Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Abefroman_sl said:
As i thought you have nothing. Your just gonna keep shitting up this thread because you think you are an expert since you watched quantum leap. Fuck off faggot.
Click to expand...
Are you new to this thread or something? Furry has been talking out of his ass for fucking months in this thread, filling it with pseudoscientific "critiques" of QM's about as valid as Rescorla's. I decided to stop treating him like someone worth debating on the subject when he said some of the stupidest shit possible about negative numbers.

I get it though. You don't know enough about mathematics and physics to know if he is talking out of his ass. Fine. Many people can't tell with Deepak Chopra either. Just don't confuse yourself by thinking we are all that ignorant.
 
Ambiturner

Ambiturner

Ssraeszha Raider
16,040
19,501
I'm guessing most people who are defending Furry aren't regulars in this thread.

Some threads have posters so bad they're able to derail rational discussion and turn it into their own personal "Look at me!" thread. Gamergate has Tanoomba, Global warming had Rescorla, we have Furry.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,661
24,881
khalid_sl said:
Are you new to this thread or something? Furry has been talking out of his ass for fucking months in this thread, filling it with pseudoscientific "critiques" of QM's about as valid as Rescorla's. I decided to stop treating him like someone worth debating on the subject when he said some of the stupidest shit possible about negative numbers.

I get it though. You don't know enough about mathematics and physics to know if he is talking out of his ass. Fine. Many people can't tell with Deepak Chopra either. Just don't confuse yourself by thinking we are all that ignorant.
Click to expand...
You all flailed around when I made my claim about negative numbers, but not one person would able to provide an example of where I was wrong when challenged. I said that negative numbers don't exist in reality, and results where we can't change the frame of reference to make the results positive are irrational. An example is negative mass or negative volume. I had people flail around and go "BUT NEGATIVE NUMBERS ARE REAL", but not one person was able to provide a single example of a real negative number in nature with an inflexible reference that demands it to be negative. An example of a negative where reference can be swapped to make it possible is a negative velocity, where human perspective makes it negative.

I never made the claim that you can't mathematically use negative numbers, only that negative absolutes don't exist in nature. So I'll offer you a chance again. Where is but one negative absolute in nature.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Negative is just a descriptor. A mental construct we enforce on reality.

Saying "there's no example of a negative number in nature" is mistaking the map for the terrain.
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
His real underlying claim to his stupid negative number rant was that somehow physicists and mathematicians don't understand how to work with negative numbers. Then somehow tried to tie that to how QM had huge flaws in it because of this. It is just flat bullcrap.
 
Abefroman

Abefroman

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,588
11,904
khalid_sl said:
Are you new to this thread or something? Furry has been talking out of his ass for fucking months in this thread, filling it with pseudoscientific "critiques" of QM's about as valid as Rescorla's. I decided to stop treating him like someone worth debating on the subject when he said some of the stupidest shit possible about negative numbers.

I get it though. You don't know enough about mathematics and physics to know if he is talking out of his ass. Fine. Many people can't tell with Deepak Chopra either. Just don't confuse yourself by thinking we are all that ignorant.
Click to expand...
Way to miss the point. I've read this thread the entire time and instead of talking about the actual discovery, dipshits like you with zero fucking self control have nothing to add that might actually be interesting. Instead we get a bunch of furry bullshit. I was hoping that somehow people would be talking about what technologies this information might help produce, can it help discover planets by looking at gravity waves, or is it just pretty fucking cool to have a theory proven after around 100 years?

Too fucking much to ask.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,661
24,881
Quaid_sl said:
The quantum spin of a particle can be negative.
Click to expand...
The positive an negative refers to an angular direction in this case. It's essentially (putting it simply) A form of velocity, which I already exemplified as something with human reference.
 
Quaid

Quaid

Trump's Staff
11,554
7,862
Neither positive nor negative numbers exist without a (largely arbitrary) set reference point. These things are human creations that allow us to understand directional relationships. This isn't really a question of mathematics from what I can tell, it's a question of metaphysics.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,661
24,881
khalid_sl said:
His real underlying claim to his stupid negative number rant was that somehow physicists and mathematicians don't understand how to work with negative numbers. Then somehow tried to tie that to how QM had huge flaws in it because of this. It is just flat bullcrap.
Click to expand...
There are some offshoots of QM that are based on believing absolute negatives could be real. I consider those specific fields to be complete bunk, yes. I never made the claim that this encompasses ALL of QM.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,661
24,881
Quaid_sl said:
Neither positive nor negative numbers exist without a (largely arbitrary) set reference point. These things are human creations that allow us to understand directional relationships.
Click to expand...
Where the reference point is arbitrary, negatives can exist in nature. Where the reference is non-arbitrary, negatives do not exist in nature. You understand exactly!
 
khalid

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Abefroman_sl said:
Way to miss the point. I've read this thread the entire time and instead of talking about the actual discovery, dipshits like you with zero fucking self control have nothing to add that might actually be interesting.
Click to expand...
Well, actually, I linked a great book on the subject of quantum mechanics and science right before all this shit got started. It is actually really relevant to the entire Furry bullshit, as it talks directly about QM, QE and the different philosophies of science. However, you probably didn't read the link as any subject at all in this thread involving those gets derailed by Furry.

However, continue blaming it on the people that want Furry to fucking leave, instead of Furry himself.


Here, I will link it again in case anyone wants a fun read or listen.
 
U

UnobservantBastard_sl

shitlord
653
1
Abefroman_sl said:
Way to miss the point. I've read this thread the entire time and instead of talking about the actual discovery, dipshits like you with zero fucking self control have nothing to add that might actually be interesting. Instead we get a bunch of furry bullshit. I was hoping that somehow people would be talking about what technologies this information might help produce, can it help discover planets by looking at gravity waves, or is it just pretty fucking cool to have a theory proven after around 100 years?

Too fucking much to ask.
Click to expand...
New frontiers in astronomy is the big takeaway. They were able to measure the velocities, masses, and mass energy conversion in one observation of the resultant gravity waves. They also believe they can use this technique to observe further back into the past, possibly even before the emergence of the CMB which obscures any visual observations.
 
Quaid

Quaid

Trump's Staff
11,554
7,862
To me, the question to ask seems to be: If there were no humans to observe directional changes of values along a 1D axis, would negative values exist in the universe?

Or, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

I'm not sure the universe gives a shit about our ability to perceive it.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Quaid_sl said:
To me, the question to ask seems to be: If there were no humans to observe directional changes of values along a 1D axis, would negative values exist in the universe?

Or, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

I'm not sure the universe gives a shit about our ability to perceive it.
Click to expand...
It doesn't, and the answer to both is "yes".

We call them negative, which implies to us an absence filled with a lack of things, which of course seems boggling.

But there's an actual thing there. We just define it as negative in relation to its opposite. We could just as easily call the positive negative and vice versa.
 
Furry

Furry

WoW Office
<Gold Donor>
19,661
24,881
Quaid_sl said:
To me, the question to ask seems to be: If there were no humans to observe directional changes of values along a 1D axis, would negative values exist in the universe?

Or, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

I'm not sure the universe gives a shit about our ability to perceive it.
Click to expand...
Parts of quantum mechanic would argue that our perception is an important part of the working of the universe (Shrodinger's cat). I tend to agree with you, myself. I don't think the universe gives a fuck.
 
Abefroman

Abefroman

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,588
11,904
ObservantBastard_sl said:
New frontiers in astronomy is the big takeaway. They were able to measure the velocities, masses, and mass energy conversion in one observation of the resultant gravity waves. They also believe they can use this technique to observe further back into the past, possibly even before the emergence of the CMB which obscures any visual observations.
Click to expand...
That is awesome. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.