Reality is...

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Spellbound, Aug 24, 2015.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    I believe someone has really gone off the deep end.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    I don't think moderators, like you, will make a poor judgment in this case. You are not even worthy of consideration.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Correct.

    Are you saying that energy conservation requires an absolute reference? I gather that you are thinking of energy as being all over therefore impossible to be referred to? What do you mean?

    Indeed.

    Interesting. But is not work and energy related to force and therefore the time derivative of velocity or acceleration?

    Oh, now I see.

    Makes sense.

    THANK YOU!

    Love it.

    Of course.

    Very cool. Thank you.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    So who's "Nicholas Ibrahim Hosein"?

    Did you just plagiarize this thread from an identical one at ScienceForums.net, or are you starting to infect other forums with your spam?
     
    Yazata likes this.
  8. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    That's Spellbound's name.
     
  9. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    That is a confused and false claim.

    You repeat this over and over but never follow up on your claim. You just make an empty claim.

    Show us where this issue arises with the following example (if you cannot perform the math I will help you).

    There is a marble that has a mass of .1 kg and a bowling ball that has a mass of 4 kg. There is a relative velocity between them of 10 m/s.

    Where is the issue?

    Extra credit: You also have made the claim that you could tell which one was 'really' moving if they hit each other, show how that is possible for an extra 10 points.
     
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    And while we're at it, suppose we take that 4 kg bowling ball and drop it from a height of 3 metres above the ground onto a table top that is 1 metre off the ground. How fast will it be going when it hits the table? Can you solve this problem using conservation of energy?

    Now, suppose instead that we drop the same bowling ball from an initial height 2 metres above the ground onto the ground. How fast will it be going when it hits the ground? Can you solve this one using conservation of energy?

    Is the answer in the second case the same as in the first case? If so, what happened to the idea of absolute gravitational potential energy that you sought to introduce with your mountain/lake example above, wellwisher? Can't we arbitrarily set the zero of potential energy at the table top in the first case and at the ground in the second case, and still get perfectly valid, testably correct answers?
     
    sweetpea likes this.
  11. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
     
  12. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623



    Reality complies


    Energy comes in the form of a wave.

    Reality complies with Damped

    and forced harmonic motion.

    As well as any particle in simple Harmonic.


    (xi) = A sin (

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    t - k )


    (equation for displacement of a molecule in

    Simple Harmonic Motion)
     
  13. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Perhaps I do not fully understand your question , but according to the Law of falling bodies
    http://muse.tau.ac.il/museum/galileo/galileo_low_of_fall.html

    Tegmark demonstrated this in his clip "the mathematical universe".
     
  14. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    What is a ''self-contained'' reality? Is that the same as saying reality is however we perceive it to be - purely subjective? Sorry, I don't entirely follow.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Why would you follow a bullshit topic, except to fit in?
     
  16. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    Must be a lot of people who want to ''fit in'' if this has gone on for 23 pages.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Most of these 23 pages are Spellbound posting thread after thread of "Reality is..." spam, all merged into one thread.

    See post #52 on page 3.
     
  18. wegs Matter and Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,253
    lol Oh.
     
  19. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    Life

    And

    Everything known and will be known.

    Have a good day.
     
  20. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Reality Combined as Coulombs

    Coulombs are the force experienced per unit of electric charge and exist as invisible field lines that emanate from a point charge or particle in space. Invisible forces like these help unify the building blocks of matter and combine reality to some extent.
     
  21. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    It doesn't seem to work in some notable cases.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    This is not correct.

    A coulomb is a unit of electrical charge, not a force.

    The field lines you speak of are a way of representing an electric field.

    An electric field is the distribution in space of the electrostatic force experienced by a unit charge at any point. The units of electric field strength, at a point in space, are thus Newtons/Coulomb, which happens to be equivalent to volts/metre.

    But I think you would be right to say that electrostatic force plays a dominant role in causing molecular matter to behave as it does: the chemical bond is largely an electrostatic phenomenon.
     
    Dr_Toad likes this.
  23. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Too bad this is in Pseudoscience, because I'd love a clarification on the 'largely' part. I was under the impression that chemical bonds are purely electrostatic.
     

Share This Page