Debunking Relativity #1

A

Anti-stupidity

Registered Member
Hello, first time being on this forum and am excited indeed :D. I bring you the most heinous of anti-main stream science that the dark web can offer, relativity deniers. I love relativity and it pains me every single time that I find one of these sites & four thoughts come to mind.

1. Burn it with fire.

Followed by

2. Maybe there is something of substance.

Then

3. Should I question what know.

Followed immediately by

4. HAAAAAAAAAA

But i'm wondering what you think of this site:
https://debunkingrelativity.com, and don't be shy to not read through the thing as a whole; nobody aside from you and me are looking.

PS: how do you put in links.
 
Welcome.
Relativity presents a scientific model and there is no reason to believe that one day there may be a better model however I could not see the site you linked has a better model.

A new model not only has to debunk the old model it needs to somehow do a better job...I think that's the way it works.
Alex
 
What I'm thinking of the site is that the author knows nothing of even 19th century physics let alone 20th century. Newtonian physics or whatever flavour he might be thinking of is hardly a hot topic for debate. As Alex suggests - pick on some point if you feel it is worth further discussion.
 
On that site I clicked on the link "Can maths go against logic?"

Wont link it cause, well, that's pretty crank. lol is 1+1=2 merely an assumption, or, does 1+1 actually equal two?

My mind exploded sifting through the page.
 
Beer w/Straw said:
On that site I clicked on the link "Can maths go against logic?"

Wont link it cause, well, that's pretty crank. lol is 1+1=2 merely an assumption, or, does 1+1 actually equal two?

My mind exploded sifting through the page.
Click to expand...
That sounded kind of funny so I thought I would go to the site for a laugh. Unfortunately, there was no humor, just stupidity. Luckily I stopped reading prior to my mind exploding.:)
 
I do not know why this guy wants to say stuped a hundred times and expect it to be the next big swear. Also, I just looked at his profile and he is a medical doctor with no experience in physics at all. I may now regret ever posting this at all.
 
Although, I still feel pity for this guy and hope to do a video reply to his points. In the form of first addressing his points, then talking about what mainstream science thinks of it, then telling him my own opinions and then moving on to what questions he should address that I thought were missing from his theory or that he should explain. I'm actually excited and can't wait to start as I love to teach people about physics, even douche bags. ;)
 
Anti-stupidity said:
I'm going to raid his comment sections with so many dick picks now, it makes me so upset. :mad:
Click to expand...

That's not an appropriate way to respond. That would be how a 13 year old would react. Respond with reason, and if that fails, don't respond at all. Most cranks and woos have their heads encased in hardened concrete....rendering them impervious to logic. If you allow yourself to become angry over a little woo on the internet, you're going to spend all of your time angry....like The Hulk.....don't be The Hulk. :)
 
Beer w/Straw said:
On that site I clicked on the link "Can maths go against logic?"

Wont link it cause, well, that's pretty crank. lol is 1+1=2 merely an assumption, or, does 1+1 actually equal two?

My mind exploded sifting through the page.
Click to expand...

Actually, hmm...I dont know as thats a really good question and not as silly as assumed. Does it always equal two or is it just assumed based on theory?

You can think logically all day long but it doesnt always mean it coincides with the natural world and its chaos. Quantum physics shows us how anti-logical or anti-anticipatory it can be.
 
birch said:
Actually, hmm...I dont know as thats a really good question and not as silly as assumed. Does it always equal two or is it just assumed based on theory?

You can think logically all day long but it doesnt always mean it coincides with the natural world and its chaos. Quantum physics shows us how anti-logical or anti-anticipatory it can be.
Click to expand...
Maybe you're complaining about human thought...

Not about mathematics.
 
birch said:
Actually, hmm...I dont know as thats a really good question and not as silly as assumed. Does it always equal two or is it just assumed based on theory?

You can think logically all day long but it doesnt always mean it coincides with the natural world and its chaos. Quantum physics shows us how anti-logical or anti-anticipatory it can be.
Click to expand...

Mathematics is in essence a highly developed quantitative form of logic, so it is impossible for mathematics to be illogical. And don't allow yourself to think that anything in quantum physics is illogical, because it is not. It may be counterintuitive, compared to our everyday experience, but that is something quite different - more like what you are calling "anti-anticipatory", which I take to mean "unexpected".

Quantum physics applies logic (mathematical logic) to observations of nature, some of which are - or were originally - surprising. As a result it makes predictions which are also sometimes surprising. But they are not illogical.
 
Beer w/Straw said:
Maybe you're complaining about human thought...

Not about mathematics.
Click to expand...

I dont know emphatically that one and one equal two in all situations or contexts because what is one anyway really? It is a principle, concept or sticky note attached but actual substance is relative. How can we be sure its precise/exact every time besides the principle or theory of one? There probably does exist a relative element.

If i add you as one and then me equals two people but what have you really counted? Its exact in principle but relative in reality. People are different weights, shoe size, haircut, wear different clothing etc.
 
Last edited:
birch said:
I dont know emphatically that one and one equal two in all situations or contexts because what is one anyway really? It is a principle, concept or sticky note attached but actual substance is relative. How can we be sure its precise/exact every time besides the principle or theory of one? There probably does exist a relative element.

If i add you as one and then me equals two people but what have you really counted? Its exact in principle but relative in reality. People are different weights, shoe size, haircut, wear different clothing etc.
Click to expand...
I don't know what exactly is your opinion here.
Are you talking about experimental evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top