What Happened To This Forum?

[fahrquad]

Indeed, we should welcome posters back, except your disregard for what you call ''uber-geeks'' is highly offensive to the posters here who take their time to help others understand physics. Besides... you are one of the cranks this forum has had to put up with.... and yes, corrections, no matter how minute, should be the pivotal standard of an education. If you ignore it, then you'll never learn. And no, there is no ''belittling'' people of lesser knowledge, but a crank however should reap what they sow.

 

How readily you take the bait.

[Dubbelosix]

You above all contributors here, cant expect reason to prevail. You cry crank, but not realizing that you are the crank.

Never, not once, have you been able to explain rationally the bizarre theories of Einstine, yet you insist that they are correct. Your only answer is always the same'

"Cranks don't understand Relativity, if they learned what I learned, they would think like me."

 

We anti relativists only insist that any claim of Physics MUST show a consistency of rational thoughts, and display the use of deductive logic.

As you seem incapable of proving this in any of your statements about HOW relativity is supposed to work, then us "cranks" must continue to call a space a spade.

So the solution for you to rid the world of cranks is to still the same as its always been, to show us why our criticisms of Einstein can possibly be unjustified.

  Unless you are willing to do that you should expect that cranks will continue to ask embarrassing questions.

 

But it's gone beyond that really.  The "cranks" have a case so strong that it's no longer debatable.

The evidence is clear.  The conclusion is that for one to still believe in Relativity, one must accept irrationality and non-sensical as the foundational guiding principals in the study of Physics.

 

Meanwhile "the cranks" are happy to point to you and call you intellectually dishonest.

 

First of all, reason is the by-product of an educated mind and without reason and justification for a theory, then its just half-baked idea's dressed like mutton as lamb.

 

Secondly, who cares if Einstein's results are strange, the facts remain that his theory prevails... no scientist is under the delusion that physics is difficult to understand, or even that the quantum world doesn't make rational sense - but this is not a reason to disregard the mountain of evidence supporting these constructions. Your problem, I think... is like any other crank, they wish to make some marvelous discovery and they tend to attack theories by great men to show the world they are somehow more intelligent.

 

But you disregard scientific evidence, you have no appreciation of the hard work that has been put into the experimentation behind how these theories have been varified. That is not to mean we will not find a theory that could even overthrow the best out there, it means you need sufficient evidence to prove you have done so. And I am afraid to inform you, you haven't and its unlikely you ever will.

[Dubbelosix]

How readily you take the bait.

 

Oh so you're not only a crank, but you are bait master. Aye ok, people should really listen to you then.

[fahrquad]

I'm not the one screaming for attention.

[Dubbelosix]

I'm not the one screaming for attention.

 

A forum is a place of attention, so what is your point? The point I am making is that the cranks are looking for attention from people who cannot be bothered with them... no one cares about half-baked theories as I have explained before, people enjoy critical thinkers using reason and logic.

[GAHD]

That is something I am sure relativists and Non-relativists can agree on Flat Earther's are insane. There is no argument that could possibly ever convince me that the earth is flat having watched the earth from orbit from satellite.

Irony: The universe itself looks like it's flat, even if the earth is a spheroid. 

 

Friends.

 

It has been awhile before I came around.

 

Truthfully, I discovered Chinese Light Novels and my addiction leaves me little time or enthusiasm for other things...

 

Anyway, in days gone by there were beaucoup members—each more brilliant than the last.

 

Rather than have to explain which Forum that I was referring to when I discussed something with my sister, that I'd read here, I'd simply call it "That Genius' Forum."

 

There used to be one fellow who disliked me with a burning passion—something to do with my handle and motto. Truthfully, I used to avoid coming around unless I had a burning question simply because I saw little need to antagonize him.

 

There was also a kind-hearted moderator who asked me not to feel unwelcome.

 

Fast forward, and the Forum had a new name and it was being reorganized to mainly be a learning resource for students.

 

Skip another couple or three years and now you have about five or six active posters. 

 

What happened?

 

I suppose that the fellow who disliked me is no longer active—or he would have excoriated me again by now. I don't know if the kind moderator is still aboard or not.

 

I don't remember either of their handles. When I went to look at some of the old posts just to get the names—all of the old archives seems to have disappeared.

 

Y'all seem a good crowd and—not to exaggerate my importance—it seems like you could use another reasonably frequent poster. I will try to come around fairly often.

 

Forums seem to have a critical mass for both members and number of posts, Also, once above the critical mass they seem to grow by a slow exponential rate...

 

Until something knocks them in the head and then they waste away remarkably rapidly.

 

 

…..Saxon Violence

Ahh yes. The growth days. The days when we were owned by a journalist at the ESA who constantly put up interesting science news and facts... The days after when it moved to more of a discussion forum

 

Really, most of the moving onward is due to the youtube or other multimedia community areas taking center stage. Why READ a thread when you can listen to a podcast or watch video quorum of people. There's extra social cues abundant in multimedia that let the emotional and extroverted people understand things better than "dry old text" without inflection.

 

It's simply evolution of the people looking for a "close enough" understanding to navigate modern life finding better ways to get that quickly.  "stuff falls cause the rock is big, close enough" "air can push things, that's how we can fly. Close enough" "life hacks bypass problem solving, close enough"

 

 

We anti relativists only insist that any claim of Physics MUST show a consistency of rational thoughts, and display the use of deductive logic.

The universe doesn't have to follow your rules. You have to follow IT's rules. Rational thought is great for some things...but your brain evolved to avoid predators and find prey, not to intuitively understand what happens when motion magnitudes beyond what your muscles can ever accomplish interact with each other. You can't intuitively understand a head-on collision between a dump truck doing 20 MPH and a sportscar doing 200MPH. It is beyond the realm of intuition. Add a few more orders of magnitude and your intuitive rational thinking becomes even more of a hindrance. ;)

 

Just FYI, your posts that I have read are mostly INDUCTIVE reasoning, not DEDUCTIVE reasoning. There's a big difference, and I hope you explore it some day. :)

Edited June 3, 2019 by GAHD
postmerge

[marcospolo]

First of all, reason is the by-product of an educated mind and without reason and justification for a theory, then its just half-baked idea's dressed like mutton as lamb.

 

Secondly, who cares if Einstein's results are strange, the facts remain that his theory prevails... no scientist is under the delusion that physics is difficult to understand, or even that the quantum world doesn't make rational sense - but this is not a reason to disregard the mountain of evidence supporting these constructions. Your problem, I think... is like any other crank, they wish to make some marvelous discovery and they tend to attack theories by great men to show the world they are somehow more intelligent.

 

But you disregard scientific evidence, you have no appreciation of the hard work that has been put into the experimentation behind how these theories have been varified. That is not to mean we will not find a theory that could even overthrow the best out there, it means you need sufficient evidence to prove you have done so. And I am afraid to inform you, you haven't and its unlikely you ever will.

Why do you guys ALWAYS repeat the same old claim, that peoiple who dont accept your ideas are somehow just wanting to be seen as more intelligent?

I keep trying to simply get you back on track, and ask you to SHOW WHY WE ARE WRONG.

But you never attempt it.

The reason we reject Einstein, is NOT because his ideas are STRANGE, but because they are self contradictory and fail the requiremnts of rationality.

So please stop side stepping the issue by pretending that there is some other reason why we dont accept your hero's theories.

And by the way, Reason or Rationality is NOT the product of an educated mind. Its a property of an INTELLIGENT MIND.  Education is practically a system of indoctrination. Some of it good, some of it not so good.

[Dubbelosix]

Why do you guys ALWAYS repeat the same old claim, that peoiple who dont accept your ideas are somehow just wanting to be seen as more intelligent?

 

Because it's the truth.

 

I've seen your posts, its full of crap, then you bit-ch and whine that no one ''will dispute your claims, or falsify them'' but what gives you such a massive ego that people should? If I saw a genuine post, with more than an ounce of intellect behind it, I would almost certainly participate. But you are like a broken record, you cry for attention, but when people have given you the attention, you constantly repeat false claims. This is not an incentive for anyone to bother with you.

 

Now - I have had enough of these swings and roundabouts, you need to show some humility that your knowledge of physics is seriously lacking. One last statement from me, how many times have people said to you, that you wish to appear more intelligent than the greatest scientists alive? - because this is a statement I have only used once on this forum to explain the psychology behind the crank. Perhaps do yourself a favor, stop deluding yourself and go through the hard process everyone else has to do to truly understand the complexities behind the theories of Einstein which you so insidiously ignore.

Edited June 3, 2019 by Dubbelosix

[marcospolo]

Because it's the truth.

 

I've seen your posts, its full of crap, then you bit-ch and whine that no one ''will dispute your claims, or falsify them'' but what gives you such a massive ego that people should? If I saw a genuine post, with more than an ounce of intellect behind it, I would almost certainly participate. But you are like a broken record, you cry for attention, but when people have given you the attention, you constantly repeat false claims. This is not an incentive for anyone to bother with you.

 

Now - I have had enough of these swings and roundabouts, you need to show some humility that your knowledge of physics is seriously lacking. One last statement from me, how many times have people said to you, that you wish to appear more intelligent than the greatest scientists alive? - because this is a statement I have only used once on this forum to explain the psychology behind the crank. Perhaps do yourself a favor, stop deluding yourself and go through the hard process everyone else has to do to truly understand the complexities behind the theories of Einstein which you so insidiously ignore.

You never gave Einsteins Special Relativity a seconds thought, you just learned the math parrot fashion. Without stopping to consider if its the work of a sane person or not.

I read up to the first postulate and realised that it's impossible to continue reading any further, and a major error had already been introduced into the hypothesis.

I asked Einstein to fix his half-truth error of the first postulate, but he never replied. The hypothesis must be dead for him.

Of course, I did actually read the rest of the paper but had the same problem with Postulate number two.

Now, how easy should it be for you to explain why the postulates are in fact, sound rational claims, contrasting my statements that they are half-truths, which are often used as a means of deception?

So my post is full of crap?  Where exactly, point by point are my statements wrong, rationally and logically speaking, in my post #2?

Exactly which of my statements caused you to conclude that they were "without an ounce of intellect?"

Don't just make stuff up, and make wild statements about my ego or motives when they have naught to do with the questions at hand.  You can't just say that I'm wrong, without justifying that claim with a valid reason.

I don't see any reasoning at all in your posts.

Which of my statements is "crap" and why is it crap?

You neglected to address this in your rant.

Saying its crap because you don't agree with it is NOT evidence that it is crap.

[fahrquad]

A forum is a place of attention, so what is your point? The point I am making is that the cranks are looking for attention from people who cannot be bothered with them... no one cares about half-baked theories as I have explained before, people enjoy critical thinkers using reason and logic.

 

It is funny how you have been here for 2 years and have made nearly 2500 posts while I have been here 7.5 years and made 1101 posts (including this one) and I am the crank calling for attention?

[LaurieAG]

Ahh yes. The growth days. The days when we were owned by a journalist at the ESA who constantly put up interesting science news and facts... The days after when it moved to more of a discussion forum

 

Really, most of the moving onward is due to the youtube or other multimedia community areas taking center stage. Why READ a thread when you can listen to a podcast or watch video quorum of people. There's extra social cues abundant in multimedia that let the emotional and extroverted people understand things better than "dry old text" without inflection.

 

GAHD, those good old 'growth' days LOL :) . When I first joined hypography Tormod was running the site, there seemed to be a lot more interesting general discussions going on and there was a wide variety of people involved in both the theoretical and practical aspects of science.

 

There was also a like function that went haywire during one of the pre 2010 updates so that may go some way to explain the early 'growth' days. If I recall correctly, on average, I received one like for every 2 posts before the like count 'grew'.

 

It is funny how you have been here for 2 years and have made nearly 2500 posts while I have been here 7.5 years and made 1101 posts (including this one) and I am the crank calling for attention?

 

Here are the current 'ratings'. ;)

Name             Likes    Posts    Likes per post


GAHD             74975    10486    7.15

LaurieAG         34605    1479     23.4

Exchemist        622      2507     0.25

VictorMedvil     74       1092     0.07

farquad          68       1101     0.06

Dubbelosix       81       2485     0.03

Marcospolo       10       476      0.02

SaxonViolence    1        298      0.01

[Dubbelosix]

It is funny how you have been here for 2 years and have made nearly 2500 posts while I have been here 7.5 years and made 1101 posts (including this one) and I am the crank calling for attention?

 

 

I hope this is not you arguing that quantity here is being beaten by quality....

[Vmedvil2]

 

GAHD, those good old 'growth' days LOL :) . When I first joined hypography Tormod was running the site, there seemed to be a lot more interesting general discussions going on and there was a wide variety of people involved in both the theoretical and practical aspects of science.

 

There was also a like function that went haywire during one of the pre 2010 updates so that may go some way to explain the early 'growth' days. If I recall correctly, on average, I received one like for every 2 posts before the like count 'grew'.

 

 

Here are the current 'ratings'. ;)

Name             Likes    Posts    Likes per post


GAHD             74975    10486    7.15

LaurieAG         34605    1479     23.4

Exchemist        622      2507     0.25

VictorMedvil     74       1092     0.07

farquad          68       1101     0.06

Dubbelosix       81       2485     0.03

Marcospolo       10       476      0.02

SaxonViolence    1        298      0.01

 

This is not facebook this is a science forums who cares how many likes you get per post, it is not about if people like your posts but rather about the scientific quality of the posts that you put down. I ****ing hate facebook, go to facebook if you care about likes. I tried to post about science and the status of politics on facebook and had the cops called on me twice for no reason having to explain to them that I was posting about the status of the ISIS war within politics and wasn't actually killing terrorists as that is how dumb people on facebook are. I suppose that shows how "Social Media" effects the brain it has the same effect as methamphetamine rotting it away. If there was a petition to illegalize social media I would be first to sign it as a drug that negatively effects the human psyche as a class of opioid.

Edited June 3, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[marcospolo]

So is that it? that's all you can dredge up to defend Relativity?

Nothing?

You have made thousands of posts, is no indication of how much of the content was correct. It just means you like seeing your name on the score sheet.

By not replying to my statements, and showing my errors, you are allowing me to win without any competition.

It's way to easy this way.  I would prefer SOME sort of attempt to point out my errors.

Relativists are just hopeless at thinking. They are great at repeating what they have been told.

But I enjoy the exercise of putting my thoughts down on paper, so to speak. At the end of the day, it matters not if anyone agrees or disagrees.

I'm satisfied in my own efforts to delve to the bottom of the pit of irrationality that Einstien dug, to find a way to understand where he erred and how to explain it to non-relativists. 

You can rest assured, that when I discuss these problems with people who are NOT "born again Relativists", they all agree that the rational explanation beats the nonsense that Einstein developed. No one is willing to stick with Einstein once they see the errors under the bright light of rational thinking and deductive logic.

 

 

[sanctus]

Wrt to the good old days, it is also just a matter of available time. From being student to family job and own startup. But for me it is not like Gahd says, I prefer to read rather than listen.

[Dubbelosix]

That's right... you offer nothing you get nothing. Again, if you showed an ounce of humility about your own knowledge of relativity (which again, is extremely limited) then why should people bother with you? I made up my mind a while ago, you feed the cranks here, it gives them a sense of status. 

 

This is why I won't waste my time with you, you don't deserve to be taught the ways of science. In such a case, you make your bed and lye in it... educate yourself, stop expecting you are so important that I should jump into your posts and give you elongated responses to clearly erroneous statements. It would essentially, be a waste of my time. Not others who could learn from it, just mine. 

 

So is that it? that's all you can dredge up to defend Relativity?

Nothing?

Edited June 3, 2019 by Dubbelosix

[exchemist]

Re post 6, I am tempted to say quod erat demonstrandum...........