Real Science Radio: Brought To You by the Number Three

[Granite]

Neither does religion. I know you think religion causes attrocities, but I say so does atheism, which leads me to think humanity is a danger to the human race, not religion.

Well, then we simply disagree. Apocalyptic monotheism poses a real danger to us, and it seems to be getting worse. When theocrats, zealots, and pre-tribbers have nukes, we should all be terrified.

 

[Stripe]

Well, then we simply disagree. Apocalyptic monotheism poses a real danger to us, and it seems to be getting worse. When theocrats, zealots, and pre-tribbers have nukes, we should all be terrified.

:darwinsm:

:mock: :granite:


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Lordkalvan]

:e4e:

My pleasure.

LH should be turning up to call you ignorant, an idiot or a blowhard soon (or maybe all three).

 

[Silent Hunter]

LH should be turning up to call you ignorant, an idiot or a blowhard soon (or maybe all three).

:juggle: . . . while I wait.

 

[Lighthouse]

Plasma . . . (from Greek πλάσμα, "anything formed") is one of the four fundamental states of matter (the others being solid, liquid, and gas) . . . look it up.

You didn't need to explain what plasma is; I'm not as stupid as you look.

Who has said anything about your deity except . . . you?

The thread is about the triune nature of God, idiot.

Time is not a "physical dimension" like "height", "width", and "depth" . . . it is a dimension of -- wait for it -- TIME. It, like all the other "dimensions", is measurable and quantifiable.

It is only measurable by mental constructs. It is in no way tangible.

 

[Lordkalvan]

:juggle: . . . while I wait.

^ And right on cue....

 

[Silent Hunter]

You didn't need to explain what plasma is;

Then WHY did you ask what the fourth state of matter is?

The thread is about the triune nature of God,

Actually, no. This thread is about the number THREE . . . ask Big Bird if you're unsure.

It is only measurable by mental constructs. It is in no way tangible.

If time wasn't tangable then there would be no way to measure or quantify it. We can do . . . both.

 

[gcthomas]

It is only measurable by mental constructs. It is in no way tangible.

Except the tight link between physical dimensions and the time dimension has been thoroughly examined through experiments measuring Lorentz contraction and time dilation (see muon decays).

It is in every important way tangible.

 

[Stripe]

Except the tight link between physical dimensions and the time dimension has been thoroughly examined through experiments measuring Lorentz contraction and time dilation (see muon decays).It is in every important way tangible.

Nope. What you are describing are mathematical equations built into a model that can help us predict outcomes from certain conditions. However, the model is not reality. No matter how successful a mathematical model, that success is no evidence that the model's components are physical realities.

An easy example is the idea of average family sizes. We can take the average number of children per family - say, 2.3 - and accurately predict population growth, but that does not mean there exist fractions of children. Similarly, we can use Lorentz equations and have success with them, but that is no justification for believing that distances can shrink if we travel faster.

An even easier example is negative numbers. We can send our bank balances into overdraft, but that does not mean there exist negative dollar notes.

The accuracy of a mathematical model is no evidence that it's components describe real things.

 

[Lordkalvan]

Nope. What you are describing are mathematical equations built into a model that can help us predict outcomes from certain conditions. However, the model is not reality. No matter how successful a mathematical model, that success is no evidence that the model's components are physical realities.

An easy example is the idea of average family sizes. We can take the average number of children per family - say, 2.3 - and accurately predict population growth, but that does not mean there exist fractions of children. Similarly, we can use Lorentz equations and have success with them, but that is no justification for believing that distances can shrink if we travel faster.

An even easier example is negative numbers. We can send our bank balances into overdraft, but that does not mean there exist negative dollar notes.

The accuracy of a mathematical model is no evidence that it's components describe real things.

Except, of course, for the evidence that shows that, for example, time contraction under relativistic speeds actually occurs.

 

[Stripe]

Except, of course, for the evidence that shows that, for example, time contraction under relativistic speeds actually occurs.

Nope.

That is just a component of your mathematical model that you are insisting is physical reality. Fractions of children and negative dollars do not exist either.

 

[Lighthouse]

Then WHY did you ask what the fourth state of matter is?

:bang:

All you had to do was answer "Plasma." You did not need to explain what plasma is.

Actually, no. This thread is about the number THREE . . . ask Big Bird if you're unsure.

It's about the number three pointing to the triune nature of God. You really are quite dumb.

If time wasn't tangable then there would be no way to measure or quantify it. We can do . . . both.

Really? OK. Right now I want you to measure into the past and the future...

Except the tight link between physical dimensions and the time dimension has been thoroughly examined through experiments measuring Lorentz contraction and time dilation (see muon decays).

It is in every important way tangible.

Then prove it in such a way that cannot be explained by other forces.

 

[Lordkalvan]

Nope.

That is just a component of your mathematical model that you are insisting is physical reality. Fractions of children and negative dollars do not exist either.

You mean like an actually observed component? There are numerous examples that validate general relativity, from the functioning of the GPS network to experiments conducted with particle accelerators. False analogies do not changed these facts.

 

[Lordkalvan]

....Then prove it in such a way that cannot be explained by other forces.

What 'other forces' are you referring to?

 

[Stripe]

You mean like an actually observed component? There are numerous examples that validate general relativity, from the functioning of the GPS network to experiments conducted with particle accelerators. False analogies do not changed these facts.

There are numerous observations that validate fractions and negative numbers.

 

[Lordkalvan]

There are numerous observations that validate fractions and negative numbers.

Um, you've just told us that fractions of children and negative dollars don't exist and that this in some inexplicable way is an analogy that demonstrates that time contraction under relativistic speeds is illusory. More usefully, you could explain to us how the functioning of the GPS network and particle accelerator experiments are so widely misunderstood and misinterpreted by physicists.

 

[Silent Hunter]

All you had to do was answer "Plasma." You did not need to explain what plasma is.

No . . . I didn't.

It's about the number three pointing to the triune nature of God.

The "facts" are in error and should be corrected. I'll wait while you prove your version of deity has three "natures".

Really? OK. Right now I want you to measure into the past and the future...

Can I expect for you to move the goalposts often during this discussion?

 

[Stripe]

Um, you've just told us that fractions of children and negative dollars don't exist and that this in some inexplicable way is an analogy that demonstrates that time contraction under relativistic speeds is illusory.

Time contraction under relativistic speeds is not illusory in the same way that negative bank balances and average numbers of children are not illusory.

More usefully, you could explain to us how the functioning of the GPS network and particle accelerator experiments are so widely misunderstood and misinterpreted by physicists.

They are not. They are well understood.

You are playing the old evolutionist game of pretending that because you have a popular explanation that has some usefulness, it must be exactly how the world works.

 

[Lordkalvan]

Time contraction under relativistic speeds is not illusory in the same way that negative bank balances and average numbers of children are not illusory.

That seems a roundabout way of trying to suggest that time contraction under relativistic speeds does not represent an actually occurring phenomenon.

They are not. They are well understood.

You are playing the old evolutionist game of pretending that because you have a popular explanation that has some usefulness, it must be exactly how the world works.

By 'some usefulness' and 'popular explanation', are you trying to imply that they tell us nothing at all about how the world really works? Can you elaborate your hypothesis, or do you prefer to remain cryptic?

 

[Stripe]

That seems a roundabout way of trying to suggest that time contraction under relativistic speeds does not represent an actually occurring phenomenon.

Evolutionists. :chuckle:

I just finished saying exactly that in my previous posts in very clear terms.

By 'some usefulness' and 'popular explanation', are you trying to imply that they tell us nothing at all about how the world really works? Can you elaborate your hypothesis, or do you prefer to remain cryptic?

I have no hypothesis. Just a simple concept that you should very easily agree with: The success of a mathematical model is no evidence that it's components represent physical elements of reality.