cube theory.

>>1961835
I don't know.

>>1961439
Is that "Sharingan" I am seeing?

>>1961845
Nope.

>>1961838

Opposite points on the earth, your point?

And let's skip the bullshit on your question, and just get straight to the point: Why this arbitrary limit on sides? And in any case, no matter how many "sides" you divide earth into, your definition for day does not equal the rest of the worlds, which is when point a gets back to point a. Sure, you can say "there are four days in every day", but according to the rest of the world, that statement is incorrect because you are using a definition that you created.

>>1961842

Guess we should stick with telling children about death then, don't you agree?

>>1961848
Why u lyin' nigga?

>>1961851

Also, don't try to point to your source site, take me on with your own knowledge (or, use that site as a reference for any information you have forgotten), but by using it in order to ward off those who don't agree with you, you are showing that you don't understand the material.

>>1961439

LMAO

is that kakashi from naruto?

>>1961864
Yes it is.. And he has the SHARINGAN. Let's discuss the science of the Sharingan.

>>1961851
Evidence is on that linked website. You can check:
http://www.cubicao.com/theory/cuberepresentation.html
The direct link. I'm not posting it all here, your choice.

>>1961853
I don't agree, I haven't spent enough time trying to come up with ways around it.

>>1961856
I'm not, faggot.

>>1961831
because all these "sides" are orthogonal, and humans really like to keep things orthogonal, like coordinate systems and dimensions and everyday objects like books and desks and houses. it's probably just an aspect of our nature. of course you could say the earth has infinitely many sides and you'd be just as right, as long as you could find a sufficient explanation. it's really arbitrary

>>1961871

I say the evidence is bullshit, so let's discuss this. Besides, let's be honest: The site looks like it was designed by a schizophrenic. I don't want to navigate that mess any more than I already have. Besides, all you ever do is quote like that site is the Bible to you, you never put it in your own words, excluding the extremely basic stuff like what is in this topic.

Also, you haven't even provided a reason why we shouldn't talk about death. And there is no real way to not tell a child about death without straight-up lying to them, as we are simply faced with death too much in life.

A sees YE, B sees BL, C sees RE, D sees GR (then)
A sees BL, B sees YE, C sees GR, D sees RE (then)
A sees RE, B sees BL, C sees YE, D sees GR (then)
A sees GR, B sees RE, C sees BL, D sees YE (repeat)

Yes it's kakashi

>>1961871
>I don't agree, I haven't spent enough time trying to come up with ways around it.

If you get time to consider the problem in greater detail I'd be interested in your conclusions. It seems to bear quite directly on a number of our most pressing current goals.

>>1961876

And it is because it is arbitrary it is pointless to bring it up, since day has already been defined and the rest of the world is unwilling to change it as there is 0 utility in adopting this "cubic" idea.

>>1961901
Will do.
>>1961893
It's truth and almost impossible to say in a form other than what's on that website. Believe me I understand it, and I've posted here many times with my own explanation. Right now, I'm watching naruto and I'm in an average mood, so I'm trying to come across calmer than usual.

Also, no, you didn't read the website and why would you need to mention the schizophrenia part, isn't that obvious suppression? Trying to make others not visit the website? (try be more discreet)

>>1961900

But this is SO arbitrary.

Let's look at this pic I just made, now each rotation takes three "days"

a sees 1; b sees 2; c sees 3 then
a sees 2; b sees 3; c sees 1 then
a sees 3; b sees 1; c sees 2 repeat.

>>1961921

My mistake, forgot pic

>>1961916

>>1961916

No, the website is just ugly, and I don't want to search through its ugliness when we can have a civil debate. Plus it is more useful to debate because someone who can readily answer questions is much better than a site, so you would have more of a chance to "convert me", and I have the chance to "convert you".

And wasn't that obvious libel? (try to be more discreet)

THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST THE BEST

>>1961943
Okay. What are your questions? I will have to teach you the Principle of Opposites and Quadrant Division before you can understand why it can only be a cube. If you have any other questions, shoot.

>>1961930

Just depends on how you choose to draw it. Here is the exact opposite happening.

Granted, it needs an even sided shape to do EXACTLY what the square does, but the principle you were suggesting works with odd numbered ones too.

>>1961979

Damn, forgot the pic again.

>>1961979
Would you say the universe was 'odd' or 'even'.

>>1961964
are you in fact, gene ray of timecube dot com? because he, sir, is insane.

>>1961994

I would that statement has absolutely no meaning whatsoever, so neither.

But if I must choose between the two, I would say odd.

If you want to say symmetrical or asymmetrical I would say asymmetrical, because while the universe expands at a constant rate on all the points, the galaxies that inhabit it are not symmetrical.

>>1962003


Come on, let's make this civil. No insults to actual people, only inanimate objects.

>>1962005
Then our differences are settled. I believe the universe is Even, whilst you believe it to be Odd. Both of us have evidence to support our claims, and neither of us will back down (by the looks of things) so leave it at that.

>>1962005
>>1962011
>>1961979
>>1961943
>>1961925
>>1961921
>>1961904
>>1961893
>>1961858
>>1961853
>>1961851
>>1961835
>>1961831
>>1961803

Me, taking a trip now.

>>1961964

On the first level of existence, it says there are two singularities. Aren't there an infinite amount as each point on this line can be seen as a singularity, and there are infinitely many points on a line?

>>1962017

But you haven't even defined what it means for the universe to be even or odd!

>>1962043
The line is imaginary.

>>1962050
Symmetrical.

Even IF time cube theory is mathematically, geometrically, logically or philosophically true, how can it be used constructively? What can it predict?

>>1962065
I don't know what it can predict. All I know is that it's true. I haven't used my cubic wisdom to explore the universe, only to explain it.

>>1962063
#1 But you can objectively say that the universe isn't symmetrical because if you fold it in half, galaxies will not overlap galaxies, planets will not overlap planets, etc.. It is true that we some symmetrical things in nature, but that doesn't mean that the entire universe is symmetrical, only that some parts have developed symmetry.

#2 But the site implies that the line isn't imaginary.

#3 Define harmonic correlation, because the site doesn't

#4 Infinity does exist, pic related (You have not brought it up, but it had to do with the principle of opposites)

>>1962096
Cubic Harmony, rather than symmetrical. The site does explain it you just gotta read more.

http://www.cubicao.com/theory/rational.html
-Infinity Question

The line is imaginary, it's not an actual line. Think of it as a connection between the two singularities.

I gotta go to sleep, I'm too tired to type, toodles till tomorrow, tyrannical tossers!

>>1961539
Aether we know its you, You just changed your trip code after you got laughed off the board.

But seriously, I dont understand what your goal is. What do you gain if you convince people the universe is a cube? Why are you so invested in it? No one really know for sure what the shape is, So I'll even say it might be possible.

But so what?

>>1962158

Yeah, the link is exactly what my post explained, dipshit.

>>1961439
WHY THE FUCK DO YOU RESPOND TO THIS NONSENSE /sci/? This is just Aether TROLLING!

>>1962163
because it's the only way to prevent the destruction and extinction of the nature and Humanity

>>1962177
I dont see how that relates in ANY way to the shape of the universe.

>>1962172
Aether's arguments are epistemologically interesting. Like if he was to come on here every day and try to convert us from saying "bannana" because "blandyellobend" is a better name.

Not all those who possess abnormal thought processes are going to change the way we think about things, but most of the people who will change the way we think have what we'd consider abnormal thought processes... It's possible some aspect of his stated views has utility, or will start someone else down a line of inquiry that has utility.

Or maybe he's just crazy. Either way, how often do we get to audit non-traditional thought expressed in traditional language?