The direction of the big bang

guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Seedling said:
[/B]
More like this:

Me: Hey everyone, I have the facts, they are 2+2=4.
Everyone: Bullshit, that's old school thinking. We have mountains of evidence saying you're wrong.
Me: How can I be wrong, because the very definition of addition says I'm correct.
Everyone: BS, prove it. There is no absolute addition. Everyone does addition their own way.
Click to expand...
Yet even more like this:

Seedling: Hey everyone, I have the facts, they are (2/x)+(2/x)=4.
non retards: You are wrong because you are assuming the x is EXACTLY 1. At a measured value of 2 I agree that x looks extremely close to 1, so close in fact that if you simply assume it is 1 and do your math then your answer of 4 will be close enough for everyday purposes. However once you reach integers of sufficient magnitude the x factor will NOT be 1.
seedling: How can I be wrong when I make up my very own definition of terms that says I'm correct?
non retards: Because you made up your own definition. We tried explaining that your definition is wrong and provided you with the correct equations to do the math. Then we provided you will real world examples and measurements that confirm everything we told you is correct.
seedling: DERP DERP DERP DERP DERP DERP DERP DERP
 
Seedling

Seedling

Well-Known Member
guy incognito said:
No. We each measure the same closing speed. We do not measure the same distance or time. We have been over this a thousand times. No I do not agree we will agree on the distance, nor can we communicate our agreement/disagreement to each other because we don't have the same concept of time. My time is not the same as your time.

You are a fucking retard.

The evidence has been laid out clearly. By evidence I mean real measurements taken in laboratories, ALL of which agree with the theory of SR. Not a single experiment has ever been done that contradicts SR, nor has one ever been conducted that supports your conflicting theory. Lots of evidence, 100% of which converges at the conclusion that Einstein was correct and seedling was wrong. If you can provide even a single piece of actual evidence to support your theory I will apologize to you, and I will restructure my own beliefs to incorporate that evidence. Until then I only see a few possible options:

You understand SR and agree the evidence supports it, yet you are lieing because you like drama on web forums.

You do not understand SR and are holding tightly to your views according to your own intuition and ignoring valid evidence.

You do not understand SR because you have not been presented with the evidence to support it.


Given that I have personally provided you with not only a detailed explanation of how SR works in multiple scenarios, but linked you directly to the experiments that provided the supporting data, that leads me to believe you are either stupid or a troll. Either way I see no reason for this discussion to continue.
Click to expand...

If we do not agree on distance and time then we can not agree on a closing speed, which means you are full of shit! You're an Einstein groupie at an Einstein love fest. But don't worry, there are plenty of cult organizations out there, so you're in good company.

Thanks for playing!! When you finally figure it out you'll have a good laugh at yourself. But, you will be a day late and a dollar short, as I have already been laughing at you since the beginning.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Seedling said:
If we do not agree on distance and time then we can not agree on a closing speed, which means you are full of shit! You're an Einstein groupie at an Einstein love fest. But don't worry, there are plenty of cult organizations out there, so you're in good company.

Thanks for playing!! When you finally figure it out you'll have a good laugh at yourself. But, you will be a day late and a dollar short, as I have already been laughing at you since the beginning.
Click to expand...
So if we are approaching each other and you measure the distance closed as 10 miles over a time period of 10 seconds, and I measure 11 miles over 11 seconds, what speed do each of us calculate?

EDIT: Just thought I should clarify that 10 and 11 are different numbers in case you were getting confused. You seem to have a tenuous grasp of math and science.
 
Seedling

Seedling

Well-Known Member
guy incognito said:
So if we are approaching each other and you measure the distance closed as 10 miles over a time period of 10 seconds, and I measure 11 miles over 11 seconds, what speed do each of us calculate?

EDIT: Just thought I should clarify that 10 and 11 are different numbers in case you were getting confused. You seem to have a tenuous grasp of math and science.
Click to expand...
The distance and time is 1 mile per second for each of us.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
NO NO NO NO you said total distance and total time. We disagree on both the distance AND the time, yet the math works out that we both agree on closing speed.

Events which are simultaneous with reference to the embankment are not simultaneous with respect to the train, and vice versa. Every reference-body has its own particular time; unless we are told the reference-body to which the statement of time refers, there is no meaning in a statement of the time of an event.
 
Heisenberg

Heisenberg

Well-Known Member
Seedling said:
The problem with your statement is that you're wrong, 2+2=4, always! If you mess up your 2's with you'r 5's that's your mistake, and it doesn't mean 2+2 does not equal 4. Your method obviously has massive mistakes if the mathematics suggest 2+2 does not equal 4. The very nature of counting and adding is at stake in your method, and yet you insist it is correct. Like I said before, bait and switch.
Click to expand...
Wow. You have now surpassed fundamentalists and conspiracy theorists with your level of arrogance and cluelessness. Do you really see your words as doling out punishment? In your mind, do you really feel that you are holding your own? You have everyone by the balls? It must be a pretty cool world you live in.

[video=youtube;C0HG5rkY8r4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0HG5rkY8r4[/video]
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Seedling said:
Well thanks for playing. I suggest that you stop being a glutton for punishment and stop visiting this thread if it is uninteresting for you. Why would you keep coming back for more??

The problem with your statement is that you're wrong, 2+2=4, always! If you mix up your 2's with your 5's then that's your mistake, and it doesn't mean 2+2 does not equal 4. Your method obviously has massive mistakes if the mathematics suggest 2+2 does not equal 4. The very nature of counting and adding is at stake in your method, and yet you insist it is correct. Like I said before, bait and switch.
Click to expand...
You have proven both my points. cn
 
Seedling

Seedling

Well-Known Member
guy incognito said:
NO NO NO NO you said total distance and total time. We disagree on both the distance AND the time, yet the math works out that we both agree on closing speed.
Click to expand...
Are you fucking retarded?? I am not talking about the total distance and total time. I am talking about our closing speed. If we are separated by 100 miles do you have to travel 100 miles before I know your speed? Hell no!
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Heisenberg said:
Wow. You have now surpassed fundamentalists and conspiracy theorists with your level of arrogance and cluelessness. Do you really see your words as doling out punishment? In your mind, do you really feel that you are holding your own? You have everyone by the balls? It must be a pretty cool world you live in.

[video=youtube;C0HG5rkY8r4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0HG5rkY8r4[/video]
Click to expand...




Simple Seedling.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Seedling said:
Are you fucking retarded?? I am not talking about the total distance and total time. I am talking about our closing speed. If we are separated by 100 miles do you have to travel 100 miles before I know your speed? Hell no!
Click to expand...
So when we meet up and you say you measured 100 miles and 10 seconds, and I say no I measured 110 miles and 11 seconds, who is right? I calculate the same speed.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
I keep saying i'm done with this thread but I just can't leave out of morbid curiosity for what seedling will post next. He is a train wreck. My jaw is dropping to unprecedented levels.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Heisenberg said:
Wow. You have now surpassed fundamentalists and conspiracy theorists with your level of arrogance and cluelessness. Do you really see your words as doling out punishment? In your mind, do you really feel that you are holding your own? You have everyone by the balls? It must be a pretty cool world you live in.

[video=youtube;C0HG5rkY8r4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0HG5rkY8r4[/video]
Click to expand...
Hmm. Now that i'm reexamining I don't think that youtube freeze frame was actually the preferred frame.
 
Seedling

Seedling

Well-Known Member
guy incognito said:
So when we meet up and you say you measured 100 miles and 10 seconds, and I say no I measured 110 miles and 11 seconds, who is right? I calculate the same speed.
Click to expand...
There you go again asking me who is right, the guy speaking Spanish or the guy speaking French. They are both describing the same distance and time with their different languages.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Seedling said:
There you go again asking me who is right, the guy speaking Spanish or the guy speaking French. They are both describing the same distance and time with their different languages.
Click to expand...
No they aren't. Is 110 the same as 100? is 11 the same as 10? The math works out so they do actually both agree on the speed - but that is all. You are erroneously drawing the conclusion that if speed is the same then distance AND time must be the same. You seem very focused on the distance aspect and completely neglecting the time, which makes me believe you are assuming universal time. It has already been pointed out that there is no universal time.

Events which are simultaneous with reference to the embankment are not simultaneous with respect to the train, and vice versa. Every reference-body has its own particular time; unless we are told the reference-body to which the statement of time refers, there is no meaning in a statement of the time of an event.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
We aren't even on relativity anymore. You can't seem to grasp the fact that 110 and 100 are different numbers. I saw you add 2+2 but I am convinced you simply copied the equation from a website.
 
Seedling

Seedling

Well-Known Member
guy incognito said:
No they aren't. Is 110 the same as 100? is 11 the same as 10? The math works out so they do actually both agree on the speed - but that is all. You are erroneously drawing the conclusion that if speed is the same then distance AND time must be the same. You seem very focused on the distance aspect and completely neglecting the time, which makes me believe you are assuming universal time. It has already been pointed out that there is no universal time.
Click to expand...
This is the deal. I have a size 10 shoe. You have a size 12 shoe. We are tasked to measure a football field in shoe lengths. I say it's 360 shoe lengths. You say it's 300 shoe lengths.

You are asking me who is correct. Seriously, you are that retarded!!
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
Seedling said:
This is the deal. I have a size 10 shoe. You have a size 12 shoe. We are tasked to measure a football field in shoe lengths. I say it's 360 shoe lengths. You say it's 300 shoe lengths.

You are asking me who is correct. Seriously, you are that retarded!!
Click to expand...
I would say nice try, but it wasn't. That is a terrible analogy and not even close to relevant to what is being discussed.



More like we both have size 12 shoes and I ask you to measure the field while being at rest relative to the football field, and I will measure it while I fly by at a significant fraction of the speed of light. Then we compare distances and we have different measurements. Then we compare times and we clocked different times too! Then we plug our values in (you use the distance AND time YOU measured - I used the distance AND time I measured) and calculated the same closing speed between us.

Notice that neither of us agrees on distance. Notice neither of us agrees on time. Notice we do both agree on closing speed.
 
guy incognito

guy incognito

Well-Known Member
And I already anticipate your next question:

Seedling: om nom nom nom *takes cock out of mouth* But how do we measure a different distance!? The football field is a football field and it is the length of exactly 1 football field!!!! DERP DERPA DERP! It is 300 feet exactly! *inserts cock back into mouth*

me: You took that measurement from the frame of reference of yourself, which is not moving relative to the football field. If you are moving relative to the football field you will get a different results. Also, watch the teeth please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top