TeleMad Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Freethinker: If you take a mass of a given radioactive element, we know it's decay rate, or how many particles (clicks on a giger counter) it will release during a given period. TeleMad: No, we probably wouldn't know it's actual decay rate; decay rates aren't typically exact. FreeThinker: I see, so half lives don't exist. I see, so you can’t understand English. Let’s see how FreeThinker’s mind works (or whatever it does). 1) I say that decay rates are typically NOT EXACT 2) FreeThinker pulls out of his arse...“I see, so half lives don’t exist” What messed up kind of logic is that??? What valid train of thought leads from what I said to what FreeThinker implies I said??? I’ll tell you…absolutely none. TeleMad: And nothing guarantess that even if an exact decay rate was determined yesterday, that that value would hold - exactly - for the sample we had today. FreeThinker: So much for everything we thought we knew about half lives. Why? Half lives can be used to ESIMATE how many particles in a sample will decay in a given period of time. We can make predictions based on half lives, but we can't KNOW how many will actually decay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 I just can't get over the lengths FreeThinker will go to in order to try to save face and/or make it appear his opponent is wrong. It's his completely off the wall reply above. Let's see how well his logic holds up. 1) How many stars are there in the Universe? We don't know the exact number. FreeThinker: I see, so [stars] don't exist 2) How many bees are there in North Carolina? We don't know the exact number. FreeThinker: I see, so [bees] don't exist 3) How many cells are there in President Bush's body? We don't know the exact number. FreeThinker: I see, so [cells] don't exist 4) How many atoms are there in the Earth? We don't know the exact number. FreeThinker: I see, so [atoms] don't exist 5) How many planets are there in the Universe? We don't know that exact number. FreeThinker: I see, so [planets] don't exist and so on, and so on, and so on,.... Wow, what great logic FreeThinker uses! Nope, can't argue against reasoning like that!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Originally posted by: TeleMadI just can't get over the lengths FreeThinker will go to in order to try to save face and/or make it appear his opponent is wrong. And you are...*not* going to extreme lengths to make it appear your opponent is wrong? Then what have you been doing for the past two days? Stop the flaming and get back to business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Tormod: And you are...*not* going to extreme lengths to make it appear your opponent is wrong? Then what have you been doing for the past two days? Nope, I am not. I AM showing that my opponent is wrong. FreeThinker, on the other hand, is doing some pretty lowlife things in the process of trying to create the illusion that I am wrong and he isn't. Get back to business? Sure, now that I've established my superiority over FreeThinker, I will. As long as he doesn't try any more of his stupid tricks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Originally posted by: TeleMadI AM showing that my opponent is wrong. FreeThinker, on the other hand, is doing some pretty lowlife things in the process of trying to create the illusion that I am wrong and he isn't. Get back to business? Sure, now that I've established my superiority over FreeThinker, I will. As long as he doesn't try any more of his stupid tricks. Superiority? Lowlife? Please respond to my PM or I will be forced to ban you from Hypography. This is a warning. I will have no more of this nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lindagarrette Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Tormod, Maybe you should create an unmoderated "bickering" forum so the resst of us don't have to plow through this non relevant stuff. Linda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Perhaps. But usually people listen to warnings. This seems to be an exception... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 WHile I have no intention of becoming mired in an attack, I do think there is value to explaining my intentions in order to clarify the information presented. I consider it important that visitors to this site receive as accruate of info as needed to answer their questions. Unfortunately they may have to stumble through counterproductive attacks to get there. Freethinker: If you take a mass of a given radioactive element, we know it's decay rate, or how many particles (clicks on a giger counter) it will release during a given period.A radioactive element has a half life. That means that given a starting mass, there will be a specific time period after which half of the mass will have released particles in order to become more stable. (Very simple level of explanation). Thus during any given time period we can predict approximately how many particles will be released in order for that mass to maintain it's half life structure, or "(clicks on a giger counter)". This explanation was given in order to provide an answer regarding aspects of the Uncertainty Principle, That is that while we can KNOW roughly how many clicks to expect, we can not know WHICH atom will be the one to release the next particle. There is no mechanism known to allow a prediction of such. However we were pulled down a completely different path in an effort to discredit me for some reason.Originally posted by: TeleMadNo, we probably wouldn't know it's actual decay rate; decay rates aren't typically exact.However, based on half lives, which are established for all radioactive elements, we can predict decay rates. Thus I responded:FreeThinker: I see, so half lives don't exist. And over a given period of time, we will get a specific number of particles released. Just as you will see win/lose rates given for gambling, the longer the time period, the greater the samples, the more accurate the estimate will be. But the EXACT number of "(clicks on a giger counter)" predicted for a specific element is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Say we have a given mass of a specific element and it has a given half life of 100,000 years. From that we can calculate that during a typical period of time, X number of particles will be released in order to maintian that half life. With a half life of 100,000 years, will we be able to completely accurately predict how many particles will be released in this thousandth of a second and the extact same number the next thousandth of a second? More imporatntly, what difference does this make regarding explaining Uncertainty? Let’s see how FreeThinker’s mind works (or whatever it does).My mind works based on how I can best explain answers to questions asked. I stand by my attempt in this specific case. The explanation works and is accurate regardless of potential variations of decay rates over arbitrarily given short time periods. If you want to start a fight about exactly how many particles will be released by a specific element and how many of those would reach the detection device in a specifically located gieger counter, then start a thread in which that discussion is the subject. This thread's topics is question: how the uncertainty principle works? My answer was accurate for the topic under discussion. Why? Half lives can be used to ESIMATE how many particles in a sample will decay in a given period of time. We can make predictions based on half lives, but we can't KNOW how many will actually decay.Funny, that's what I said. Now if you want to discuss it further, start a thread in which it would be relevant. And so we don't wind up down yet another unrelated path, I will admit in front that not ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 FreeThinker: WHile I have no intention of becoming mired in an attack… ROTFLMAO! No, not FreeThinker! :-) FreeThinker: *******************************TeleMad: No, we probably wouldn't know it's actual decay rate; decay rates aren't typically exact.******************************** FreeThinker: However, based on half lives, which are established for all radioactive elements, we can predict decay rates. Thus I responded: ****************************************FreeThinker: I see, so half lives don't exist. **************************************** Which as anyone with half a brain can see, makes no sense at all as a response to what I said. Your attempt here to convince people that your reply was valid just shows what extent you’ll go to to try to save face. TeleMad: Let’s see how FreeThinker’s mind works (or whatever it does). 1) How many stars are there in the Universe? We don't know the exact number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------FreeThinker: I see, so [stars] don't exist-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) How many bees are there in North Carolina? We don't know the exact number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------FreeThinker: I see, so [bees] don't exist-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) How many cells are there in President Bush's body? We don't know the exact number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------FreeThinker: I see, so [cells] don't exist-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) How many atoms are there in the Earth? We don't know the exact number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------FreeThinker: I see, so [atoms] don't exist-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) How many planets are there in the Universe? We don't know that exact number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------FreeThinker: I see, so [planets] don't exist-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FreeThinker: My mind works based on how I can best explain answers to questions asked. I stand by my attempt in this specific case. You stand behind your reply to me on this? Gee FreeThinker, what happened to your “I admit when I’m wrong” claim? Oh, that’s right, it’s mostly just PR BS. A way you try to make yourself look honorable by “admitting” something insignificant while you continue to be disingenuous in all other matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts