Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
If Only....

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Nicholas on November 14, 2002 22:30:44 UTC

"Particle accelerators use empirically derived data."

Wrong. Utterly wrong. Do you seriously think that equations like E=mc^2 and the Lorentz transformations were empirically derived? Not only did Einstein's theory automatically give equations that described observations, but they PREDICTED equations for future observations. Now, here's the key point. The predictions were not just general conceptual statements like you give, they were exact formulae! For a given mass and radius from the sun, he could tell you exactly how any planet would precess, not just mercury. He could tell you exactly where that planet would be at a given time. Anytime that something which cannot be explained with current theory, it is reported and debated by the theorists. Ray, I do this for a living. You MUST understand math if you are going to refute modern theories.

Accidents that occur in nuclear power plants (or in planes, for that matter) are rarely a result of a failure to understand all of the physics. They are a result of a human error. We understand why things fail most of the time, but that doesn't mean that people will always do the right thing in any given circumstance. If a pilot forgets to drop the wheels before landing a plane, you can't blame it on the physics.

"Like Bruce, you're paying attention. Pretty soon it'll start to come together for you. "

If only you had any idea how clueless you are. Your arrogance is almost depressing to me, because it means that humans are so stubborn and deluded that they will believe anything that gives them a feeling of importance. As for the rest of your ramblings, I'm getting really tired of refuting virtually everything you say. My main point is at the top of this post and in several others I've posted. If you can't predict anything useful, shutup. Let us do our jobs and you stick to something that you know about. I don't care if you believe in it or not, you have to learn math before you can be of any use in something like this.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins