Delano
-
Posts
5,601 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
262
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Delano
-
-
Maybe people have the need to dominate and be dominated. This may be because of self interest. Perhaps people want more and are less interested in eradicating hunger.
Rap used to be the voice for the voiceless. Rappers wanted sex, fame, money and cars and a few wanted to educate. In the Furious Five first album Melle does the message. Which is social commentary . in the Funky 4+1 Sharock raps about astrology . So you have a minority rapping about social issues or education. What sells it what people want. Although you could argue that the supply creates the demand.
i would say more people aspire to be successful like Trump. Than be a social activist like Sanders.
-
1
-
-
Yes unless he is Earl Graves in disguise.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/nov/04/relativity-quantum-mechanics-universe-physicists
Now for the problem: relativity and quantum mechanics are fundamentally different theories that have different formulations. It is not just a matter of scientific terminology; it is a clash of genuinely incompatible descriptions of reality.
Have a read. The text below the link is from the article.
https://futurism.com/newtonian-physics-vs-special-realtivity/
http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae392.cfm
Newtonian Mechanics turns out to be a private case of Quantum Mechanics. In some situations, the behavior of the sub-atomic particles can be described well enough by Newton's Laws, but the more general theory is the Quantum Mechanics.
-
1
-
-
-
Pioneer last paragraph makes his point. He is being cautious.
-
I don't know. Perhaps you are right Pioneer. We may ve our worst enemy. Then I think about the creation of the KKK and the internment camps during WWII.
-
There is a difference between me saying you are wrong and saying I am right.
Asking a personto give an example to back up a statement is an effective tactic in argument. Most people can't which then weakens the rest of the argument. This is the second time. After some thought I changed my mind and realised Cynique was correct. Years back i was wrong and you were right about sampling. The climate is changing. It may also be due to fossil fuels. But the models and the predictions are misleading. The two not for profits are making misleading statements.
I have recently been very critical about Troy's usage of words. I am not defending Pioneer in order to get back at Troy. I find intelectual bullying distasteful. Elitism Racism Sexism are all ways to diminish and or dominate the target.
Troy's attempts to use science and mathematics to silence the opposition. That is distasteful. Pioneer mentioned that he didn't go to university a while back. That moved me. Whether it was said with humility I don't know. What i have noticed with Troy recently is a need to attempt to use his pedigree to win arguments.
Troy you are clearly a focused driven guy with multiple degrees. If the conversation is about engineering and mathematics, your opinions are informed. Being an expert in one field doesn't make you an expert in others.
You telling me to Stfu doesn't warrant more of a response.
3 hours ago, Troy said:Del I don't delete posts when people are wrong, or even say stupid things, but I will reject them including your statement that I've never provided Pioneer proof, because it is false. I told you, in a manner of speaking, to STFU, because you on that point you don't know what you are talking about and you are becoming increasing arrogant in your ignorance. Even sinking as low as to suck up to Pioneer, Have you no shame!
@Del have you ever modified your opinion on anything as a result of something you've read here? If so, can you share one or two examples? If not, how can you grow, if you always think you are right and everyone else is always wrong? I bolded the question to ensure that you saw it.
1 Sampling
2 Alpha male
Man's knowledge changes over time and that knowledge takes time to disseminate. Isaac Newton laws of gravity stood for hundreds of years until they were shown to be wrong. The calculations are good enough for a great many of things, but 'ole Isaac did not know anything about the warping of space/time and as you suggest even Einsteins who corrected Newton, can be corrected as well.
You are wrong.
Newtowns law work within one sphere. Quantum physics works on the quantum level. They work within their respective domains.
3 hours ago, Troy said:Look you can have a great life completely ignorant of space/time, the nature of race, or even the causes of global warming. But when you say things that direct contradict what the best minds have collectively determined, based solely upon your own uninformed musings, you just sound like a kook.
I can't convince you to think past your ignorance about the numbers being presented. The following statement is for rational people.
There's a diffeence betwen 97% of scientist saying climate change is an incontrovertible fact. When the statement made by climate scientists is that 97% of climate scientists think its an incontrovertible fact. Using yhe word incontrovertible fact should make a thinking person suspicious.
The climate change data is not transparent. The undelying numbers have been altered. Go to Princeton University's site. They geometerological department says they have questuins about climate change that they can't answer. I don't expect that Troy will look at the opinion from credible scientist. You have made up your mind. We have a change in the climate. I am uncertain of the cause.
-
1
-
-
The peevish bit I get but you think it was rude.
No I have very little illusion about my fellow posters.
I loved growing up in New York. However i saw the city i love disappear.
Perhaps will see how things develop
-
Pioneer I just want to acknowledge that your style and methodology follow a logic that is internally consistent. I appreciate a well presented and thought out argument. That is neither argumentative nor emotional. I am also striving to present arguments that have less typos and are easier to understand.
I was wondering if you have consciously changed your style?
I am less inclined to blindly follow experts. Since even amongst experts you have dissenting opinions. The discussion pf those differences rationally is what propels discourse both personal and scientific.
-
1
-
-
Troy this is a discussion. So unless you want to censor me or delete my post. I will point out why and where you are mistaken. You ability to think critically or to even withstand criticism is appaling . If you want to be seen and respected as an expert. Your delivery and content of your arguments need to be sharper. or maybe just learn yo argue using rhetoric.
Or I can just stop posting. or engaging with you.
I'll close my mouth when you start opening your mind.
Having knowledge in engineering doesn't make youan expert in any other field.
-
1
-
-
This is where reading comprehension is important. It's is not 97% of scientist its 97% of climate scientists. And that number is overstated I know because I checked.
Think for a second how would you take a global average temperature.
-
Maybe check their sources. As to how they computed that number. A lot of people mention ut without knowing anything about it. Because people are happy not thinking.
Anyone using that 97% hasn't read how they figured that number. Don't take my word go check.
Also go see if you can find temperature data.
-
-
-
-
Well said Cynique. That's why i say there aren't any facts.
-
18 hours ago, Troy said:
I've never read any of Feynman's books, but I really enjoy his videos--one of the greatest things about the web is the ability to hear someone like him speak. I doubt I I would have heard of him otherwise. Del is the only other person I know who has mentioned his name.
My favorite Feynman books Surely you're joking, Mr Feynman! and What do you care what other people think.
-
The answer should be obvious.
-
Al Gore has a colossal carbon footprint.
BTW I have already looked at Trump. He literally has hundreds of businesses. Most of which are licenses of his name.
Troy it won't be long before Al Gore and Climatologist are seen for being frauds.
A lot foundations are ways to pay yourself and your cronies. The Trump's Clinton's Obama's Bush's Reagan's all have foundations.
Al Gore has a not for profit it raised about $26 mil $18 is for programs. Which is another way of saying salary.
-
Domination is more about aggression than intelligence.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Troy said:
Absolutely, a complicated lie which sounds good is always more desirable than the complicated truth. I often think those with the most willingness to tell these lies can achieve the most financial success in America.
-----------------
search Al Gore Income.
-
1
-
-
Do a search on Al Gore Income.
OR
Will Al Gore be the first Climate Change Billionaire.
Figures don't lie but every liar can figure.
-
If mathematics was created instead of discovered. Then all of science which is dependent on mathematics is chimerical. The philosophy of mathematics discusses said issue. It is unresolved amongst mathematicians. I think its a creation like all symbolic languages . Which are imbued with meaning by the users. Numbers have no intrinsic value nor a basis in reality. Punny.
-
1
-
-
Troy I tagged the people who contribute yo yhe discussion. There's no pecking order. I generally dont agree with Pioneer. However his opinions resonate with some if your audience.
I will ask a question or make a statement to some one with more knowledge. Some technically train people assume have knowledge in one sphere makes them knowledgeable in others.
Stephen Hawking says astrology is rubbish. Richard Feynman asks how does it work. So unless you can show its efficacy. Let's use science.
Actually Troy.....
in Culture, Race & Economy
Posted
No Troy they weren't as precise. Precision and accuracy are different. You are saying the aren't accurate.
@Troy
Read this and then admit you are wrong. Not impecise but inaccurate.
Let me skip to your third paragraph, because this highlights a very important point not commonly appreciated by non-scientists.
In Physics a "theory" is a mathematical model based on various assumptions and valid for a limited range of physical conditions. Newton's laws are a mathematical model that is limited to non-relativistic speeds and low gravitational fields, and within those limits it is exceedingly accurate. There is no sense in which Newton was proved wrong by Einstein. What relativity did is expand the range of physical conditions over which the theory applied. Special relativity extended the range to include high speeds, and general relativity extended it again to include high gravitational fields. Even GR is not applicable everywhere because it fails at singularities like the centre of black holes. We expect that some future theory (string theory?) will extend GR to describe places that are singular in GR.
Anyhow, rant over, and on to your real question. The classic difference is the precession of Mercury. This is probably the biggest effect and it's certainly the most easily observed. Because the orbit of Mercury is an ellipse it has a long axis that points in a particular direction. In Newtonian gravity the direction of this axis doesn't change, but GR predicts it changes by 43 arc-seconds per century. This is a tiny tiny amount. The angular resolution of the unaided human eye is about 1 arc-minute, so you would have to watch Mercury for 140 years before the change in the axis would be perceptible.
You are smarter than rocket scientist who use Newtonian physics.
https://spaceflightsystems.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/newton.html