And to all trying to "prove" a force, effect or parameter


Instead of proving the existence.. Create a model without said concept and see if it agrees with observation, this is why true scientists use terms such as theory instead of fact


Black holes have been "proven" because supercomputers could not recreate the model without the infamous black hole parameter of increasing mass and therefore gravity


Indirect detection....

Are black holes fact? No.

Are they required in every model ever made? Yes



Decide for yourself which course of logic is logical

so helium isn't affected by gravity, what magic force do Helium atoms have that normal matter does not.

Why when i drop a piece of wood it falls right to the ground, but if i drop it in water - it doesn't fall to the bottom of the ocean - what is this sorcery?

Its almost like its the density of an object compared to density of the medium that object exists and in is the reason and that gravity is just faith in the state to tell you what to think, so they can tax you.

I didn't say it was a result, at least thats not what was meant


Ask yourself this

If I have a system $box with cord x,y,z range 1 to ten (the system CAN expand) with energy $e at pressure $unknown/infinite

$e at time zero starts at 0,0,0

At time one what happens? What forces are involved? How do we identify change and more importantly how do we go about logically creating a concept to base data upon



Can you really say thermodynamics and gravity are not sharing a common factor or to dig deeper are not simply parameters of reality



I can go into detail about gravity but in truth the laymen has an incorrect understanding on what gravity really is, if it exists at all or its simply a way of completing a comprehension

Math only proves stuff on paper



A computer model only proves a computer model

I was just watching a video about how the google earth map does not correlate to real life observations. Do you know who owns goggle maps - its the CIA.

Why is the geoid map a matter of National safety?

Why did Neil Armstrong say as a speaker to a graduation ceremony that great discoveries await beyond truths protective barrier?

Dont you already know the truth?

and black holes are just fake, Einstein just divided by 0 to create them any everyone thought he was a genius, im mean really - people are so gullible.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Jan 19 2018 11:35pm

In a way we are speaking the same language, I just have a different accent....


Like you said about a computer model hit the nail on the head

If all our data is based on observation but its then learned spacetime is warped by factor (n) then how do we know the data is real and not just perceived

We can't know such things, our brains require theoretical basis to prove upon and when people start arguing arbitrarily it gets me smiling



My favorite example (personal conclusion) is the speed of light


How the fuck can we know how fast light traveled at time one after the big bang

How do we know the constant is that everywhere in the universe

How do we know the speed has never changed

And finally what governs the speed? Something has to be otherwise it would be instant according to known theory

Such a debate is a fools errand and using any form of known data is 100% arbitrary


In order to know the answer I will have had to existed forever and seen every measurable unit of the universe at each point in change everywhere


Logic breaks down to the true scientist

Forgot to add

Time one after he big bang


If time is a function of spacetime which depends on the mass of a system, our concept of one second cannot apply to when the system was at a value not = to earth


That being said the measure of time is a variable based on what the earth is doing in relation to the sun


Using time to explain the big banv becomes illogical once you realize definitions and constants may not apply to a system we have never observed and are incapable of observing at every point simultaneously


Most modern thinking is reverse engineering

It makes sense because it describes what we see but describing what can no longer be seen or is "out of range"

...... Im not convinced

I thought I saw the edge of the earth but then I flew over it and realized it was just the horizon.

Look at him go. Wing him up.

Can you try that again only ib the form of a coherant

no I said clearly that the Helium Balloon experiment is factored by the mass of air, and the mass of helium...

card is asking me if helium raising is due to magic? its not...

the helium is being pulled by gravity.... and the air is being pulled by gravity... the helium has mass... and the air has mass... but Helium has less mass than air... but its not weightless or anti gravity...

buoyancy raises the balloon...