How the world really works, and its solution.

1356710

Comments

  • Milo wrote: »

    For all practical purposes of the layman's conversation, the Moon orbits the Earth, which in turn orbits the Sun along with all the other planets in our system.
    are you really gonna try to pass yourself as correct and me wrong?


    Edit: Because of relativity showing one is correct does not disprove the other......thats what relativity means
  • darbday wrote: »
    This is exactly what i said.

    well under your definition it doesn't say anything because it doesn't talk...but part of his great works was the realization that everything is subject to what view point you choose.

    yes so we only talk about the sun being a centre out of convince...ie belief

    okay, i get what you're saying. but seriously, you're just arguing semantics.

    EDIT: i'd also like to say that i admire what in essence you are trying to do in this thread but i feel you are really going about it in the wrong way. you're glossing over specific events and suggesting large universal and cosmic relations. you might want to start at some sort of beginning, or some sort of logical order of some kind. i'm trying to read and follow what you're saying but it's not easy, sorry.
  • darbday wrote: »
    This is exactly what i said.

    Not really, no . . .

    well under your definition it doesn't say anything because it doesn't talk...but part of his great works was the realization that everything is subject to what view point you choose.

    It was not my definition . . .

    yes so we only talk about the sun being a centre out of convince...ie belief.

    What I posted was quoted from a scientific forum. It was a scientific question, and a science-based answer. "Belief" is not relevant.


    no he didn't need to say it, his theories cleary showed it. I don't expect you to infer that though, but i do think you are capable of surfing the net and seeing people say i am correct.

    Well, except that you aren't correct. Carry on . . .
    we can assume the earth rotates around the sun or vice versa, or they both orbit each other, or the don't move or whatever, the math all works and its all correct and incorrect...that is relativity

    **sigh**

    I am going to try and avoid wasting any more time on your crap. In every fashion except the most elaborate discussions about the workings of the universe, it is correct to state that the Earth revolves around the Sun. So, if you wish to use Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to state otherwise, fine. So long as you remember that everyone else can use the same theory to prove that you are wrong. It is, after all, simply relative.
  • trigs wrote: »
    i'm no science expert but i do enjoy reading a lot about physics/astronomy and the like. i've read a decent amount about the theory of relativity (actually just watched a documentary about it yesterday). therefore i'm pretty sure that the earth revolves around the sun since, you know, the whole gravity thing. you don't quite explain anything in your above statement.
    do you know any physics prof you can email, they have to be college level. And if your right fair enough, but if im right you have to stop using stuff you read and documentaries as proof. But Milo already said it the only reason we use the current model is convenience...its not actually correct.




    i am a teacher. english mostly but i do teach many social science courses as well. however, i graduated with a major in philosophy and a minor in english (but almost all my english courses were cultural studies courses). i also took a lot of religious studies as well (which is my second teachable). so i kind of know what i'm talking about - at least a little.
    alright that makes sense then. there is def content upcoming you can verify or debunk then.
    i don' know hitler's motivations, sorry.
    how did you not study judaism?

    and i don't quite know what you mean by "what does antiquity mean".
    this conversation will show why you don't relate to that word...unless i misspelled it. We are talkign about the division between history and pre history
    i can definitely talk about the schools/churches and the native populations. that was covered extensively in many of my cultural studies classes.
    this will likely come up again.
  • trigs wrote: »
    EDIT: i'd also like to say that i admire what in essence you are trying to do in this thread but i feel you are really going about it in the wrong way. you're glossing over specific events and suggesting large universal and cosmic relations. you might want to start at some sort of beginning, or some sort of logical order of some kind. i'm trying to read and follow what you're saying but it's not easy, sorry.

    If he were to do that, his house of cards falls apart. It is only by leaping across disparate points of reference that he can keep all the plates spinning at once. How's that for mixing my metaphors? :D
  • Originally Posted by darbday viewpost.gif
    This is exactly what i said.
    Not really, no . . .
    darb wrote:
    the earth revolves around the sun no more than the sun revolves around the earth

    source: Einsteins theory of relativity
    Milo wrote: »
    **sigh**

    In every fashion except the most elaborate discussions about the workings of the universe, it is correct to state that the Earth revolves around the Sun. So, if you wish to use Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to state otherwise, fine. So long as you remember that everyone else can use the same theory to prove that you are wrong. It is, after all, simply relative.
    exactly what i said

    darb wrote:
    the earth revolves around the sun no more than the sun revolves around the earth

    source: Einsteins theory of relativity


    yup, guess time for you to leave huh?
    I'm clearly correct.
  • Originally Posted by trigs viewpost.gif
    EDIT: i'd also like to say that i admire what in essence you are trying to do in this thread but i feel you are really going about it in the wrong way. you're glossing over specific events and suggesting large universal and cosmic relations. you might want to start at some sort of beginning, or some sort of logical order of some kind. i'm trying to read and follow what you're saying but it's not easy, sorry.
    There is no begingin or end its a circle, we can only outline the circle to understand the whole, you are anticipated a begining and an end because school taught you its the only way to learn. But the problem cannot be solved or understood in its parts.

    If you think i miss anything or have wrong info lemme know and we'll clarify
  • darbday wrote: »
    I'm clearly correct.

    Except that you're not . . . from my perspective, you're wrong.

    See? Relativity in action.

    And the best part is, I can use this on every one of your future posts, and make no effort of any kind to actually disprove anything because, from my perspective, you are wrong and, relativity-wise, that makes my perspective equally valid to your perspective. QED . . .

    So, can we get back to real life now?
  • Milo wrote: »
    If he were to do that, his house of cards falls apart. It is only by leaping across disparate points of reference that he can keep all the plates spinning at once. How's that for mixing my metaphors? :D
    At some point your gonna have to admit i'm not a complete idiot, you look silly arguing me for no reason producing facts that show exactly what I am saying.

    Relatively shows its pure belief to say the earth revolves around the sun. Sorry you all had to find out this way.
  • darbday wrote: »
    do you know any physics prof you can email, they have to be college level. And if your right fair enough, but if im right you have to stop using stuff you read and documentaries as proof. But Milo already said it the only reason we use the current model is convenience...its not actually correct.





    alright that makes sense then. there is def content upcoming you can verify or debunk then.

    how did you not study judaism?



    this conversation will show why you don't relate to that word...unless i misspelled it. We are talkign about the division between history and pre history

    this will likely come up again.

    yes i know physics profs. i also know students in physics who are smarter than physics profs. i also know physics teachers. and i'm sorry for reading extensively and watching documentaries and combining that information to form my own opinion. i guess i should just listen to you instead??

    i studied judaism. i did not study the holocaust in great detail. judaism has just a little bit of information in it outside of hitler you know.
  • Milo wrote: »
    Except that you're not . . . from my perspective, you're wrong.

    See? Relativity in action.
    that is what i said, its relative. you said, i was ignoring physics. Or was that only relative to whether or not you prove yourself wrong?
  • darbday wrote: »
    At some point your gonna have to admit i'm not a complete idiot, you look silly arguing me for no reason producing facts that show exactly what I am saying.

    Relatively shows its pure belief to say the earth revolves around the sun. Sorry you all had to find out this way.

    No, it says that the equations work more simply from that perspective. That is not the same thing, and it is not "belief". Maybe you should have done some more work in school.

    Also, I'll admit you are not a complete idiot . . . but you are well on your way.
  • Milo wrote: »

    Also, I'll admit you are not a complete idiot . . . but you are well on your way.
    ahh idiot calling

    I'm just waiting for you to admit that there is no one correct model for the way sun and the earth move.
  • Milo wrote: »
    you have no idea how long it took me to stop laughing at you for posting that.
    hahahahah....hahahahahah...hahahahahaha


    tumblr_m4czvvhlT91rruba4o1_1280.jpg
  • we've clearly shove that the sun revolves around the earth as much as it does vice versa we could prob move on now. Hopefully trigs can email some profs and students in the meantime.
  • darbday wrote: »
    ahh idiot calling

    I'm just waiting for you to admit that there is no one correct model for the way sun and the earth move.

    now just wait a minute. your whole point is that there is no one correct model? that pretty much falls into the no shit category since practically all of physics can be argued in such terms.

    if this was your whole point, you can pretty much kiss all your arguments goodbye because one can easily state that your opinion is not the one correct model for the world.
  • We know exactly how the planets move. How else can NASA fire off probes to Mars and have them land where they want them too?
  • kwsteve wrote: »
    We know exactly how the planets move. How else can NASA fire off probes to Mars and have them land where they want them too?

    i guess they just believe in it strongly enough.
  • trigs wrote: »
    now just wait a minute. your whole point is that there is no one correct model? that pretty much falls into the no shit category since practically all of physics can be argued in such terms.

    if this was your whole point, you can pretty much kiss all your arguments goodbye because one can easily state that your opinion is not the one correct model for the world.
    Trigs email a physics college prof (non religious etc) he will instantly tell you that you that it is not correct to say the sun doesn't revolve around the earth...and its is wrong to say the earth only rotates around the sun and not vice versa

    What you are protesting is your first true understanding of relativity and its real ramifications on the world as you know it

    but no I am not doing what you are saying a am doing, its is common knowledge in the learned science field that saying the earth revolves around the sun is just something we do for ease of explanation and math....its not true in itself, not what so ever.
  • kwsteve wrote: »
    We know exactly how the planets move. How else can NASA fire off probes to Mars and have them land where they want them too?
    steve milo won't admit he is wrong, i fully believe you will .....take 2 balls make one orbit the other and imagine both perspectives.

    I am saying that if nasa did all their math as if the sun orbited the earth they would land on mars with the exact same accuracy

    nasa knows this and they believe it, it is common knowledge to physicists...


    don't just assume im stupid and there fore wrong, i know i am correct just waiting for you to catch up

    Also I didn't mention I read Einsteins book on relativity
  • darbday wrote: »
    Trigs email a physics college prof (non religious etc) he will instantly tell you that you that it is not correct to say the sun doesn't revolve around the earth...and its is wrong to say the earth only rotates around the sun and not vice versa

    What you are protesting is your first true understanding of relativity and its real ramifications on the world as you know it

    but no I am not doing what you are saying a am doing, its is common knowledge in the learned science field that saying the earth revolves around the sun is just something we do for ease of explanation and math....its not true in itself, not what so ever.

    again, i have. i have talked to people in physics a lot like i've already mentioned. please show me your evidence because a simple google search discusses gravitational pull and the 'barycenter' with all deals with orbiting planets.

    if you have this information, please supply it instead of just saying you are right.

    i can show you some of my evidence if that helps:

    The Earth, Sun, and Moon

    here's one specifically from a mathematician surprisingly enough:

    Q: Why does the Earth orbit the Sun? | Ask a Mathematician / Ask a Physicist

    and one more just for fun:

    The Earth's Elliptical Orbit Around the Sun - Aphelion and Perihelion
  • trigs wrote: »
    i guess they just believe in it strongly enough.
    no you see the math works the same either way, this was the great discovery of the man call Einstein!! FUCKING AMAZING HUH? edit <<< i am serious that its fucking amazing.

    if you don't know this stuff what do you teach to the kids???
  • darbday wrote: »
    no you see the math works the same either way, this was the great discovery of the man call Einstein!! FUCKING AMAZING HUH?

    if you don't know this stuff what do you teach to the kids???

    seriously. please explain your point. just saying 'math works the same either way' makes absolutely no sense.

    i teach my students to fully explain their arguments with clear examples and citations.

    EDIT: and see post 82 about. it requires a response from you.

    EDIT #2: and please stop insulting me in this manner. i am simply debating with you and i have not insulted you in any way. i would expect the same courtesy in return.
  • trigs wrote: »
    seriously. please explain your point. just saying 'math works the same either way' makes absolutely no sense.

    i teach my students to fully explain their arguments with clear examples and citations.

    EDIT: and see post 82 about. it requires a response from you.

    EDIT #2: and please stop insulting me in this manner. i am simply debating with you and i have not insulted you in any way. i would expect the same courtesy in return.
    once you understand I am correct you will realize i was not really insulting you

    You cannot prove me wrong by proving your model is right.

    Relativity says that both are right and/or not right.

    Thats the huge discovery that is Einstein, in public school we teach one way is right (sun is the is the centre of our orbit). and that the other way is wrong...however that is an incorrect view point, and in an incorrect teaching...

    did you email someone yet...remember has to be college level not religious teacher.
  • darbday wrote: »
    once you understand I am correct you will realize i was not really insulting you

    umm...what the fuck? no sorry. just because you think (or even if you are) right does not mean that your comment about 'what am i teaching my students' was not an insult. you are outright suggesting that i am a bad teacher and there's no other way i could have taken that comment despite your 'rightness' in the matter.
    darbday wrote: »
    You cannot prove me wrong by proving your model is right.

    even though this is stupid i'll agree with you. so again, please show me the evidence that backs up your claim. you still have not shown anything other than what your opinion is.
    darbday wrote: »
    Relativity says that both are right and/or not right.

    students need to show their citations please.
    darbday wrote: »
    Thats the huge discovery that is Einstein, in public school we teach one way is right (sun is the is the centre of our orbit). and that the other way is wrong...however that is an incorrect view point, and in an incorrect teaching...

    did you email someone yet...remember has to be college level not religious teacher.

    i don't know what school you went to but my school taught differing theories.

    you just told me that proving my argument right doesn't make you wrong. so what help is there in getting a college prof to give me their point. i just supplied multiple examples and evidence of my side. if you want to supply me with some of your evidence PLEASE DO SO NOW LIKE I KEEP ASKING!
  • and by the way, why do you keep saying i have to contact a physics prof, but not a religious prof? what the hell does that mean?
  • trigs wrote: »
    umm...what the fuck? no sorry. just because you think (or even if you are) right does not mean that your comment about 'what am i teaching my students' was not an insult. you are outright suggesting that i am a bad teacher and there's no other way i could have taken that comment despite your 'rightness' in the matter.
    IF i am correct then its a valid question
    since what you are teaching them is really not the whole truth at all. But youll agree more once a university professors tells you I am accurate and correct.
    even though this is stupid i'll agree with you. so again, please show me the evidence that backs up your claim. you still have not shown anything other than what your opinion is.
    Its not stupid thats what 'relativity' is....it says gravity, mass, direction, speed, time everything is relative to its observer, and changes depending on the observer.

    That is I am moving in my car at 100km/h, but I am also not moving compared to the car beside me going 100km/h, but we are also moving through the universe and unimaginable speeds.

    The earth orbits the sun and it also doesn't, and its also hurling through space and also not.

    students need to show their citations please.
    ok I link to wikipedia relativity, does that help? no....you need to hear a physics professor you know, say that I am correct

    i don't know what school you went to but my school taught differing theories.
    yes and we will show that they are actually just partial dogmas
    you just told me that proving my argument right doesn't make you wrong. so what help is there in getting a college prof to give me their point. i just supplied multiple examples and evidence of my side. if you want to supply me with some of your evidence PLEASE DO SO NOW LIKE I KEEP ASKING!
    Please relax I just finished my session of 24 tabling for the last 6 hours.

    I can't find something good to show an example yet but heres one thats close...

    its will show you a different perspective that will give a different example than the traditional sense of orbit theory.... it is no more correct or incorrect....but notice its completely different understanding...there are many different ways and they are all part of the correct understanding that is Einstein's relativity

    (This video doesn't really prove what the title says. But it shows how frame of reference changes things.)
    watch?v=Ex283trHBgE&feature=related
  • trigs wrote: »
    and by the way, why do you keep saying i have to contact a physics prof, but not a religious prof? what the hell does that mean?
    we are looking for the accepted scientific definition, not the one we teach our kids and not one that is not accepted because of religious bias

    but on 2nd thought go ask a religious physics professor he will tell you I am correct faster than anyone else.
  • okay. i'm seriously done with this thread now because you don't actually respond to my questions.

    before i leave (and suggest you come check out my thread about how the world works) i want to say the following:

    i told you i teach english and social science. i do not teach physics or astronomy. therefore, suggesting that i'm not teaching my students properly in reference to this argument is a direct insult about my teaching. i'm not quite sure how you managed to dance around this obvious fact.

    and yes, i understand the theory of relativity. like i mentioned earlier though, you are just arguing semantics. obviously it's all relative, but you can't deny that there are no orbits simply because the orbit is relative. believe it or not it's still there, maybe just in a different capacity but it doesn't cease to exist like you seem to be claiming.

    and partial dogmas? wtf are you talking about? all of science is partial dogmas. are you claiming that your dogma just happens to be the truth? no shit science is just dogmas. again, your claims like this are suggesting something bigger but they are coming from the complete wrong direction. organize your thoughts and seriously start this whole thread again with an actual goal and rational line of thinking and i may return to comment here.

    EDIT: removed link to my thread. guess it's not actually worth the effort. i'll stop posting in it as well.
  • I have not read very much of this thread I did watch a documentary not to long ago and they were basically saying that the objects in the universe distort space like putting a ball in sand and thing get caught in the impression like the moon to the earth and then the planets around the sun and so on. I know i did not explain this very well but that is the newest theory on how space/times work in easy to understand language. So the earth is more caught up in the space that the sun distorts.
This discussion has been closed.